The BS Filter

Today we dig deep into the US-Israel attack on Iran - Operation Epic Fury - and what's actually going on beneath the spin.

In this episode of *The Bullshit Filter*, Cameron and Ray navigate a global landscape defined by “ruptures” rather than transitions. The duo begins with a sobering look at Australia’s first mass shooting in 30 years and the subsequent rapid-fire passage of controversial anti-hate and migration legislation. The conversation then shifts to the world stage, dissecting Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney’s viral Davos speech that declared the “rules-based international order” a useful fiction that has finally reached its breaking point. From the shifting power dynamics of American hegemony to the “American ISIS” and the complexities of foreign-backed protests in Iran, Cameron and Ray peel back the layers of propaganda and political theater. They explore how historical baggage, corporate-funded think tanks, and advanced jamming technology are reshaping modern conflict, ultimately questioning whether any government—foreign or domestic—is truly equipped to handle the brewing “Wild West” of 2026. The post The Rupture – BS Filter 143 appeared first on The BS Filter.

In this episode of The Bullshit Filter, Cameron and Ray continue their deep dive into the history of fascism — tracing its emergence from the ashes of World War I to Mussolini’s rise in Italy. They unpack how the trauma of the war radicalised millions, creating fertile ground for authoritarian movements that promised strength, unity, and a return to national glory. Through sharp wit and historical insight, they explore the socioeconomic chaos of postwar Italy — labour strikes, land seizures, and political paralysis — that allowed fascism to masquerade as a stabilising force. Cameron and Ray discuss how Mussolini, once a socialist firebrand, transformed into the prototype fascist leader by weaponising propaganda, street violence, and elite fear of socialism. The episode draws unnerving parallels between Mussolini’s Italy and modern political movements, showing how democracy often erodes not with explosions, but applause. The post #139 – Make Italy Great Again: The Birth of Fascism (Fascism #3) appeared first on The BS Filter.

In this first instalment of a new series on fascism, Cameron and Ray dig into what the word really means beyond the marching boots and fiery rallies of 20th-century Europe. They explore the difficulty of defining fascism, how it manifests differently across time and place, and why the term is often misused today. Drawing on historians like Robert Paxton, Jason Stanley, and Michael Mann, as well as political thinkers from Trotsky to Hannah Arendt, the discussion asks whether the United States is sliding toward fascism, and what makes Trump’s brand of politics similar or distinct from Mussolini or Hitler. Along the way, the hosts look at epistemology and heuristics—how we know what’s true and whose voices we trust—as a framework for analysing complex social movements. This episode sets the stage for a deeper historical exploration in future parts of the series. The post #137 – What is Fascism? Part 1 appeared first on The BS Filter.

In this fiery and no-holds-barred episode, Cam and Ray dive into the geopolitics of U.S. and Israeli airstrikes on Iran, calling out the hypocrisy and propagandistic media coverage that frames these attacks as “preemptive” rather than “unprovoked” — a word the media reserved exclusively for Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. They draw sharp historical parallels, from the 1953 CIA-led coup in Iran to the weaponised narrative-building of Western governments and media. The episode also takes a tour through Iran’s actual military record (spoiler: mostly defensive or retaliatory), the ever-reliable military-industrial complex, and Trump’s sudden missile diplomacy. Plus, there’s a heartfelt tribute to Michael Madsen, a scathing takedown of media groupthink, and a sobering reminder that the real winners of war are the profiteers. As always, it’s a punchy mix of gallows humour, truth bombs, and righteous exasperation. The post #135 – Unprovoked or Preemptive? Iran, the Media & Manufactured Consent appeared first on The BS Filter.

As I’ve been saying for years – Trump isn’t the problem. He’s just a symptom of the problem. The actual problem is stupid people. And they are justifiably angry. But to think billionaires are going to solve the problem is just stupid. It’s billionaires and the politicians they control that got the U.S. into this situation in the first place. Welcome to late stage capitalism. Bullshit 129 [00:00:00] Cameron: I’m just going to start this episode of the Bullshit Filter, by playing something, that I think is topical. Uh, here’s a, here’s a show we recorded eight years ago. What the fuck, America? Ah, well,So the white people put Trump in power. So as a white person, I would like to say, I’m sorry, everybody, I’m really sorry. [00:00:28] Cameron: I mean, this guy defeated the entire political establishment of both parties in the U. S. with pretty much no money, no fun, no funding, making every possible mistake you would think it was a mistake, talking just off the cuff shit, like completely breaking every rule there is. [00:00:56] Cameron: And not only got in, but, you know, got in by a landslide in terms of electoral college votes anyway, and it looks like he’s going to win the popular vote as well. Which he didn’t. we’re recording this one, back to us in real time now on the 8th of November, my time, 7th of November in the U. S., 2024. I’ve, I went back and listened to that show that we did in 2016 after the election. I also listened to the one that we did in 2020 after the election over the last couple of days. Um, in the 2021, you know, the, my basic idea, you know, there was a lot of jubilation. with the Democrat voters that Trump was gone. [00:01:44] Cameron: A lot of the pollsters and a lot of the media in the U. S. were saying, that’s it. We’re never going to see him again. Even, um, I remember Tucker, we found out later on during the Dominion voting trial that Tucker Carlson was sending emails to people at Fox saying, thank fuck. We never need to talk to that idiot again. [00:02:04] Cameron: He’s the worst. [00:02:05] Cameron: Um, uh, but my point in the 2020 show was. [00:02:12] Cameron: You know, depends what happens with the trials, Trump may go to jail, he may skate, but I don’t think Trumpism, I don’t think the underlying anger is going away, and because I’ve been saying this, you know, that episode I just played, the 2016 episode, wasn’t even on the bullshit filter, because we weren’t doing the bullshit filter. [00:02:32] Cameron: in 2016. That was, that was a special episode of The Caesar Show. [00:02:36] Ray: Pre. Pre, [00:02:38] Cameron: we didn’t start The Bullshit Film until 2017, which was confusing because I went [00:02:43] Cameron: looking for that episode on The Bullshit [00:02:44] Cameron: Film and couldn’t find it. I was like, I don’t know, where where the fuck is this episode? And then I eventually realized we did it on The Caesar Show as a special edition because I just needed to talk about it. Um, [00:02:56] Cameron: you know, I’ve been saying this though since 2015 and going back even [00:03:01] Cameron: before Trump was a thing, I was saying this about the Tea Party. [00:03:07] Ray: Mm. Mm hmm. [00:03:08] Cameron: specifically Trump. Trump is not the problem. Trump [00:03:12] Cameron: is a symptom. of the problem. And by the way, so are the Democrats. They are symptoms, I believe, of the underlying issues that the United States has, that the, the political elites, both in the Republican Party, like the non Trump traditional GOP, [00:03:35] Cameron: And the Democrats have just been trying to ignore for the last eight or nine years. [00:03:43] Cameron: They’re sticking their heads in the sand, pretending it’s not an issue. And it, and, you know, we can get [00:03:49] Cameron: into what those issues are over the course of the show, but these are real things. Again, like, Trump is not the problem. I remember when George Bush Jr. was president. And I was saying this to Chrissy at the time, because I met Chrissy in 2008 before the election, saying, [00:04:10] Cameron: Bush isn’t the problem. [00:04:12] Cameron: Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, they’re not the problem. They’re a symptom [00:04:15] Cameron: of the problem. And when Bush was ousted in that, [00:04:19] Cameron: election, and again, people were jubilant, saying, just, I say to people, just wait to see who [00:04:25] Cameron: comes next. Because [00:04:28] Ray: Right. [00:04:29] Cameron: if this isn’t the [00:04:30] Cameron: end, and I don’t think it gets better, I think the next guy [00:04:34] Cameron: is going to be worse. [00:04:36] Cameron: And, [00:04:37] Ray: I remember that. I think I remember you saying that. Yeah, conveying that, which scared the shit out of me. Sorry, go ahead. [00:04:43] Cameron: well, you and I weren’t doing a show back then. We didn’t start doing a show until 2013. [00:04:48] Ray: No, somewhere you conveyed that, um, you didn’t say it like this, but we haven’t gotten to the bottom of the barrel yet. You did say something, [00:04:57] Cameron: Well, I remember when, when Trump was out at the beginning, in 2020, in the 2020 election, saying, Wait till you see who comes next. Because it doesn’t get better. It gets crazier and crazier. That’s the way these things tend to play out. Anyway, we’ll talk about some historical analogies. We just did, um, we just did an interview with the authors of a book, Witch Hunt, Um, couple of ladies in New York that have just come out with a book. [00:05:23] Cameron: Well, not just, they came out with it a while ago, but they just [00:05:25] Cameron: got around to talking to us, so that’s the only thing that matters. Um, watch their sales just spike now, go through the roof. Um, they wrote a book of, a book targeting teenagers, but it’s about the McCarthy movement. hearings, trials, the HUAC hearings. [00:05:41] Cameron: And I was trying to direct the conversation away from McCarthy hearings specifically, and talk about the underlying, uh, reasons why anti communism was a thing in the United States [00:06:01] Cameron: in the thirties, forties, fifties, and onwards. [00:06:05] Cameron: And the parallels between that and what’s happening today, because I think there are a lot of parallels. [00:06:15] Cameron: You know, you and I often say, we’re quoting Mark Twain, Tony often says this on QAV too, history doesn’t repeat but it often rhymes. The patterns play out again and again and again in history because people don’t change. And, um, I think that, you know, there’s too much is made in the media and by pundits and politicians about personalities and not enough about the underlying issues. [00:06:44] Cameron: What you tend to see, like you’ll see this at the moment in the media in the US, People will talk about what the underlying issues are that caused Trump to succeed as much as he did in this election. They’ll talk about, well, it’s the economy, well, it’s this, well, it’s that. It’s a pushback against support for transgenders, whatever it is. [00:07:08] Cameron: But, that generally gets quickly forgotten. And they go back to politics as usual, because trying to deal with the fundamental issues is too big a job. I think for anyone to do in an election cycle, uh, it takes like somebody like a Bernie Sanders, who’s been banging on about this for his entire political career. [00:07:29] Cameron: No one listens [00:07:30] Cameron: to that. It’s that kind of dialogue that [00:07:34] Cameron: needs to happen before things are going to. Change. Anyway, [00:07:38] Cameron: enough of my ranty ravey stuff, Ray, uh, as the [00:07:42] Cameron: um, only American whom I, I care to talk to right now. [00:07:47] Cameron: Um, what’s the vibe [00:07:49] Cameron: like in your part of the world, Ray? [00:07:52] Ray: Uh, despondency. Um, fuck, we got to do this for four more years. Uh, everybody in the family is looking up, you know, how hard is it to move out of the country? You know, all that, all [00:08:05] Cameron: Now I remember you saying this eight years ago and you didn’t fucking move. [00:08:09] Ray: no, I did, I did not know this. No, there, there, we’ll see. Then it was just, Trump was an incompetent asshole. [00:08:18] Ray: And now he’s got Roe v. Wade smashed, he’s probably going to get one or two more Supreme Court justices before he’s four years out, that’s what, six or seven out [00:08:27] Ray: of the nine? I mean, electing him will affect America for decades to come, so it’s the totality of what he represents. And you’re right, he’s not, it’s not like everything else in America is fine, it’s Trump. [00:08:42] Ray: And he’s just going to bring us all down with him. No, I mean, when you, and I’m not going to do a long spiel here, that’s for later, but when you have a shitty education system, yeah, that’s for you. When you have a shitty educational system and you have, uh, the, the average American, probably like other people have a memory, a political memory of 2. [00:09:00] Ray: 5 seconds, and they, they, And there’s things like, there’s gun violence, there’s healthcare. I pay 778 a month just in case something bad happens to me and I have to go to the hospital and that way I don’t have to pay more. That’s fucking insane, but that’s where I’m at. When’s the last time minimum wage has been raised, you know, by the federal government? [00:09:22] Ray: So the point is, you’re right, there’s a ton of problems. They’re all being ignored. No one has the cojones to see. Bernie Sanders would get in and go, okay, we’re not. Fuckin around people. I don’t want makeup on. I don’t want to waste any time. Let’s get, he would, he might not succeed, but you know, he would, he would drag his issues down to the mat and try to beat the shit out of them because that’s who he is. [00:09:42] Ray: And he doesn’t give a fuck about history. He, he just, he just sees problems. But the point is no one has the courage, the political will, whatever, to do it. And I think American politics has gotten so superficial. The really good people, Are smart enough not to go into politics to what, or at least on the presidential level. [00:10:01] Ray: I don’t know. You can tell me what you, what you think about that, but as bad as this is, we haven’t crashed yet. Um, and, and we, we said this when Trump was elected, okay, Trump, Trump is an idiot, but as long as nothing bad happens, we’ll get through this. Well, then we had COVID and we lost a million people. [00:10:18] Ray: Uh, so the point is here’s four more years. Trump is a little more comfortable now. He kind of knows what to expect. We’re not even going to bring up yet Project 2025. So I think he’s going to be more of himself. He’s not going to be overhauled or intimidated and he’s going to be Trump. And it’s, it’s not going to be good. [00:10:37] Ray: Um, I, I don’t know. We’re, we’re still in, We’re just still, uh, stunned, and we don’t really know how to think or feel. For right now, it’ll go away, because we’re humans, we adapt, and we move on. But for right now, it’s like, holy fuck. And for me, because my family doesn’t give, this will be the last thing I say for a while, my family doesn’t give a shit about history. [00:11:01] Ray: But me, someone who’s read a couple of history books on the toilets, do I now have to look in the mirror and go, I don’t know if I realized or didn’t want to realize some percentage of my fellow country people, and I know this is kind of harsh or whatever, but, but it’s not inaccurate to, to some degree, are fascists or racists or misogynists. [00:11:23] Ray: I mean, yeah, we’re, we all think [00:11:24] Ray: these things, but you know, it’s [00:11:27] Ray: not, you know, I’m tongue in cheek there, but, but you don’t act on them and you don’t say, um, um, and because everybody has rights and we’re trying to move forward as a society. Well, a couple of days ago, we [00:11:38] Ray: proved. Fuck that We’re going back to the 1950s. [00:11:42] Ray: I don’t know. It’s [00:11:43] Ray: insane. And to answer your [00:11:44] Ray: question, we don’t know how to [00:11:47] Ray: feel right now. [00:11:50] Cameron: Not back to the 1950s, back to 1930s Germany. Um, I, I don’t think, I You know, if I had to sum up my take on the people who [00:12:00] Cameron: voted for Trump, it’s not that they’re all fascists or sexist or misogynistic or racist or whatever, it’s that they’re stupid, [00:12:09] Ray: The educational system and media. Go ahead. Go ahead. [00:12:12] Cameron: just stupid, generally speaking, to believe that [00:12:17] Cameron: A corrupt, criminal, um, serial [00:12:21] Cameron: rapist, guy, you know, billionaire, bankrupt, like Donald Trump, [00:12:28] Cameron: is gonna save America? [00:12:32] Cameron: You gotta be stupid, like fundamentally deluded and stupid. But I would say the same thing that believe that, believe all of the rhetoric that the Democrats believe about Biden and Harris and the Clintons is the same thing. So I don’t, again, I’m saying this is a, it’s a symptom of a, an underlying problem of stupidity and short termism driven by. [00:13:01] Cameron: Media narratives, uh, and social media narratives and that kind of thing. People who believe that, uh, Vladimir Putin’s reasons for military action in Ukraine are because he wants to rebuild the Russian empire. I mean, just the level of. Stupidity that I hear from Americans isn’t, and I’m not just Americans, like it’s a global thing, right? [00:13:27] Cameron: I’m just, I’m not picking on Americans here. People are generally stupid because they don’t read, they’re not [00:13:31] Cameron: educated, they don’t try and understand history, they don’t try and understand politics, they don’t try and understand philosophy, they don’t try and understand anything outside of usually a narrow domain. [00:13:42] Cameron: They may be very good at their jobs, you might be really, a really good lawyer. or a really good, you know, copywriter or a really good doctor, right? But you don’t [00:13:53] Ray: A factory worker. Yeah. [00:13:54] Cameron: you don’t study how the world works. And, um, you know, as I was trying to get across to the ladies we just interviewed, from all of the study and all of the shows that we’ve done on the Cold War show about why anti communism became a thing in the US, the fundamental, there are lots of reasons, things are complicated, but the fundamental thing that made it happen, in my view. [00:14:20] Cameron: is [00:14:20] Cameron: that the rich elite businessmen in the United States and the politicians that they controlled were very, very concerned about the growing anger huh? [00:14:34] Cameron: Uh, in the working classes, the proletariat in the United States and watching what was happening around the world about the inequality in the early part of the 20th century. And they saw people were starting to organize into unions and into political parties and revolutionary political parties. They did, [00:14:54] Cameron: the rich [00:14:55] Ray: They have that right. [00:14:57] Cameron: The rich decided to, uh, use their wealth and [00:15:01] Cameron: their reach and their media control and their control of politicians to fight against that, to get on the front foot. [00:15:08] Cameron: One of the things that they did in the United States very successfully in the 40s and 50s was co opt religious leaders [00:15:17] Cameron: so they could start to position communism as evil, literally as evil, [00:15:23] Cameron: start And capitalism as Christian and American and pro American, and then they used their control of the media and their control of the pulpit and the innate Christianity that most Americans had back then, and they drove that message home relentlessly for decades until it became, until the very word socialist became basically verboten in the U. [00:15:49] Cameron: S. until Bernie Sanders brought it back a few years ago, tried to bring it back. Um, and so it, and then I look at what’s happening with Trump today, and the same with the Democrats, because again, both political parties, as George Carlin used to say, there’s only one political party in America, and it’s the party of big business, and it has two divisions. [00:16:10] Cameron: He was right when he said that in the 90s, um, Bill Hicks used to say the same thing, and it’s still true today, and, and, um, People, uh, generally just refuse to listen to that. But so what you’ve got is, I mean, this is why all of [00:16:27] Cameron: the billionaires were getting behind Trump. Um, towards the end, and spending insane amounts of money, which we’ll get into, to make sure that he won, it’s the, uh, rich consolidating their power over any forces of progressiveness. [00:16:45] Cameron: Remember back in the Obama days, we had Occupy Wall Street, [00:16:48] Cameron: which got shut down by the Obama [00:16:51] Cameron: Administration [00:16:52] Cameron: so, anyway. Uh, let me, let me quote for some stuff that I’ve been reading over the last couple of days and we’ll, we’ll dissect it. This is from the New York Times. In a closing rally on the Ellipse last week, Kamala Harris scorned Donald J. Trump as an outlier who [00:17:07] Cameron: did not represent America. This is not who we are, she declared. [00:17:12] Cameron: In fact, it turns out that may be exactly who we are. At least, most of us. [00:17:17] Cameron: Populist disenchantment with the nation’s direction and resentment against elites. Proved to be deeper and more profound than many in both parties had recognized. Now, I want to stop there. That’s the interesting point. Resentment against elites. [00:17:36] Cameron: Donald Trump is the very definition of an elite. Elon Musk is the very definition of an elite. [00:17:45] Cameron: Um, you had all of these elites coming out in support of [00:17:51] Cameron: Trump. [00:17:53] Ray: Right. Mm-Hmm. [00:17:55] Cameron: yet the people voting for Trump claim to have resentment against the elites. Now, I think they mean the political elites and Trump has still managed to position him, uh, himself as an outsider in politics. Even though he’s very much, uh, you know, born with a silver spoon in his mouth, uh, blue blood, he’s, he’s positioned himself as an outsider and, you know, that is what Kamala Harris, uh, couldn’t do, uh, Biden couldn’t do, and getting the Clintons and the Obamas and all these people to support her didn’t do. [00:18:34] Cameron: They didn’t have a candidate that could, um, play to the genuine resentment. And, uh, you know, I said this in 2016, and I said it in 2020, [00:18:49] Cameron: the American people have very, very good reasons to be angry. [00:18:54] Cameron: Against. The elites and [00:18:57] Cameron: against business leaders and the political leaders. The fact that they’re putting that anger in support of Trump is just a repre, uh, represented representation of how stupid they are [00:19:11] Cameron: because they ain’t going to make it better. [00:19:12] Cameron: He’s going to make it worse. Million times worse. And I laugh about the fact that [00:19:16] Cameron: you keep saying, well, we’ve got four years to do this and another four years. [00:19:20] Cameron: or four years. You’re assuming that there will be more elections in four [00:19:23] Cameron: years. I give that a 30 percent chance. [00:19:31] Ray: There’s already talk about the Republicans doing something about the 22nd Amendment, which limits the President to two terms, so. You might be onto something there. I mean, but I, I’ve got a, I’ve got a hope in something, but here’s my thing, if you can look at a guy, and, [00:19:47] Ray: and, and no disrespect, because, because I live with these [00:19:50] Ray: people, no disrespect, you got a guy who, who does manual labor for a living, he drives a truck, he doesn’t have sleeves, he’s worn the same baseball cap ever since he was 18 years old, salt of the earth, work, whatever, all that good stuff, to have Trump Stare at that guy through the television screen with I don’t know how much Trump suits cost But I’m sure they cost a pretty penny and go I’m here for you They’re trying to get to you through me all that bullshit and for this person to go Yeah, he is really looking out for me. [00:20:18] Ray: He’s gonna take care of me. He’s gonna make whatever and I’m like Trump doesn’t know the first thing about your life. He’s never shopped. He’s never asked him the price of milk. What the fuck? I don’t know. I just bought the cow. The point is there could not be a larger disconnect and you’re right. What does it say about the American people for someone to tell a bold faced, bold faced lie for years and have the people go? [00:20:39] Ray: Yep. Nope. He’s my man. I mean, what does that say? about the electorate. I mean, we’re mad, but, but think about it. Think about Trump’s brilliance in this. The American people are so goddamn pissed. We’re ready for a French revolution. Let’s just go in there and guillotine all the [00:20:55] Ray: people that have got way too much money. Trump was able to not only go, Hey, not me. I’m with you. And he rode [00:21:01] Ray: that like a fucking wave all the way to the white house. And like you [00:21:05] Ray: said, not once. But twice. He was able to take that anger and ride it versus [00:21:11] Ray: having it roll over him. That’s a pretty good fucking skill, if you can do it. [00:21:17] Cameron: Okay, but you, you, you’ve missed my point about the four years. [00:21:22] Ray: No, I know. [00:21:23] Cameron: let me, let me, let [00:21:24] Ray: gotcha. Go ahead. [00:21:25] Cameron: let me, drill this home for you. [00:21:28] Ray: Wicca, wicca, wicca. [00:21:29] Cameron: I was surprised, um, the last time, 2020, that he didn’t, um, stage some sort of a, uh, national crisis. um, after the election, uh, where he could declare martial law and, and, and [00:21:49] Cameron: hold on to power. There were people in his inner circle that were trying to get him to do that. [00:21:56] Cameron: He didn’t do it. What nearly happened to him in the [00:21:59] Cameron: intervening four years? [00:22:01] Ray: About to go to jail. [00:22:03] Cameron: Go to jail and have his entire empire and his family’s empire [00:22:08] Cameron: dismantled. He barely survived all of the, legal challenges that were thrown at him. They gave him too many outs, too many, they took too long to [00:22:25] Cameron: prosecute because I think the Democrats thought that’s it, he’s done, he’s over, there’s no rush. [00:22:31] Cameron: It’s, it’s, you know, we can take our time here. They didn’t fucking nail him to the [00:22:36] Cameron: wall. You know, he got fined hundreds of millions of dollars, which he couldn’t pay, and he got it, he got them to fucking reduce the settlement amount. [00:22:46] Ray: Yeah. [00:22:47] Cameron: Um, [00:22:48] Cameron: So, but he got through and he’s going to be president again. Now, [00:22:53] Cameron: if he goes to the polls again, and let’s say he survives four years, chances of that probably not high. [00:22:59] Cameron: And, um, you know, partly through assassination attempts, partly through just, he’s, you know, not a [00:23:04] Cameron: healthy looking fucker, but let’s say that he does survive the [00:23:07] Cameron: next four years. Do you, if you were Donald Trump, [00:23:12] Cameron: would you take [00:23:13] Cameron: the [00:23:13] Cameron: risk of having another [00:23:14] Cameron: election? And what you know is gonna happen to you when you’re a private citizen again after [00:23:21] Cameron: your second term expires, in terms of legal and financial challenges? [00:23:29] Ray: Yeah, your second and final term, unless The 22nd Amendment is, is, is adjusted. So I guess the thing is, and you probably heard this for the last, uh, 48 hours, like I have, Jack Smith has already met with the Department of Justice going, I’m ready to close everything. I had [00:23:45] Ray: the guy fucking nailed to the wall, [00:23:48] Ray: guilt as fuck. [00:23:50] Ray: This is the way the cookie crumbles. So, so Jack Smith has already, has already started to shut things down. So the question is, is it just delayed until four years from now and that he can pick it back up? I don’t, I honestly don’t know. I don’t know how that works. But you, but you make a good point of trump’s, like if there’s even a 1% chance, some of these assholes are gonna come after me, after I’m out of the White House. [00:24:11] Ray: Maybe my fat lily white ass needs to stay. So, again, Trump, Trump, Trump is a coward. At the end of the day, he can talk all this shit, but you know enough psychology to know that he’s an absolute pussy, he’s a coward, and the idea of jail and embarrassment and losing everything is more than he can do. I think he would try for something extreme, like having the 22nd amendment removed or augmented or whatever. [00:24:37] Ray: You know, altered so he can stay in power. And the reason he didn’t do anything after the election, to me, to my thinking in 2020, is because he already had the [00:24:45] Ray: plan. And the plan was to get Mike [00:24:47] Ray: Pence to not certify the thing. So the point is, he [00:24:50] Ray: did have a plan. It wasn’t more violence, but he had a plan. [00:24:54] Ray: This time, I think he’s thinking, I can’t take Any fucking chances, cause I’ve really riled [00:24:59] Ray: up the people that don’t like me. They will come after [00:25:02] Ray: me in some form. I think I’m going to stay right here in the oval. In fact, [00:25:05] Ray: I’m going to die in the oval [00:25:07] Ray: office. But we’ll have to wait and see what happens. [00:25:10] Cameron: Yeah, I mean, We know why Julius Caesar crossed the Rubicon [00:25:18] Cameron: Getting back [00:25:18] Ray: they were ruining him. [00:25:20] Cameron: my fundamental premise of humans is humans don’t change. Um, you know, well, yeah, he was going to be destroyed. I mean, he crossed the Rubicon because Rome was corrupt and they, were coming after him and he felt like he was backed into a corner. [00:25:37] Cameron: He had no choice. And I. [00:25:39] Ray: they, they broke the law to punish Julius Caesar. I mean, they literally, [00:25:43] Ray: the Senate broke the law, several laws to punish him, and he’s like, well, if y’all can fucking do it, guess what, [00:25:48] Ray: bitch, that’s a two way street, but the point is, yeah, I mean, humans, [00:25:51] Ray: humans, at the end of the day, will do anything to protect themselves in the more [00:25:55] Ray: radical or extreme depths of hell. [00:25:56] Ray: The threat is, the more [00:25:58] Ray: extreme their solution has to be, so, who knows [00:26:02] Cameron: know people in America think, oh, that could never happen here, because we’ve got strong institutions, and [00:26:07] Cameron: we’ve got this, and we’ve got that, and yeah, that’s what every country that’s, uh, had a revolution thought. It could never happen here. The Romans thought that. Um, You know, you, you now have Trump, looks like he will control not only [00:26:23] Cameron: the executive branch, [00:26:24] Cameron: he’s going to control both houses of Congress and he controls the [00:26:27] Cameron: Supreme Court. So all [00:26:29] Cameron: of the instruments of government at a federal level he controls. And has the ability to manipulate a great deal, a great many of the states as well, uh, by, uh, Using the levers that he has available to him, like funding and access to trade restrictions and who knows what else, to control what happens in the states. [00:26:55] Cameron: Anyway, let me go back to the New York Times. For the first time in history, Americans have elected a convicted criminal as president. They handed power back to a leader who tried to overturn a previous election, called for the termination of the Constitution to reclaim his office, aspired to be a dictator on day one, and vowed to exact retribution against his adversaries. Rather than be turned off by Mr. Trump’s flagrant, anger based appeals along lines of race, gender, religion, national origin, and especially transgender identity, many Americans found them bracing. Rather than be offended by his brazen lies and wild conspiracy theories, many found him authentic. Rather than dismiss him as a felon found by various courts to be a fraudster, Cheater, sexual abuser, and defamer, many embraced his assertion that he had been the victim of persecution. [00:27:55] Ray: Jesus Christ. On it. [00:27:58] Cameron: As, um, This election was a CAT scan on the American people, and as difficult as it is to say, as hard as it is to name, what it revealed, at least in part, is a frightening affinity for a man of borderless corruption, said Peter H. Weiner, a former strategic advisor to President George W. Bush and vocal critic of Mr. [00:28:20] Cameron: Trump. Donald Trump is no longer an aberration, he is normative. His businesses went bankrupt repeatedly and multiple others failed. He was taken to court for stiffing his vendors, stiffing his bankers, and even stiffing his own family. He avoided the draft during the Vietnam War and avoided paying any income taxes for years. [00:28:40] Cameron: He was forced to shell out tens of millions of dollars to students who scamming them, found liable for wide scale business fraud, and had his real estate firm convicted in criminal court of tax crimes. He has boasted of grabbing women by their private parts, been reported to have cheated on all three of his wives, and have been accused of sexual misconduct by more than two dozen women, including one whose account was validated by a jury that found him liable for sexual abuse after a civil trial. [00:29:11] Cameron: He is the only president in American history impeached twice for high crimes and misdemeanors, the only president ever indicted on criminal charges, and the only president to be convicted of a felony. 34 in fact. He used the authority of his office to punish [00:29:26] Cameron: his adversaries and tried to hold on to power on the basis of a brazen lie. [00:29:32] Cameron: Mr Trump beat some of the investigations and lawsuits against him and some proved unfounded, but the sheer volume is remarkable. Any one of those scandals by itself would typically have been enough to derail another politician. [00:29:48] Ray: Let me just reply real quick and then you [00:29:50] Ray: can, I’m sure you’re going to go on. I think it was last year. I think it was last year. [00:29:55] Ray: You and I said something and we were [00:29:56] Ray: joking because, uh, that’s how we do. We were like, what does the Catholic church have to do to lose your [00:30:01] Ray: vote? Molest your kids? Clearly that’s not it because it’s done it, you know, tens of thousands of times. [00:30:06] Ray: In fact, the, uh, archdiocese in LA a couple of months ago had a petition Pony up another millions of dollars, whatever. And they’re just, they’re just whatever. But the Catholic church is like, Hey, we’re still coming out of good. But the point is, what does Trump gotta do? You know, he, you know, that he holds the, uh, some of his rallies in airports because the civic centers or the whatever in the city are like, you still owe us from last time, bitch, you’re not welcome here. [00:30:31] Ray: He stiffs people. The way he treats women, what, what he’s done to his family alone, he should just, you know, be put on a deserted island, but the point is, what does he have to do? It doesn’t matter. He can’t do anything because once people identify him as their savior, be it economic, moral, whatever, uh, you know, it doesn’t matter. [00:30:51] Ray: And the last thing I’ll say is, and I’m going back to what you were talking about. Can you imagine being a priest and you’re a conservative Republican priest and you got to, okay, okay. I got to sell Trump to the congregation. Okay, I can do this. I can do this. Um, God sometimes [00:31:06] Ray: uses imperfect vessels. That’s the best they could do. Can’t God find or make or pick a better fucking vessel than Trump? The point is, there’s nothing he can do to lose these people, though. And if the 22nd Amendment is removed, he can run until he’s dead. [00:31:28] Ray: On an oxygen tank and these people will [00:31:30] Ray: vote for him. [00:31:31] Cameron: So, uh, Now that he’s president, um, all of the federal charges against him. [00:31:37] Cameron: as you said, Jack Smith is already winding them down. He is still going to have to deal in theory with the state. legal challenges. He doesn’t have the authority to interfere with or stop state prosecutions, but it’s likely that those either will go away or that they’ll just get pushed down the road until his term in office, because there is a tradition that you can’t prosecute a sitting president in [00:32:10] Cameron: the United States. [00:32:10] Cameron: So nothing is going to happen with those. [00:32:12] Ray: stupid. [00:32:13] Cameron: He faces eight felony charges in Fulton [00:32:17] Cameron: County in Georgia for Allegedly, criminally conspiring to overturn the state’s election results there, and engaging in a racketeering conspiracy. And he won Georgia! [00:32:29] Cameron: Cross [00:32:31] Ray: He lost it last time. He won it this time. He won the popular vote. He actually got more votes this time than last time. Or he did better with votes this time. I mean, what the [00:32:42] Ray: actual fuck? [00:32:43] Cameron: the board and [00:32:44] Cameron: we’ll get into the demographics in, in a system, but, in a second, but, yeah, like, again, this is, I, I see, I see this as, um, it’s just a reflection of America and American culture. This is the America that I’ve come to know over the last 35 years. Um, America is a fucking Basket Case. And it’s, you know, I haven’t engaged in a lot of this debate in line because [00:33:19] Cameron: honestly, I can’t be fucked. But a lot of people are saying, but don’t blame all Americans. We, half of us didn’t vote for him. Um, yeah, but you’re also part of the problem. That’s the point. Even the people that didn’t vote for him are part of the fucking problem. You know, we’ve done shows about, we were doing shows about the fact that Biden [00:33:39] Cameron: was, didn’t have the mental acuity to run for president. [00:33:44] Cameron: And I had people sending me angry emails and angry feedback on Facebook telling me to shut the fuck up, that I didn’t know what I was talking about, that he was fine, right up until he stepped out of the race. [00:33:56] Cameron: Um, because they’re fucking stupid. They’re just as stupid as the Trump voters. Like, are you fucking serious? [00:34:04] Cameron: Look at the guy. He can basically form a coherent sentence. Then we did a show when Kamala got the nomination. What did I say? What was my summary of her as a candidate? Can you remember? [00:34:15] Cameron: Were you listening? [00:34:16] Ray: Ooh, I’m not sure. [00:34:18] Cameron: you can’t, you didn’t listen. I said she was a nothing burger as a candidate. She had [00:34:23] Ray: Oh, yes. [00:34:25] Cameron: Apart from the fact that she was black and female and I’d say attractive. Told my one of my sons that, he goes, what do you think she, you’d hit that? Yeah, fuck yeah I would. I think she’s, she’s attractive. She’s, she’s pretty, she’s got a lovely smile, a lot of charisma, but as a candidate. [00:34:44] Cameron: Nothing going For her. Nothing. [00:34:46] Cameron: Nothing. She, when she first ran for [00:34:50] Cameron: the Senate, she did support some good policies. Like she was pretty aggressive on fracking, pretty aggressive on the Green New Deal, you know, uh, aggressive, more aggressive on things like, uh, you know, Palestinians and Gaza and supporting them. [00:35:06] Cameron: As soon as she became the Vice President, or as soon as she joined Biden’s ticket, all of that went away. And, uh, during her four years as Vice President, nothing [00:35:15] Cameron: about any of that. And then even when she became the candidate, all of that was gone. She was not going to push any harder or any differently on that, on [00:35:24] Cameron: Ukraine. She wasn’t going to buck the Biden thing. She tried to play this dance of distancing herself from Biden, while at the same time just being a Democratic, uh, you know, shill. So she, she had, and they fucking put her in no primary. And the Democrats, largely speaking, didn’t go, Oh, fucking what? No primary. We’re just putting her. [00:35:47] Cameron: No, fuck [00:35:48] Cameron: you. Like, no wonder 11 million people who [00:35:52] Cameron: voted Democrat in 2020 didn’t even bother to vote this time. And we’ll talk [00:35:58] Cameron: about some of the [00:35:58] Ray: Fuck you. [00:35:59] Cameron: we, know why. I saw, you know, John Mearsheimer. Who I’ve talked about a lot on the [00:36:04] Cameron: show, [00:36:05] Cameron: American geopolitical professor and author, um, I saw an interview with him I think the day before the election, they [00:36:14] Cameron: asked him who he was going to vote for and he said, well obviously I’m not voting for Trump, but I can’t vote for Harris either because I draw the line at genocide. [00:36:22] Cameron: I can’t vote for somebody who supports genocide. I just, I [00:36:25] Cameron: can’t. [00:36:26] Ray: That’s a sticky, sticky point. Yeah. I’m anti genocide. I hope that’s not too radical [00:36:32] Cameron: yeah, I’m a radical leftist. I’m anti [00:36:35] Cameron: genocide. Alright, so, [00:36:37] Ray: Yeah. [00:36:38] Cameron: at the voting numbers across the board, from all the exit polling, [00:36:41] Ray: hmm. [00:36:43] Cameron: Trump just got a huge increase, pretty much everywhere. Um, young men of all races, Primarily. Got a huge bump. Now my, my boys, you know, they’re social [00:36:54] Cameron: media guys and they’ve been telling me for the last year, Oh, social media is going to win this election for whoever. [00:37:00] Cameron: When Kamala’s campaign started doing videos, they were like, Oh, she’s got this lockdown, you know, TikTok game is so strong. And, um, Yeah, I kept saying, you know, look, it’s not [00:37:12] Cameron: about [00:37:12] Ray: That’s not [00:37:13] Cameron: TikTok, man. It’s, it’s about, you know, what the messaging is, how you deliver that. You might deliver it via TikTok. You might deliver it via mainstream media. [00:37:23] Cameron: You might deliver it at rallies, but at the end of the day, it’s about what your message is, not how clever a [00:37:30] Cameron: video is that you do. [00:37:32] Ray: right. [00:37:33] Cameron: Um, but there was, you know, Joe Rogan, Elon Musk, uh, using Twitter, by the way. All the people that have been criticising Elon Musk’s purchase of Twitter over the last couple of years and talking about what an idiot he was for buying Twitter. [00:37:53] Ray: Yeah. [00:37:54] Cameron: having the last laugh now? I’ve been saying, say what you want about Elon Musk, but he’s not stupid. He bought Twitter because he wanted a platform. I assumed it was a platform mostly to promote his agenda for Tesla and SpaceX and XAI and all the other things that he’s doing. Um, but obviously the [00:38:21] Cameron: political agenda was a big thing for him too. [00:38:25] Cameron: And I had been planning on doing a bullshit filter show for weeks, um, about why he was supporting Trump. And we can, we can touch on that too, I guess, before we, we finished, but, um, he doesn’t look like such an idiot for buying Twitter now, does he? [00:38:43] Ray: Right. I mean, it went from 44 billion to 10 or 11 billion in [00:38:47] Ray: value. But the point is, there are some things that are more important than, to money, [00:38:51] Ray: uh, than money. So he might be very happy right now. I just wanted to ask you one, I just wanted to follow up on one thing you said. I did read one article. about the young [00:38:59] Ray: men voting across the board of voting for Trump. I did read one article, I can’t remember where, it says something about young men are feeling, you know, between women really pushing for their rights, that men either feel like they, they might be losing their, you know, the number one, uh, position, and so maybe, not so much anti women, [00:39:19] Ray: but more pro uh, Men should be in charge. [00:39:23] Ray: That’s the way white God intended it kind of thing. So there might’ve been a little bit of an anti female, um, or whatever, vote. Uh, do you get any sense of that? Or have you read anything like that? Just a lot of men are [00:39:34] Ray: going, whoa, you know, there’s a chance we could put women back in their place. Yeah. [00:39:40] Ray: I’m kind of okay with that. I wasn’t sure. I wasn’t sure if you’d run [00:39:43] Ray: across [00:39:44] Ray: anything like that [00:39:46] Cameron: Um, look, I, I haven’t seen data that backs that up. I do accept that. Uh, misogyny is a, is a real thing. Like, I accept racism is a real thing. Where it sits in the list of things that people are genuinely angry and pissed off about, um, I’m [00:40:06] Ray: Oh, it’s probably low. Yeah. [00:40:08] Cameron: I’m not sure. Yeah. I mean, You know, I’ve been talking for the last couple of weeks with Chrissy about the fact that Trump has, one of his largest demographics has, for the last two elections before this one, has been white women. [00:40:24] Cameron: And I keep saying, if there was one demographic you think that would be horrified by Trump, it would be white women. And yet, they were one of his largest demographics, and Chrissy’s response has been, it’s fucking religion. [00:40:39] Cameron: It’s Christianity, it’s religion, uh, it, it, you know, it’s, it’s fucked with the minds of these women who, you [00:40:49] Cameron: know, believe that, you know, He is somehow more pro abortion, I mean, pro changing abortion, anti abortion, the Democrats, and that’s all that matters, um, that he’s the chosen one, that he’s the Christian, getting the Christian vote, right? [00:41:09] Ray: Right. Right. What? Well, right, right next to white [00:41:13] Ray: women, which again is a head scratcher is I think he got more than 50 percent of Hispanic men. And if there’s anybody other than white women who [00:41:21] Ray: should be nervous about Trump getting into office, it should be how should I put this, gently, brown males in this country. [00:41:28] Ray: I mean, don’t, I mean, no, he’s not really going to deport 11 million [00:41:32] Ray: Hispanics because that would cost too much money and it would ruin our economy, yadda, yadda, yadda, but their lives aren’t going to get [00:41:37] Ray: any better. I mean, there are They’re just not. And I, I don’t get that. And a lot of people, you know, [00:41:44] Ray: look right into the camera and go, Oh, I voted for him for economic reasons. There’s other things. When your ass is deported, the economics won’t matter so much. I don’t know. So that’s just one of, one of those [00:41:54] Ray: other things that just made me scratch my head and go, really? [00:41:57] Ray: Okay. [00:41:59] Cameron: And that’s, and that whole thing is obviously a ridiculous thing. Ridiculous argument. Like he added how many trillions? $8 trillion or something to the deficit. I mean, he, you know, he is, uh, he, he didn’t do anything good for the economy. I mean, [00:42:15] Cameron: the, It’s they say that, but [00:42:18] Ray: He inherited. Yeah, yeah, yeah, exactly. [00:42:21] Cameron: Uh, yeah. So look, I the. [00:42:24] Cameron: The exit polling stats that I’ve got say that he got a 10 point increase from all men under 30. So young men hugely attracted to Trump. He got double the support from black men. Now that was only from 12 to 24. [00:42:40] Cameron: So, Still, uh, uh, only less than a quarter of black men, but he doubled his [00:42:45] Cameron: support and a 25 percent increase from Latino men from 38 up to 46, not, not quite half, but almost half of Latino men. [00:42:55] Cameron: His support from Latino women went up 32 to 38. [00:42:59] Cameron: White women stayed the same at 52%. Um, white men, um, he went from 58 to [00:43:06] Cameron: 59, uh, [00:43:09] Ray: Mm hmm. Woo! [00:43:10] Cameron: This is from 2020 to 2024. Um, so the majority of white people love Donald Trump. Again, as we said in 2016, white people loved him. Black and Latino, not as much, but an increasing number of them did, [00:43:28] Cameron: which [00:43:28] Ray: So the third time. [00:43:30] Cameron: stunning. [00:43:30] Cameron: Now, he pretty much cleaned up in the swing states. The blue wall, uh, [00:43:34] Cameron: turned out to be, um, [00:43:37] Cameron: not really that much of a wall, about as much of a wall as he built it, uh, to stop the Mexicans from getting in. But I want to, I’ll talk more about demographics later, but I want to hark back to the billionaire story. [00:43:49] Cameron: A report that just came out from a group called Americans for Tax Fairness found that 150 [00:43:56] Cameron: of the wealthiest people in America contributed at least 1. [00:44:00] Cameron: 9 billion to candidates in this election. [00:44:08] Ray: Jesus. [00:44:09] Cameron: Um, In the 2020 election, over [00:44:13] Cameron: 600 billionaires contributed 1. 2 [00:44:18] Cameron: billion to presidential and congressional candidates. [00:44:23] Ray: Mm hmm. [00:44:24] Cameron: 150 billionaires contributed double that amount, almost double that amount. [00:44:31] Ray: Jesus. Jesus. That’s a priority. Clearly. [00:44:37] Cameron: now the fact that You allow [00:44:40] Cameron: billionaires to contribute billions of dollars [00:44:46] Cameron: to [00:44:47] Ray: Mm hmm. [00:44:49] Cameron: is just ridiculous. So if we’re going to talk about the fundamental [00:44:53] Cameron: problems that America has, that is why [00:44:56] Cameron: allowing [00:44:57] Cameron: billionaires to manipulate elections. Carte Blanche [00:45:05] Cameron: is just ridiculous. Like what the fuck do you think is going to happen when you, the richest people are able [00:45:11] Cameron: to just contribute an unlimited amount of money [00:45:15] Cameron: to political messaging? [00:45:19] Ray: they all go to the same country club. [00:45:21] Cameron: 72 percent of that 1. 9 billion went to support Republican [00:45:24] Cameron: candidates. [00:45:26] Cameron: 22 percent went to Democratic candidates. So there you got a problem straight up. [00:45:33] Cameron: You’ve got billionaires just sinking billions of dollars into supporting your candidates and in this case, the vast majority of it, nearly three quarters of it, going to, um, the, the, the Republicans. [00:45:47] Cameron: Now, um, the Musk stuff I want to get into in a little bit more detail because as I said, I’ve been meaning to do a show on this for a while. [00:45:57] Cameron: But, um, I haven’t had a chance to do a bullshit filter on it since I started drilling into this. So, for people who don’t know, and this is confusing, because look, I have this [00:46:11] Cameron: interesting, you know, there’s a dichotomy about Elon Musk. Tony always refers to him as a Bond villain. And, you know, I think that analogy is good, but on one hand, I think Elon Musk is brilliant, um, he is a genius, and anyone who says he isn’t can go fuck themselves. [00:46:31] Cameron: Um, you know, with what he’s done with SpaceX, and with Tesla, and his decision to buy Twitter, and what he’s doing with Neuralink, and with XAI, all of the businesses that he runs, he’s a genius. And the fact that he runs, if he ran any one [00:46:48] Cameron: of those, he would be considered a brilliant businessman and a genius. [00:46:51] Cameron: The fact that he runs all of them simultaneously, [00:46:55] Cameron: and you, you say he’s not, he’s not brilliant, fuck off. Go fuck yourself, seriously. I mean, the guy is a, is a [00:47:01] Cameron: freak. The fact that he got behind Trump, who he had been criticizing for the previous eight years, [00:47:10] Ray: Mm hmm, [00:47:11] Cameron: very vocally, at war with Trump for most of the [00:47:16] Cameron: last eight years. They were at war with each other, bad mouthing each other. [00:47:21] Cameron: To then jump on board the way that he did gave me whiplash. And so I started drilling into what’s going on here. I assumed there was something in it for Trump to, for Musk to support Trump. [00:47:35] Ray: Yeah. [00:47:35] Cameron: And, you know, he said it was when [00:47:37] Cameron: Trump’s assassination, you know, nearly happened. [00:47:41] Cameron: And then Trump got up and went fight, fight, fight. And he went, Oh, I’m going to get behind that guy, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. And that may have played a role in it, but [00:47:50] Cameron: Musk has been at war with the Biden administration for the last few years. [00:47:55] Ray: Mm hmm, [00:47:57] Cameron: and his relationship with the federal [00:47:59] Cameron: government is Extraordinary and extraordinarily lucrative. [00:48:05] Cameron: Um, SpaceX effectively dictates NASA’s rocket launch schedule. I mean, I was talking to one of my kids about this and he was like, Well, you know, he wants Trump to win so he can get more NASA contracts. I mean, he pretty much already has all the NASA contracts. [00:48:21] Cameron: Like, NASA doesn’t exi Yeah, exactly. NASA doesn’t exist, pretty much, without Trump. [00:48:27] Cameron: SpaceX right now. They’ve, they’ve basically outsourced, not everything, you know, Bezos’s company gets a little bit, but mostly it all, it all goes to, uh, SpaceX now and Boeing gets a little bit and that kind of stuff, but they fucked that [00:48:40] Cameron: up. Um, the Defense Department relies on SpaceX to get most of its satellites into orbit. [00:48:48] Cameron: His companies were promised 3 billion across nearly 100 different contracts last year with 17 different federal agencies. [00:49:00] Ray: Damn. [00:49:02] Cameron: So he’s very tied in and gets a lot of funding from the federal government and some people will argue that his businesses have been as successful as they have been because of the amount of money that he’s been able to extract out of the federal government to that’s able to fund him to do a lot of his research and run his businesses. [00:49:23] Cameron: But [00:49:23] Ray: hmm. [00:49:24] Cameron: companies have also been targeted in at least 20 recent [00:49:28] Cameron: investigations or reviews over the safety of Tesla cars, environmental damage caused by his rockets, etc. He’s got a huge business footprint. And, you know, but there’s been oversight and regulation and investigations into his businesses from Transportation Department, Justice Department, Labor Department, Interior, Agriculture, the National Labor Relations Board, Equal Opportunity, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Environmental [00:50:02] Cameron: Protection Agency, Securities and Exchange Commission, Federal Communications Commission, and the Federal Trade Commission. [00:50:10] Cameron: So He, being a typical rich, uh, quote [00:50:15] Cameron: unquote self made man, his view on government tends to be, fuck off and let me do what I’m doing because I’m a fucking genius and I’m driving the [00:50:24] Ray: Leave me alone. [00:50:26] Cameron: He has a messianic complex, you know, he does believe, according to the Walter Isaacson biography that I read, That he is the saviour of humanity. [00:50:36] Cameron: That AI is coming, climate change is coming, thermonuclear war is potentially coming. We need to [00:50:42] Cameron: become a multi planetary species really, really quickly. We need to merge with the AI through brain computer interfaces. And no one else is doing this stuff fast enough. Other people are fucking around the edges of it. [00:50:56] Cameron: He’s hitting it hard and fast like D’Angelo and your wife. And he is, um He sees [00:51:04] Cameron: himself as the guy that’s gonna help the human race survive and anyone that gets in his way, like we used to talk about Stalin in this sense. I genuinely believe that Stalin in the late 30s and the 40s [00:51:22] Cameron: and early 50s believed that he was the only thing that was going to make the Soviet Union survive. [00:51:30] Cameron: Um, because he was the guy with the vision, he was the guy with the ability to get shit done. And. And they were being attacked on all sides. The capitalists were coming, um, you know, they were coming with economic blocks, they were coming with military invasions, they were coming with the atomic bomb, they were coming with all sorts of stuff that, and anything that he had to do. [00:51:53] Cameron: To win, for the Soviet Union to win and to survive [00:51:59] Cameron: was justifiable, because they had a population of roughly 200 million people, and they were all gonna starve, or they’re all gonna get killed. 20 million died in World War II, a lot more were dying of starvation. He had to, [00:52:15] Cameron: he had to just mow down anyone who got in his way, [00:52:20] Cameron: because [00:52:21] Ray: I got time. [00:52:22] Cameron: Couldn’t afford to slow down, right? [00:52:24] Cameron: Couldn’t afford it. There were just road bumps. Had to, it’s my way or the highway. You get on board with my five year plan or I fuck you off and do a prison camp in wherever, [00:52:37] Ray: Siberia. [00:52:38] Cameron: yeah, because don’t have time to fuck with your [00:52:41] Cameron: bullshit. And then anyone. [00:52:43] Ray: do not. [00:52:44] Cameron: Anyone who was even, it’s a bit like the McCarthy [00:52:47] Cameron: hearings we just had, anyone who even remotely [00:52:52] Cameron: resembled someone who might get in the way, good enough, fuck you, you’re gone. [00:52:56] Cameron: You’re either all in, and then, of course, there were lots of guys that, you [00:53:00] Cameron: know, got, in the inner circle, um, that got executed and removed because they were a threat to his power, or a perceived threat to his power. [00:53:10] Cameron: And again, if you believe you’re the messiah, if you believe you’re the messiah of a country, and you’re a psychopath, then doesn’t matter. [00:53:17] Cameron: Anything I need to do to win is justifiable. I do believe that [00:53:23] Ray: by the means. [00:53:24] Cameron: one of, exactly, [00:53:26] Cameron: Musk is one of those guys, but he’s looking [00:53:28] Cameron: at it from a view of the [00:53:29] Cameron: human race. And if, and if the Biden [00:53:31] Cameron: administration is gonna get in his way and is gonna fuck with him and make life more difficult, [00:53:38] Cameron: then fuck it. [00:53:40] Cameron: He’s, his deal with the [00:53:41] Cameron: devil was, listen, Donald [00:53:43] Cameron: Trump, I think you’re a fucking moron. I don’t like you, but here’s what I’ll do. [00:53:47] Cameron: I will, [00:53:48] Cameron: I will help you get elected. I will throw my money and my [00:53:52] Cameron: platform behind helping you get elected in return for all of my problems go what. [00:54:00] Cameron: And Trump [00:54:00] Ray: like, Trump’s. [00:54:01] Cameron: fuck yes, yeah, exactly, you’ve [00:54:03] Cameron: got problems, you want yours to go [00:54:05] Ray: You scratch my [00:54:07] Cameron: exactly. [00:54:08] Ray: Yes. Yes. Mutual, uh, mutual, beneficial. Beneficially mutual. Yeah. [00:54:15] Cameron: So that’s, for me, explains quite rationally the whole Musk supporting Trump situation, it was a quid pro quo deal. [00:54:25] Ray: Right. Yeah. I think, I think Musk [00:54:28] Ray: can be as emotional as anybody but at the end of the day, being a genius, he’s going to be smart enough to go, this benefits me, this [00:54:35] Ray: doesn’t, this is what I’m going to do, [00:54:37] Ray: even though I might not like it, it benefits me, ergo, that is the way I’ll go. I mean, yeah, at the end of the day, you do what you got to do to survive and keep it [00:54:45] Ray: going. And if that means dealing with Trump, [00:54:50] Ray: he’s, yeah, he can do it. [00:54:53] Cameron: So, getting back to the numbers and the demographics, 11 percent of people who voted in 2020 didn’t turn up in 2024. 17 million people who did vote, stayed home. Um, in total, in 2020, 155 and a half million votes were cast. This time it was 138 [00:55:17] Cameron: and a half million. Um, in 81 million votes [00:55:23] Cameron: to Trump’s 74. In 2024, Harris got 66. [00:55:27] Cameron: 8 million votes to Trump’s 71. 6. So, a couple of million less people voted for Trump. And, uh, yeah, fucking 15 million less, uh, who voted for Biden voted for Harris. [00:55:44] Ray: right. Do you think maybe, oh I don’t know, letting Israel wipe out tens of thousands of Palestinians who are innocent [00:55:52] Ray: might have had something to do with people not being cool with taking time off from their busy schedule and going to vote for Kamala? I don’t [00:56:00] Ray: know. It’s just an idea. [00:56:02] Cameron: Look, I’m, uh, I’ll, I’ll talk about why people don’t vote in a second, but I want to say that Harris had got more votes than Obama did in 2012 and Hillary did in 2016, [00:56:14] Cameron: but way less than Biden got in 2020. Like, I think a lot of people came out of the woodwork [00:56:20] Cameron: to [00:56:20] Cameron: get rid of Trump. in 2020, but this time around, no, the [00:56:26] Cameron: white people came out to, well, not, people came out to get rid of Trump and in 2020, but this time the Democrat, they, they couldn’t be fucked voting for the Democrats this time [00:56:38] Cameron: around. [00:56:39] Ray: Yes. [00:56:40] Cameron: Um, now, [00:56:41] Ray: stayed home. [00:56:42] Cameron: I haven’t seen any analysis of why people didn’t vote in this election, but I do have analysis from [00:56:48] Cameron: 2020, and I, I don’t think it would have changed a great deal. The reason that people say they don’t vote, uh, as follows, and this is from an NPR analysis, by the way, uh, a third of them, roughly 29 percent say they’re not registered to vote. Why? [00:57:11] Ray: on that, well, on that one, because Kiki ran into this, uh, Kiki [00:57:15] Ray: registered to vote. She was very [00:57:17] Ray: excited, and, uh, [00:57:18] Ray: she got a little piece of paper, and, uh, I said, well, hopefully you don’t [00:57:21] Ray: get jury duty. And she said, what? I said, yeah, when you register to [00:57:24] Ray: vote. Your name goes into the jury duty pool, which I know may not sound like a big deal, [00:57:30] Ray: but in America, we really, really hate that. [00:57:33] Ray: So, that might be a very, very small reason why, but, you know, I don’t know, maybe that’s something that should be looked at. But the point is, I find that very, very interesting. 29 [00:57:43] Ray: people just simply aren’t registered. Are they that busy? Or do they not care? [00:57:49] Cameron: Well, 29 percent aren’t [00:57:51] Cameron: registered to vote, um, and I don’t know exactly what the reasons are, but some of the other reasons that you might assume are tied up with that are that the second biggest one is they’re not interested in politics, that’s 23%. 20 percent [00:58:05] Ray: Why should they be? [00:58:07] Cameron: say they don’t like the candidates, [00:58:11] Ray: Mm hmm. [00:58:12] Cameron: percent feel that [00:58:13] Cameron: their vote wouldn’t make a difference, and 10 percent say they’re undecided on whom to vote for. [00:58:21] Cameron: But if you, [00:58:22] Ray: I, I can’t, I can’t go with the 10. I can’t go with that last one. How in the fuck could you confuse Kamala, [00:58:30] Ray: who, far from perfect, and Tru I don’t know, to me that, and not economically, but in a lot [00:58:36] Ray: of other ways, it’s black and white, but anyways, uh, maybe that’s just me being more emotional than rational, but I’m like, I don’t [00:58:42] Cameron: Well, that’s like, John Mearsheimer. [00:58:44] Ray: between those two. [00:58:45] Cameron: I’m not going to vote for Trump, but I’m not going to vote for somebody who supports genocide either, so [00:58:49] Cameron: You know, [00:58:50] Cameron: I [00:58:51] Ray: She screwed herself. [00:58:52] Cameron: who do I vote for? I mean, you can go vote for the Greens or [00:58:55] Cameron: an Independent, or you can write a name in, like [00:58:57] Cameron: people wrote in RFK, [00:58:59] Cameron: apparently. By the way, congratulations with RFKs, now you’re going to be running your healthcare system. [00:59:03] Cameron: So good luck with [00:59:05] Cameron: that. [00:59:07] Cameron: Um, but the basic point here [00:59:11] Cameron: is that people, you know, a [00:59:13] Cameron: large percentage of the people, like, I think, um, How many people [00:59:18] Cameron: voted, did we say? Uh, 100 and, what was the numbers I said before? 140, um, 138 million people voted. What’s the population? What’s the adult population in the United States? [00:59:34] Ray: uh, 270 million? I don’t know. I [00:59:37] Ray: really don’t know. [00:59:39] Cameron: Um, [00:59:40] Ray: It’s a lot more than 130. [00:59:43] Cameron: mean, um, Adult [00:59:46] Cameron: population, USA, [00:59:49] Cameron: population 335 million, under 18, [00:59:55] Cameron: 22%. So let’s say 80 percent roughly of the population, is, able to vote. [01:00:03] Ray: Right. [01:00:04] Cameron: 80 percent of 335, right? Do some quick maths in your head for me. [01:00:11] Ray: Nope, cause you got a computer right there. I’m not a show pony. [01:00:15] Ray: We’ve had this conversation. [01:00:19] Ray: And you know I don’t know all the numbers. There’s like 12 of them. [01:00:23] Ray: So, [01:00:25] Ray: 80 times 335, I mean, I forgot, I don’t know. [01:00:29] Ray: Do I look like Rain Man to you? Don’t answer [01:00:31] Ray: that. [01:00:32] Cameron: Yeah. Okay. It’s about, let’s say 268, 270 million. Um, [01:00:37] Ray: Fuckin nailed it! Sorry, go ahead. [01:00:40] Cameron: yeah. Good job, [01:00:42] Cameron: rain man. So. [01:00:46] Ray: I used intuition. Go ahead. [01:00:50] Cameron: 138 million people [01:00:52] Cameron: voted. 268 million people could have voted. So that’s 130 million people just don’t fucking [01:01:03] Cameron: decide. You know [01:01:03] Cameron: what? [01:01:04] Ray: Oh, I heard you saying, yeah, you know, fuck it. [01:01:07] Cameron: I cannot be fucked. Fuck, fuck politics. [01:01:10] Cameron: Fuck the politicians. Fuck [01:01:12] Cameron: politics. [01:01:14] Cameron: Here, here’s um, [01:01:16] Cameron: here’s some of the stuff from this NPR article from [01:01:18] Cameron: 2020. Politics is simply not the way to make change, they said. Two thirds of non voters agree, for example, that voting has little to do with the way that real decisions are made in this country. They are 21 points more likely [01:01:31] Cameron: to say so than people who voted. A majority also said they believe it makes no difference who is elected. [01:01:38] Cameron: President, and that things will go on just as they did before. Non voters were 29 points more likely to say that than people who voted. Non voters are also more likely than voters to say that traditional parties and politicians don’t care about people like me. The mainstream media is more interested in making money than telling the truth. [01:01:58] Cameron: The American economy is rigged to advantage the rich and powerful. Success in life is pretty much determined by forces outside of our control, and a feel that most issues discussed in Washington don’t affect them personally. Non voters were also more likely to be young and Latino. 35 percent of non voters [01:02:16] Cameron: in this survey were between the ages of 18 and 34, compared with 24 percent of voters. [01:02:22] Cameron: And notably, a quarter of non voters were Hispanic, compared with just 7 percent of voters. So, [01:02:31] Cameron: people, like, like a large percentage of the country, say half of the country, [01:02:36] Cameron: uh, more or less, just believes that politics is bullshit, doesn’t matter, we’re being lied to, all the politicians are fucking useless and corrupt, the media’s lying [01:02:49] Cameron: to us. Disenfranchised, disaffected, jaded, and you know what? [01:02:54] Cameron: Right. [01:02:56] Ray: Yeah, absolutely. Yeah, they feel it in their bones. Trust me, I know. [01:03:02] Cameron: Um, so, [01:03:05] Cameron: You know, I [01:03:06] Cameron: think it’s a, so, like in countries like Australia, you have to vote. [01:03:11] Cameron: Voting is [01:03:11] Cameron: mandatory. Or pay a fine. And [01:03:17] Cameron: so people vote. You know, we just had a state election here. Chrissy and I did it via postal vote. [01:03:23] Cameron: And as you [01:03:24] Cameron: know, [01:03:24] Cameron: our election campaign cycles run about three minutes. Um, They, they announce the election long enough to make sure that you don’t have anything scheduled for that day or to get a postal vote organized. [01:03:37] Cameron: That’s all. Oh, by the way, what are you [01:03:38] Cameron: doing in three weeks? Nothing. What are you doing? Oh, we’re going to have an election. Oh, fuck it. Really? Okay. Yeah. All right. Well, I’ll make sure that I’m around or whatever. Who’s the candidates? Do you, does it matter? No, probably not. Okay. [01:03:51] Cameron: Um, [01:03:53] Ray: Right? [01:03:54] Cameron: Literally, I did not know anything about the candidates, and I got my postal vote from them, and I looked at it, and I, I, Chrissy looked at hers, and we both went, well, this is fucking easy, isn’t it? [01:04:04] Cameron: It’s like, cunt, cunt, cunt, cunt, cunt, cunt, and, you know, Greens Party, okay, probably lesser of the cunts. Um, [01:04:11] Ray: Right. [01:04:13] Cameron: It was, it was, You [01:04:14] Cameron: know, that’s [01:04:16] Ray: chose the less cuntiest. [01:04:18] Cameron: yeah, the lesser of five cuts, basically. but You know, we have to vote, uh, and, and even if you’re disaffected as I am and disenfranchised and, and believe, you know, most of the major parties are fucking, Not worth pissing on. [01:04:38] Cameron: Again, because they’re supporting genocide in Gaza. Like, fuck you. And [01:04:43] Cameron: they’re supporting, you know, the bullshit narrative around Ukraine. You know, a guy who is our Prime Minister, Anthony Albanese. Before he was in power, he was a labor union [01:04:56] Cameron: guy. For decades, he was, going back to his university days, very vocal about the treatment of the Palestinians and of Gaza, you know, getting Israel the fuck out of Gaza, and two state solution, and very critical of Israel. [01:05:13] Cameron: The minute he becomes the prime minister, all of that [01:05:16] Cameron: disappears, you know, [01:05:18] Ray: Well, we have to, uh Yeah. Bullshit. [01:05:22] Cameron: I’m like, fuck you. You have [01:05:24] Cameron: zero credibility. How can I have any respect for you or your party, um, that they’re allowing this? Anyway, breaking down more of the exit poll demographics here, Ray, um, [01:05:36] Ray: Mm hmm. [01:05:37] Cameron: Oh my God, the majority of men voted for Trump. 55 percent of men, uh, voted for Trump. Um, the majority of women, 53 percent [01:05:45] Cameron: of women voted Democrat. [01:05:48] Cameron: But, uh, when you break it down into a race, that changes. In terms of gender, uh, race, uh, majority of white people voted for Trump. Majority of black people, by a large margin, 85 percent of black people voted for Kamala. She got a bare majority of Hispanic, Latino, 52%. [01:06:08] Cameron: Um, she [01:06:09] Ray: Mm hmm. [01:06:10] Cameron: slight majority in the Asian vote. [01:06:12] Cameron: 54% and 42% of other, uh, in terms of, uh, uh, [01:06:24] Cameron: are [01:06:24] Cameron: you white? Why am I seeing [01:06:27] Cameron: this twice? Oh, American Indian is in [01:06:32] Cameron: this next [01:06:32] Ray: Mm hmm. [01:06:33] Cameron: Uh, American Indian has broken out into this one. She got 34. The majority of American [01:06:38] Cameron: Indians, native Americans got, uh, gave their vote to Trump. [01:06:44] Cameron: Well, fucking what? [01:06:45] Cameron: Um, [01:06:46] Ray: What? Yeah, that’s a legitimate response. What? [01:06:52] Cameron: sex by race, uh, white men [01:06:55] Cameron: voted for Trump, white women voted for Trump, black men and black women voted for [01:07:00] Cameron: Kamala, Latino men voted for Trump, Latino women voted for Kamala. And all the other races, it was pretty much evenly split. She got a little bit more, 48 to 46. Age groups. Now, this is another interesting [01:07:17] Cameron: thing. [01:07:17] Cameron: You know, I’ve been hearing since the days of [01:07:20] Cameron: Bush that the Republicans were a spent force in America because [01:07:27] Cameron: the youth were more progressive. And the youth were going to be voting Democrat. The old white people were going to be dying off the boomers. You were going to have, uh, this rise of the young white voters and Latino and black voters were going to vote Democrat. [01:07:46] Cameron: And they had it locked down, [01:07:49] Ray: Yeah. Days are numbered. [01:07:51] Cameron: right? It was going to be locked down for decades to come. And there was a whole [01:07:55] Cameron: bunch of, you know, punditry and analysis about this in the early Obama years. In this election, 18 29 age group, 54 percent voted Democrat, um, so, a majority, but only a skinny majority. [01:08:17] Ray: Yeah. Should’ve been more. [01:08:18] Cameron: 30 44, um, it was evenly split, 49 48, uh, 45 64. [01:08:28] Cameron: Our demographic, majority voted Republican and 65 and over evenly split, which [01:08:37] Cameron: is kind of interesting. You would expect the boomers mostly to be Republican, but it wasn’t the case, it was evenly split. So it’s the, it’s the 30 to 44 demographic. I don’t even know what that is in terms of generation, I don’t know if that’s still Gen X. [01:08:55] Cameron: I’m Gen X and I was, I’m 54. [01:08:58] Ray: hmm. [01:08:59] Cameron: But overall, so if you break the, depending on how you break the age up, 18 to 44, bare majority went Democrat, 51 percent. Um, 45 and over, majority went Republican. Uh, you can break the ages up into other ways, uh, you know, smaller and smaller increments, but it’s basically the same thing. [01:09:20] Cameron: When you get down to age by gender, Men 18 to 29 voted Trump. Again, a bare majority, 49 percent Republican, 47 percent Democrat, but the majority went for Trump. So young, young men, uh, 30 to 44 also Trump, men, 45 to 64, largely Trump, 60%, men, 65 and above Trump. So. [01:09:46] Cameron: Men of all ages love [01:09:49] Cameron: Trump. [01:09:49] Ray: Yeah. [01:09:50] Cameron: Uh, most of the women, uh, across all ages and, um, races voted, uh, for the Democrats, except women, 45 to 64, 50 percent went Republican. [01:10:08] Ray: Right. [01:10:10] Cameron: So, um, like young people. Again, stupidity. Like, voting for this fucking retard. [01:10:20] Cameron: Um, it’s just shocking. What, which best describes your education? Never attended college, 63 percent voted Trump. Uh, attended college but never received a degree, 51%. Uh, voted Trump, [01:10:36] Cameron: Associate’s Degree, 56 percent voted Trump, Bachelor’s Degree, 53 percent voted Democrat, and Advanced Degree, 59 percent voted Democrat. [01:10:48] Cameron: So the, so the Republicans are getting the majority of the, let’s say, uneducated, uh, or, or barely tertiary educated. [01:10:57] Cameron: vote. [01:10:57] Ray: I love the poorly educated. [01:11:00] Cameron: Yeah, college graduates, uh, Democrats got [01:11:03] Cameron: 55%, no [01:11:05] Cameron: college degree, Trump got 56 percent all up. Uh, so, I mean, look, you make university as expensive as [01:11:16] Cameron: possible over there, and this is what happens. [01:11:20] Cameron: People don’t get an education, and they vote, uh, [01:11:26] Cameron: or they don’t vote, [01:11:27] Ray: Well, they fall for shit. yeah. good point, but they fall for shit. [01:11:32] Cameron: Um, one of the [01:11:34] Cameron: interesting ones, again, [01:11:35] Cameron: is going to be religion. 63 [01:11:38] Ray: Mmm, right. [01:11:41] Cameron: Christians, so that includes things like the Mormons, [01:11:44] Cameron: um, 63 percent voted for Trump. Catholics, 58 percent voted for Trump. [01:11:52] Cameron: 78 percent of the Jews, I love the Jews, [01:11:55] Cameron: um, 78 percent [01:11:57] Ray: Do my taxes. [01:11:59] Cameron: voted, for Kamala. [01:12:01] Ray: How much? What was the percentage again? [01:12:04] Cameron: of the Jewish vote went Democrat. [01:12:07] Ray: Okay, [01:12:07] Cameron: But they’re, you know, two tenths of fuck all. So it doesn’t really matter. But, [01:12:12] Cameron: um, [01:12:13] Ray: that’s true. [01:12:14] Cameron: and I don’t know how many of them are pro Israel, but, uh, you know, I would guess that a lot of them are. [01:12:21] Cameron: So in terms of who they thought, I assume [01:12:25] Cameron: this was an issue for them, was going to, [01:12:27] Cameron: uh, support the genocide in Gaza. They were all for the Democrats. [01:12:33] Ray: Mm hmm. [01:12:35] Cameron: but there you go. In terms of no religion, 71 percent of atheists. Or no [01:12:41] Cameron: religion. Anyway, atheist, agnostic, whatever you like, uh, voted Democrat. [01:12:46] Ray: Right. Huh. So We need we need, right. Sorry, go [01:12:52] Cameron: got uneducated Christians are the [01:12:56] Ray: That’s what I was gonna say. We need to ban church, make college free, and eventually [01:13:04] Ray: we might be okay. Maybe. [01:13:06] Cameron: Which, you know, the communists, that’s communism, my friend. Ban [01:13:10] Ray: Boom. There we go. There we go There We go. [01:13:14] Ray: We solved all the world’s problems tonight. I’m taking the rest of the week off. Oh, [01:13:22] Cameron: the whole thing about, uh, [01:13:23] Cameron: you know, Trump being big in the rural areas, you know, there’s often been this thing about the, east and west coast elites. [01:13:32] Cameron: Um, He was up in all of those areas, including New York. He got 51 percent of the suburban vote, only 38 percent of the urban vote, but was up in that. And of course, 64 percent of the rural vote, So absolutely dominated that as always. [01:13:54] Ray: Mm hmm. [01:13:55] Cameron: look, I want to, I want to finish. So that’s all of the election stuff, but we’ve talked about civil war [01:13:59] Cameron: stuff over the years. [01:14:02] Cameron: You know, I said at the beginning of this show that. I, um, [01:14:06] Cameron: I was surprised that there wasn’t some sort of a civil war or martial law declared at the end of Trump’s first term. I think the chances are much more likely. this time to happen. [01:14:21] Ray: You can do something. [01:14:22] Cameron: And I’ve been trying to think [01:14:26] Cameron: about, based on [01:14:29] Cameron: my study of history, what are the, what are the precursors to civil wars? How do they generally take form? [01:14:39] Cameron: What do they look like? [01:14:41] Cameron: And then which of those models most closely resembles where the United [01:14:48] Cameron: States is at today? [01:14:50] Cameron: And therefore, What do you think the progression is going to be? So I’m going to run these past you and see what you think. [01:14:57] Ray: Okay. [01:15:00] Cameron: So the first one I would say is a successful coup. So you have a conspiracy to remove the head or heads of state. [01:15:10] Cameron: Uh, Julius Caesar, um, the, the, [01:15:16] Cameron: sort of the French Revolution to a point, but not really, no, the French Revolution’s not really there. Um, you have a coup where you have a group of people that decide to kill the president, um, And, not like the assassinate, like there are assassinations of [01:15:32] Cameron: Lincoln, or the attempted assassination of Trump recently, although he wasn’t the head of state, you have [01:15:38] Cameron: assassinations that aren’t part of a coup, they’re just an assassination, JFK’s assassination wasn’t part of a coup, [01:15:48] Cameron: it was [01:15:48] Ray: Right. [01:15:49] Cameron: an assassination for, because, depending on what story you want to [01:15:54] Ray: had a beef. [01:15:56] Cameron: Lone Wolf, Or the CIA slash the mob [01:16:00] Cameron: slash, um, [01:16:02] Ray: Soviet Russia. Right. Yeah. [01:16:05] Cameron: wanted to get rid of the Kennedys. [01:16:07] Cameron: Um, [01:16:09] Cameron: but you have a coup, right? So you have a bunch of people that are angry [01:16:14] Cameron: enough that they want to kill the leader of the government and overthrow the [01:16:19] Cameron: government. So you have a successful coup, coups come in two forms. You have a successful coup. And, you know, we talk about Rome, Julius Caesar, that wasn’t really a successful coup because, uh, the guys that committed the coup didn’t end up running the government, you know, it [01:16:39] Cameron: was probably a [01:16:41] Ray: They wanted to. [01:16:42] Cameron: yeah. [01:16:43] Ray: Right? [01:16:44] Cameron: So you have a failed coup where the coup fragments the military or rival political factions. and [01:16:58] Ray: Mm. [01:16:59] Cameron: that who end up fighting each other in a civil war and the the stages of the coup are not successful. So, um, [01:17:08] Cameron: Brutus and Cassius weren’t successful after they [01:17:13] Ray: Right. [01:17:13] Cameron: had the civil war with Mark Antony and, and, um, Augustus, [01:17:19] Cameron: um, or Octavius as he was at the time. [01:17:24] Cameron: So, [01:17:25] Cameron: that plays out. A failed coup attempt. Then you have the large scale civil uprising. You have a, usually led by a vanguard of intellectuals. The people go on strike or take over key infrastructure. They cripple the economy and society, form a new government, and it goes from there. And sometimes the leaders are killed. [01:17:53] Cameron: Um, as part of that process, you know, I think the Russian revolution, the French revolution are examples of these, [01:18:02] Cameron: the people rose up because they were starving or angry, um, and they just went on strike or overthrew the prisons and overthrew the government. Just mass unrest, a mass public upheaval, not led from the top by a coup, but just by anger. [01:18:22] Cameron: Political leaders, the vanguard of intellectuals, antagonizing, organizing, riling people up. So there’s a, some sort of an upheaval. Then you have the slow rebellion, which is where, uh, uh, A small group of rebels slowly start to take over parts of the country, building support with the populace as they go, capturing pieces of critical infrastructure one at a time, until they have a big enough army and a big enough amount of populace support. [01:19:02] Cameron: that they can have more of a head to head engagement with the government. And the classic example for that is the Viet Cong, uh, against the French and then the Americans, um, in the Vietnam war, or Castro in Cuba started off with 20 guys. Uh, in the mountains and just built slowly, piece by piece by piece until he was big enough to, until the, the government collapsed and Batista ran away and they were able to, um, take over government. [01:19:44] Cameron: Um, then you have, I’m not, I’m not sure what to call this one, but it’s like the ideological revo, um, [01:19:52] Cameron: uh, rebellion, where you have a large section of the country split. That’s it. along ideological lines. The American Civil War, the American Revolution, I think both examples of this. The Korean War is an example of this, where you have two large ideological groups that, you know, just decide, you know what, fuck you, we’re breaking away, or we’re drawing a line in the sand, we’re going to take this part of the country, you’re going to take that part of the country, or maybe we’re going to fight over who controls [01:20:31] Cameron: the whole thing. Um, you know, I think the, the American revolution, it’s not often depicted like this, but we know it was, I mean, you had large, uh, numbers of Americans at the time that were pro British control, that were, that were collaborators with the [01:20:53] Ray: Loyal. [01:20:54] Cameron: loyal to the British. And then you had a group that decided to break away [01:20:58] Cameron: from the British and [01:21:00] Ray: economic reasons. Mm-Hmm. [01:21:02] Cameron: Exactly. So, and an ideological [01:21:08] Cameron: of it, you know, we, we don’t want to pay taxes to a foreign government, whatever it is. And then of course the civil war was about, you know, economic reasons as well. And, you know, the, the, the slave owning [01:21:20] Cameron: states versus the non slave owning the industrial states and, and who was going to control the future of the country. [01:21:28] Cameron: Then you have the situation where there’s a severe economic collapse or severe inequality, and, and the Russian and French revolutions play into that to an extent as well. But when you also have situations where there’s hyperinflation or famine or extreme inequality, large sections of the population are driven to desperation. [01:21:51] Cameron: They’re not necessarily rebelling for ideological reasons because the state can no longer Or will. Will no longer meet their needs, and the people just rise up and decide to take shit. Food. [01:22:06] Ray: right? [01:22:07] Cameron: to feed themselves and then they get into a war with the authorities and they fight [01:22:12] Cameron: back. they [01:22:14] Cameron: get pickaxes and pitchforks and shovels and torches, right? [01:22:20] Cameron: Which as we talked about in our Cold War series was what FDR was concerned was going to happen during the Great Depression and he was saying to the elite when he was introducing the New Deal, he was saying to the business leaders, listen, I’m your last defense, right, against pitchforks. Then they’re [01:22:35] Ray: Yeah, pay a little now, or pay a lot later. Yeah, [01:22:39] Cameron: were, they were like, fuck you. we [01:22:42] Cameron: hate the new [01:22:42] Ray: Because they’re not used to [01:22:43] Ray: being, yeah, because they’re not used to being [01:22:45] Ray: stymied. And he’s like, it’s a brave new world. Well, the thing for me, out of everything you [01:22:51] Ray: just said, the people that are ready to war against America, within America, right the fuck now, are the militias. [01:22:58] Ray: And they don’t really get a lot of news unless some ranch or whatever gets busted, but there’s a lot of militias, they have a lot of firepower, they’re getting more and more. Pretty highly organized, but they have to be careful because the FBI is trying to track them down. So if there’s a war right now, these guys are ready to go. [01:23:15] Ray: Uh, but here’s the question. Most of them, if not all of them, are pro Trump. [01:23:20] Ray: So do they not attack while he’s president or maybe they’re thinking that he’ll help in their [01:23:25] Ray: own fantasy world that they’ll help. Uh, so, so who knows with that, but as far as all of those ideas that you [01:23:31] Ray: just espoused, uh, uh, [01:23:33] Ray: the, the ideological will probably be If something doesn’t [01:23:38] Ray: hack it, because, oh, I’m sorry. [01:23:41] Cameron: Um, [01:23:41] Ray: Okay. Well, I think it’s going to be [01:23:42] Ray: that one, but go [01:23:44] Cameron: The fourth one is a religious schism or a sectarian divide. So you have deep seated religious or sectarian divides [01:23:53] Cameron: that flare up into a civil war when a government favors one, group and actively discriminates against another. Sri Lanka, Lebanese Civil War, the Syrian Civil War. [01:24:05] Cameron: We’ve talked about these on the bullshit filter and, um, the, the. Cold War show, [01:24:13] Cameron: um, you know, where you have, uh, even going back to Tito, And his day in Yugoslavia and like huge religious divide and members of the government were actively supporting one religion versus another. And they’re like, fuck you. [01:24:33] Cameron: And it breaks out. [01:24:35] Ray: Right. [01:24:36] Cameron: seven. Number eight is a foreign intervention or a proxy war. [01:24:40] Cameron: So you’ve got foreign powers intervening, arming one side to achieve their own goals. This is Ukraine to a large extent. Right, um, where you had And I’m not even talking about what’s happening today, I’m talking about 2004, 2014, America supporting coups in the country that spilled over into violence, didn’t erupt at that stage into a full out civil war, except in the Donbass region where it did, um. [01:25:16] Cameron: And then you had the U. S. supporting Ukraine on one hand and Europe and NATO. You had Russia supporting the other side and the Donbass and then it turned into the 2022 escalation. [01:25:32] Cameron: So, um, You’ve also got other examples like the Greek Civil War after World War II that we’ve talked about in a Cold War show where the British got involved to support the monarchy. [01:25:42] Cameron: People were trying to overthrow the monarchy, the British supported it. Um, proxy wars. You know, a lot of what’s happened in the Middle East and has since the end of the Ottoman Empire have been proxy wars. Um, what’s happening in Gaza, what happens in Iran, what happened in Iraq in 2003, etc. Proxy wars happening. [01:26:05] Cameron: Different foreign powers getting involved and trying to make sure that a government that’s supportive of their economic interests is in power. [01:26:16] Cameron: Number nine is decolonization, where you have an empire or a federation fall apart, internal groups vying for control. The breakup of Yugoslavia after Tito died was part of sort of that sort of thing, a breakup of a federation. [01:26:32] Cameron: The collapse of the Soviet Union after the Cold [01:26:34] Cameron: War, uh, India and Pakistan, after the British got out, Israel and Palestine, after the British pulled out of Palestine, um, Similar things happened in Iraq and in Syria after the European powers pulled out post the World War II and that sort of stuff. And the 10th is ethnic or regional marginalization, where you have ethnic or regional [01:27:02] Cameron: minorities that are politically or economically marginalized within a country and eventually rebel. [01:27:09] Cameron: Again, Sri Lanka is part of that, although there’s a religious aspect, Nigeria, Sudan, Yemen. [01:27:18] Cameron: We often have that situation as well. It’s, it’s partly religious, but quite often it’s [01:27:24] Cameron: ethnic. marginalization, we hate you because you’re a Huthi or we hate you because you’re a member of this tribe or whatever it is. [01:27:33] Cameron: Not necessarily religious, but ethnic. [01:27:37] Cameron: Although the two, two are often conflated, but I think we can separate. So that’s, as far as I could work out, looking at [01:27:45] Cameron: civil wars, these are the 10 main that cause civil wars. Now, out of all of those, which do you think sounds? closest to where the United States is today. [01:28:05] Ray: Uh, well, um, if I can put the second part of your [01:28:09] Ray: question to the side for a second. Any kind of serious economic collapse, uh, because Americans are nothing more than capitalists, I could see that causing some trouble, but I think it’s, it’s the ideology, but Um, [01:28:22] Ray: Civil War might be pushing it too far. I think there’d be a lot of fistfights. [01:28:26] Ray: I think there’d be riots in the streets, which eventually would become a civil war. But, uh, yeah, I think it’s just, I, I, and, and I’m going to exaggerate on purpose, but I, I see the people, some of the people that voted for Trump, and I’m literally like, I don’t know. I don’t understand you at all, and to go from I don’t understand you at all to I hate you is not a, it’s not a big leap, um, because when there’s, there’s an absence of understanding, normally something dark fills the void, so I, I think it’s something about we’re just getting further and further away from, from, from the two sides are getting further away from each other, and eventually within that gap, conflict, violence, Whatever can take place. [01:29:09] Ray: Basically, when one side attacks another, it normally comes down to two reasons. One, desperation, [01:29:14] Ray: or two, one side or both sides think they can win. Oh, well, I wouldn’t do this if I didn’t think I could win. That’s what a lot of conflict comes down to. You add that with a lot of all the tension and all the problems that we have in this country, [01:29:27] Ray: it’s a, it’s a fucking pain. Powder cake. But I don’t think we’re, for a lot of us, we’re not there yet. But for some people, they’re already there and they’re [01:29:36] Ray: just waiting for the whistle to blow. So, I think it’s the ideology. What about [01:29:40] Ray: you? [01:29:42] Cameron: Yeah. Out of those 10, I think an ideological war is where you’re headed, uh, where the United States is most likely going to split. And with where you’re at now, I don’t, I think the way, if I had to guess how it would play out, it’s a combination of things, but you know, and I thought this the [01:30:07] Cameron: last time around, and I’ve been thinking this for the last eight or nine years, is. I can imagine a couple of scenarios. One scenario is where Trump gets assassinated. And, uh, whoever replaces him, J. D. Vance, let’s say, decides that, to blame it, rightly or wrongly, on radical leftists, and they, um, crack down. So they implement a version of martial law, they crack down, they start arresting anyone who’s ever expressed a leftist opinion on Twitter, Facebook, and Um, eventually the, the victims try and fight back and, and then people, militias or whatever in states, the states start to do some of the same things. [01:31:03] Cameron: Some of the red states, uh, some of the militias in the blue states start to take it upon themselves to start rounding up radical leftists, atheists, pro abortionists, homosexuals, trans, LGBTQ, whatever [01:31:20] Cameron: it is. The Jews. [01:31:23] Ray: hmm. [01:31:23] Cameron: we love, we love Israel, but we hate the Jews. Um, whatever it is. [01:31:29] Cameron: Uh, so that’s one way that kind of a thing can happen. [01:31:32] Cameron: The other thing is similar in [01:31:36] Cameron: that either as some other event happens, the burning of the Reichstag is the other example for this, right? A manufactured event. That creates a justification for a [01:31:51] Cameron: crackdown on your ideological enemies in the country. The, [01:31:57] Ray: Mm hmm. [01:31:58] Cameron: um, or the other thing is, it doesn’t need to be, [01:32:05] Cameron: prefaced by that kind of, uh, justification. [01:32:10] Cameron: It’s just a crackdown. Okay. So if, if you’re Trump and you’ve decided that, um, you’re the biggest threat [01:32:22] Cameron: to your political career, uh, political [01:32:25] Cameron: career, uh, and the career, the business career of all of your friends is. People agitating, you know, unions agitating, leftists agitating, people talking about, you know, your crimes or whatever it is, you just move to outlaw that, [01:32:44] Cameron: you know, [01:32:44] Ray: Yeah. Preemptive. [01:32:46] Cameron: Yeah, you just start shutting stuff down and eventually somebody fights back against that. [01:32:53] Cameron: There’s a retaliation and that just starts to build and it turns into a civil [01:32:58] Ray: Exactly. [01:32:59] Cameron: The America, this is what I’ve been saying for decades, America is a tinderbox and it won’t take much for it to explode, particularly as [01:33:10] Cameron: trust in the institutions [01:33:12] Cameron: of government are whittled away. Right now, subreddits, [01:33:17] Cameron: they believe that. Everyone in the government is corrupt. If I go into the Democratic subreddits, [01:33:28] Cameron: Conservative side of government is corrupt. [01:33:31] Ray: Mm hmm. [01:33:32] Cameron: the other side is corrupt. And then you’ve got the non voters who believe that it’s all corrupt. So you [01:33:37] Cameron: got the Reds, the [01:33:39] Ray: a lot of [01:33:40] Cameron: and the fucking you’re all corrupt [01:33:42] Ray: Neutral. Right? Right. [01:33:45] Cameron: Um, it’s a tinderbox [01:33:47] Cameron: waiting to happen. Um, [01:33:50] Cameron: so I, I just, I have thought for a long time and I continue to think and it gets worse every year that that’s what you’re looking for. And of course that ideological war will be supported by foreign intervention. China. Russia, Iran, um, all of the countries that you’ve fucked with, uh, [01:34:09] Cameron: for [01:34:10] Ray: Mm hmm. [01:34:10] Cameron: if not [01:34:11] Cameron: centuries, [01:34:12] Ray: Fucked back. [01:34:13] Cameron: will [01:34:13] Cameron: do whatever they can do to try and support, uh, division in the country. [01:34:20] Ray: Right. [01:34:21] Cameron: I did see like a day or so before the election [01:34:25] Cameron: media coverage saying the Russians are trying to cause division in the country. [01:34:31] Cameron: It’s like, yeah, the Russians don’t need to, aren’t the ones causing division in the [01:34:35] Ray: No. Save your money. [01:34:37] Cameron: Yeah, [01:34:38] Ray: Save your money, Russia. We got this. We can do this ourselves. [01:34:42] Cameron: fuck me. Anyway, [01:34:46] Ray: but, but, that article is an attempt at internal division. you want [01:34:54] Ray: people on the left to get angry, the [01:34:56] Ray: people on the right or Russia. [01:34:57] Ray: I mean, even that’s an example of just stirring the pot. Anyway, I couldn’t let that pass. [01:35:03] Cameron: well there was another article, depending on how this election turned out, that I was going to read, I saw a number of articles in the New York Times and the mainstream media just before the election that was There was saying that the polling that was being shared in conservative media channels before the election and I saw a lot of this happening, that was saying Trump was going to win by a landslide, was all manufactured and bad polling because As they were gearing up for when Trump lost to be able to say, well, obviously the election was stolen because our polling said it was going to be a landslide and it wasn’t, therefore the election was stolen. [01:35:56] Cameron: And so the New York Times were pushing this narrative that, well, all of the other polls say that it’s going to be really close. So these polls were obviously wrong. Corrupt and deliberately manipulated because they’re going to justify this argument after the election. Turns out, they were right and he didn’t win by a landslide. [01:36:18] Cameron: And so, again, the New York Times had no fucking idea what they were talking about. [01:36:27] Ray: right. [01:36:28] Cameron: Oh, by the way, Alan [01:36:29] Cameron: Lichtman, we did a show on the 13 keys. [01:36:33] Ray: yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. [01:36:34] Cameron: He and his son [01:36:35] Cameron: did a 6 hour live coverage of the election on their [01:36:38] Cameron: YouTube channel, which I watched the [01:36:40] Cameron: last 10 minutes of. Uh, [01:36:43] Cameron: you want to see somebody who’s depressed and re evaluating his life choices right [01:36:47] Cameron: now? [01:36:47] Cameron: It’s Alan Lichtman. [01:36:51] Ray: well, he’s still, he’s still more right than he is wrong, that’s something, right? Is this the guy that guessed, uh, correctly guessed the last six or nine presidential elections, or am I thinking of somebody else? [01:37:04] Cameron: No, yeah, yeah. [01:37:05] Ray: read is [01:37:06] Cameron: Yeah, yeah, yeah. [01:37:09] Ray: Oh no, I’m sure he’s like [01:37:10] Cameron: went horribly wrong. [01:37:12] Ray: Yes. Yes. [01:37:14] Cameron: he, [01:37:15] Cameron: in fairness, he did say in the lead up to this election, [01:37:18] Cameron: look, um, my keys were built by studying the true, you know, historical elections, which [01:37:25] Cameron: were traditional elections and Trump is not a traditional [01:37:28] Cameron: candidate. This is not a traditional election we’re going into and it could, uh, completely, [01:37:38] Cameron: you [01:37:38] Cameron: know, Throw everything up in the air and, and he was right. [01:37:43] Cameron: Like by any traditional metric, Trump should not even have been a candidate [01:37:50] Cameron: in 2015, let alone 2024. So [01:37:56] Cameron: all bets were basically off. [01:37:59] Cameron: But anyway, so there [01:37:59] Ray: Right. Right. [01:38:02] Cameron: The only winner in this election, apart from Donald Trump, was Tony Kynaston because a couple of months ago when Kamala got the nomination, Tony took out bets both ways. [01:38:12] Cameron: He took out a bet for Trump to win and a bet for Kamala to win. [01:38:16] Cameron: So, [01:38:17] Ray: good. [01:38:18] Ray: He’s good. [01:38:19] Cameron: Yeah. [01:38:19] Ray: Yeah. [01:38:25] Cameron: Anyway, to sum all of that up, America is deep, deep fucking problems, and it’s not about Trump. [01:38:31] Cameron: It’s about the system. It’s about late stage capitalism. It’s about billionaires getting to decide who wins elections. It’s about both of your major parties being absolutely and thoroughly corrupted [01:38:46] Cameron: by the industrial [01:38:47] Cameron: military complex. [01:38:49] Cameron: It’s about the lack of education. In the American population, about how your country works, about how much propaganda you’ve been fed over the course of your life, about, [01:39:03] Cameron: uh, everything, like, just, it’s, it’s fucked from the ground up. Um, and I’m not trying to be mean, and I’m not saying that Australia doesn’t have similar problems, or any other country doesn’t have similar problems, we all do, because we’re all living in this era of late stage capitalism, where money is, I mean, we don’t have billionaires able to write books. [01:39:27] Cameron: Blank checks in our elections, but we do have billionaires that control the media, that can control the narrative, and Rupert Murdoch gets to control the narrative, and a lot of people here are fucking stupid and believe everything they read in the media as well, etc. So we have a lot of the same sort of problems, but these are all problems of late stage capitalism of the rich elite. [01:39:50] Cameron: That are manufacturing the consent of the people using the tools at their disposal to get the people to do what they want them to do in order to try and make sure that the people don’t rise up and demand more equality. economic equality, political equality, etc, etc. [01:40:11] Cameron: We’re being manipulated on a daily basis by the rich elite and most people, you know, uh, don’t even realize how much they’re being manipulated. [01:40:24] Cameron: And I don’t know what to do about it, honestly, except AI. I continue to believe that our only hope is AI. And here’s the other fucking kicker. We’re going to [01:40:31] Cameron: get probably artificial general intelligence in the next four years. Donald Trump. He’s not the guy [01:40:38] Cameron: you want to be in power when that happens, but Elon Musk maybe is. [01:40:44] Cameron: Like Elon was the co founder of OpenAI and he’s just built the biggest AI data center on the planet for XAI. Um, he’s a big believer in AI. He’s a big believer in the future of AI and humans and making sure it goes [01:41:06] Cameron: well. If he doesn’t have a falling out with Trump. And I give that, you know, [01:41:11] Cameron: 90 percent chances that he will within three months. [01:41:15] Cameron: If somehow they’re able to keep their [01:41:17] Cameron: egos in check, uh, we might have basically it like, [01:41:22] Cameron: I’d hate to be the guys that open AI right now. Um, yeah. Uh, Elon in charge of [01:41:28] Cameron: AI, Trump in charge of AI, bad. Elon in charge of AI, [01:41:33] Ray: ha. [01:41:34] Cameron: maybe not so bad. [01:41:35] Cameron: I don’t [01:41:38] Ray: Ha ha ha. Okay. When you publish this episode, please put out Maybe. a don’t listen to right before you go to sleep warning because I’m going to have nightmares tonight thinking about that. Thank you. Thank you. [01:41:54] Cameron: anyone who doesn’t know that about these shows by now, [01:41:56] Cameron: yeah, I will put a [01:41:58] Ray: Good point. [01:41:59] Cameron: yeah. [01:41:59] Ray: Good point. [01:42:01] Cameron: Well, once again, congratulations America, you fucked it. [01:42:05] Cameron: Yet again. Congratulations, well done. The post BS 129 – It’s The Stupid, Stupid appeared first on The BS Filter.

Who is Kamala Harris? How does she stack up as a potential POTUS? And how do Lichtman’s 13 Keys to the White House work? Who does it predict will win the 2024 election? Listen and find out. The post BS 127 – Kamala and Lichtman’s 13 Keys appeared first on The BS Filter.

This month we’re looking (again) at the US’ ban of TikTok, and their veto over Palestine’s membership in the UN, as well as the Australian government trying to censor X and we ask if what Israel is doing is “genocide”. 00:00 Welcome to the Bullshit Filter: Unpacking Contemporary Issues01:21 Freedom of Speech and Social Media: A Deep Dive03:44 The Role of the eSafety Commissioner in Online Safety06:32 Exploring the Impact of Social Media on News Consumption11:56 The Complex Landscape of Free Speech and Regulation32:26 The Future of AI in Ethical and Content Regulation35:01 The Decline of Free-to-Air TV and the Rise of Streaming44:33 The Future of AI in Media Production46:24 The Evolution of American English47:48 TikTok’s Global Impact and US Policy Challenges55:48 Exploring the Moderation and Influence of Social Media59:59 Navigating News Consumption in the Digital Age01:08:33 Analyzing the US’s Stance on Palestine’s UN Membership01:18:42 Exploring the Implications of Palestine’s UN Membership01:20:05 The Hypocrisy of the US and Its Allies on the Two-State Solution01:21:30 Drawing Parallels: US Support for Apartheid and Israel01:23:39 The Shift in Public Opinion and Policy on Social Issues01:25:20 Debating the Definition and Occurrence of Genocide01:25:23 Analyzing the Email: Is What Israel Doing Genocide?01:35:13 The Complex Dynamics of International Condemnation and Israel’s Actions01:52:23 Campus Protests and the Future of Political Activism01:55:32 Concluding Thoughts and Humorous Banter The post BS 125 – Come On Feel the Noise appeared first on The BS Filter.

Hey there, fellow Bullshit Fighter! This page contains some member-only content. If you're already a registered member, LOGIN HERE. If you aren't registered, well you can fix that right now! Find out about our registration options here. My guest co-host today is Tony Kynaston from the QAV Investing Podcast. We’re talking about the Tucker Carlson interview with Putin and breaking down the lies, distortions and misinformation ABOUT the interview that we’re reading in the mainstream media, and asking why there is a need to distort Putin’s words in the West.BS 123[00:00:00] Tony: 3, [00:00:12] Tony: 2, 1. [00:00:13] Cameron: Welcome to the Bullshit Filter episode 123 Special edition because, uh, Ray has been replaced[00:00:23] Cameron: with a, uh, smarter, better looking version of Ray, uh, my o my other Ray Tony [00:00:30] Cameron: Kynaston, and welcome to the Bullshit [00:00:33] Cameron: Filter, Tony. [00:00:35] Tony: Thank you, Cam. Thanks for the invite. And I, I feel special [00:00:39] Cameron: Uh, you invited, you, you, you invited yourself? I think, uh,[00:00:43] Cameron: actually, yeah. Yeah. [00:00:45] Tony: I do. [00:00:46] Cameron: We had a lot, we had a lot of people offered to come on, and I appreciate everyone’s offers, but I did say condition was, you had to watch the Putin interview. No one else, uh, seemed to be up for that. Tony goes, yeah, I can do that.[00:00:58] Cameron: So he [00:01:00] Tony: And that, and that was a high price to[00:01:01] Tony: pay too, by the way. [00:01:02] Cameron: Was it? [00:01:03] Tony: Well, I didn’t mind listening to Putin, but[00:01:06] Tony: Tucker Carlson, gimme a break. [00:01:09] Cameron: Well, the, the upside is he didn’t, didn’t have much to say in the two[00:01:13] Tony: it was a, I think a, a journalist would call that a softball interview.[00:01:17] Cameron: Well, they’ve called it much, much worse than that. But look, and, and here’s, you know, there’s, there’s a couple of reasons for me being interested in this. Uh, number one.[00:01:28] Cameron: Yeah. Uh, Putin’s obviously a, a major player in global geopolitics right now, and we don’t get to actually hear from him very often in the west.[00:01:40] Cameron: Uh, and this is the first interview that an American journalist has got with him in over two years since the, this latest phase of the war, uh, began, the invasion began. Um, secondly, uh, you know, I think he’s, uh, he’s an interesting character. You, you know, you, you, you don’t run Russia for twenty-five years or whatever it’s been now, um, without having something going on.[00:02:10] Cameron: He’s a smart canny player. Brutal, probably. And thirdly, and this is, I guess the main focus I want to give is just the level of outrage in the Western media about. Interview itself, even existing about Carlson doing the interview and, uh, and, and the outrage about the things that Putin allegedly said, which he didn’t actually say, I think, in the interview.[00:02:45] Cameron: So I wanna cover the media coverage of it, and that’s kinda what the bullshit Filter originally was about, was looking at media coverage of big stories in the West and picking them apart to see if they’re providing a fair and reasonable, uh, coverage of the stories or if it’s bullshit. And I’ve read a lot of new stories about this and, and by and large, uh, I’m calling bullshit on a lot of it.[00:03:12] Cameron: Anyway, let’s start with the interview, Tony. Um, I mean, I, you and I, I don’t think have talked a great deal about we, uh, Putin or Russia or Ukraine. Do you wanna give me your high level view on what’s been going on over there for the last 10 years? [00:03:31] Tony: I’m not sure I can or I’m qualified. You, you probably know that far better than I [00:03:36] Cameron: No. [00:03:36] Cameron: one on this show has ever qualified [00:03:38] Tony: yeah. [00:03:38] Cameron: anything, don’t he? [00:03:40] Tony: Well, you talk interesting, you said 10 years. I assume you’re referring back to the last time the[00:03:45] Tony: government changed when, um, uh, Russia, annexed Crimea, and then there was a bit of a coup around that time as Well, Is that what you’re talking about? Is that why you said 10 years?[00:03:55] Cameron: Well, uh, yeah. So Putin’s view, and, and I[00:03:59] Cameron: tend to agree with him, is that in 2014 in Ukraine there was a coup, it was a US.[00:04:05] Cameron: Uh, supported, if not engineered coup. There was an earlier coup, it was a 2004 coup, then there was the 2014 coup, uh, both led slash supported slash engineered, we believe by the, I believe by the United States.[00:04:22] Cameron: To what degree? It’s hard to say, but there seems to be sufficient evidence to say that they were involved to some degree. Um, but you know, it’s the last 10 years is really when the Donbass situation became a thing. The Crimea became a thing, et cetera, et [00:04:38] Cameron: cetera. Yeah. [00:04:40] Tony: Yeah, I found it really hard to, to get to the truth, I guess, on the Donbass thing. I remember, um, when the, uh, probably prior to the Ukraine war, um, starting, I, I did hear some interviews. I think it was on the BBC World Service with, uh, which alleged that there was a flood of. Russian-speaking, um, Russian-affiliated Ukrainians crossing the border back into Russia.[00:05:09] Tony: And that, that was because of alleged persecution from neo-Nazis in Ukraine on that sort of border region. And therefore, that was the justification for Putin having to take action. So, um, I tried to look up those articles in preparation for this and I couldn’t find them. So I can’t really talk about it in depth, but, but it’s, to me, it’s really hard to, to drill down and find out exactly what’s going on.[00:05:35] Tony: Um, uh, it, it’s been hard as it always is in, I guess in a wartime situation. It’s been hard to get even accurate information about what’s going on in Ukraine during the war. And I probably relied a bit more on Al Jazeera for, for news on that rather than the Western media. Um, now Al Jazeera does have its problems too, but at least it was reporting issues like that.[00:05:58] Tony: Pretty failure. And it was actually quite riveting the way they were reporting they were on the ground in the early days, reporting as, as suburb by suburb. The Russians started to get close to Kiev and, and get into Kiev and what was going on there. So that was, that was far better than the Western journalism.[00:06:15] Tony: Um, and it was far more independent. So, uh, listening to the Putin interview, I think it was really interesting when he started to talk about his point of view on things like, uh, the, uh, the visit of Zelensky to the Canadian Parliament when the speaker and the Canadian parliament, uh, praised a, a war hero who turned out to be a, um, a Nazi or a neo-Nazi.[00:06:39] Tony: A Nazi, I think actually. And then the speaker had to resign. So that didn’t get, that was the first time I’d heard of that. That didn’t get much coverage over here at all. So there is obviously two sides to every story. And I think, you know, it’s a show like this, which is good to pull it apart because. You know, as, as you know, it’s, um, the media is one of the institutions that manipulates us in, in our points of view and our, our lifestyles.[00:07:03] Tony: And definitely in the West, that can be shaped by just straight capitalism and who, uh, who is paying for what ads in the media and, and who, what kind of agendas are they pushing and what kind[00:07:16] Tony: of, uh, you know, political, uh, persuasions are they pushing and or do they have allegiances to or do they control?[00:07:23] Tony: So it’s a, it’s a big issue.[00:07:25] Cameron: mm It is, and it it, you know, I guess part of the reason[00:07:31] Cameron: for me being interested in doing this show[00:07:33] Cameron: is, uh, you know, the historian side of me knows how I. Regularly Western populations have been lied to historically during wars, uh, going back to World War I all the way through to, you know, Vietnam, um, and the, the Gulf Wars.[00:07:53] Cameron: And, you know, there seems to be this fascinating cycle where we go through a war, we go through a conflict that we’re either directly involved in or indirectly involved in. And the government of the day and the media of the day spin a whole bunch of propaganda about it. We find out years later that they lied or spun or manipulated or there was no evidence for WMD and, you know, the attacks on this ship or that ship weren’t really [00:08:25] Cameron: attacks ill that Yeah.[00:08:28] Cameron: And, and the media says Mia culpa will never do that again. I. And the people tend to say, wah-ha. Now we understand that we will never be lied to again. And then the cycle just repeats. You know, within a decade there’s another incident and the media jump on board. The governments jump on board and the people just go along for the ride and believe everything again.[00:08:50] Cameron: And inevitably a few years later they’ll go, oh no, we were lied to. Oh, [00:08:53] Cameron: never again, you know? [00:08:56] Tony: Well, you raised some great points, Cam, and they’re pertinent to this topic as well. And you know, it’s interesting, I think that there is no crime of misrepresentation in journalism, even though journalists will always say, we need to get to the facts and we want to, um, report them objectively, and we need two sources and we need hard evidence if none of those things happen.[00:09:16] Tony: They get off Scot-free, and in fact, if they don’t happen, their readership may actually go up. So that’s, that’s the first thing to, to address what you’ve said. But the second thing about what you’re saying as well is that, particularly in this case, there’s an awful lot of money involved. Um, you know, Congress has stalled now on a multi-billion dollar aid package to Ukraine.[00:09:38] Tony: And as, as we both know, that, that aid probably won’t ever reach Ukraine. It’ll be given to American companies providing arms to, uh, Ukraine, which is, which is fine in terms of helping Ukraine, uh, fight off the Russians, but it’s, it, you know, leads you to think, well, who’s behind that? Who benefits from that?[00:09:56] Tony: And it’s the arms dealers in the, in the us the ominous manufacturers in the us. To benefit from it. So they’re always spoiling for a fight. ’cause it, it’s a good way to increase sales. So, um, yeah. The, the last 10 years, has it, has it been a swing to the Western Ukraine and has it been natural that Ukraine has therefore felt, um, more antagonistic or antagonized by Russia?[00:10:24] Tony: And has that been fueled by the military-industrial complex in the US who are saying, well, you know, we, we kinda like it that there could be an antagonism on the border. It may actually work out for us.[00:10:37] Cameron: mm[00:10:41] Cameron: mm mm[00:10:47] Cameron: mm mm mm mm. Mm mm. The, there, there are certain interests in Western countries who love good war because it’s economically profitable. And it’s not just the, the weapons manufacturers, it’s the media. ’cause big conflicts drive newspaper sales, television viewership, radio listeners, which means you can sell more ads.[00:11:09] Cameron: Uh, and they’re cross related, obvious, uh, uh, often ownership issues between the owners of big media companies and the owners of weapons manufacturers. And, but it’s also, as we’ve, we’ve talked about on the Cold War Show, uh, many, many times and on this show, when there have been studies done on this in the US primarily. Who benefits from the industrial military complex over there? It’s not just weapon manufacturers, it’s businesses of all shapes and sizes. Because particularly US America’s, 800 odd military bases around the world need socks and condoms and food and computers and software paperclips, right? And so every congress person, every senator in the US has people in their district who run businesses, who have Pentagon contracts, and it’s a big chunk of their revenue.[00:12:05] Cameron: And it’s easy money once you have that contract. It’s not competitive. They’re not like, uh, running a, a tender every year for this. If you’ve got it, you’ve got it. Quite often there’s, there’s a sense of urgency. Oh, we just need the stuff. We’ve gotta get it now. It’s urgent. We need it [00:12:22] Tony: It’s a rush job. [00:12:23] Cameron: Yeah. So it’s, it’s good for business.[00:12:27] Cameron: Anyway, back to the coverage. So most of the coverage that I’ve read, and obviously I haven’t read everything, but I try and get a smattering of, you know, I, I read the BBC and the New York Times, and the Guardian and the ABC here in Australia and CBC in Canada, and try and get a coverage of what the, the major media outlets, uh, saying about this.[00:12:47] Cameron: It’s a combination, I think, of lies, outright lies and distortion of what Putin said. And a lot of it is just attacking Carlson, both for giving Putin airtime in the first place, or for his weak interviewing skills. To me, the only real crime Carlson committed is having a very punchable face. Uh, he’s, he, he’s just one of those guys that just Chrissie walked through the, the living room a couple of times and I thought she’s going, oh my God, I just wanna punch him in the face. [00:13:25] Tony: Yeah, he’s a smug white man, isn’t he? [00:13:27] Cameron: He is, look, he is, uh, like, I mean, you’ve gotta be a pretty horrible person for the Murdochs to get rid of you. You know, when he got fired from Fox[00:13:36] Cameron: last year, he was the most viewed cable network host in, not only in Fox, but in the United States. And they got rid of him when they were in the dominion of Voting Systems lawsuit.[00:13:50] Cameron: And a whole bunch of his texts and emails were gonna become released as evidence. And, you know, it was just evident that he was a racist, vile piece of shit. And it, it was probably gonna cost them. Uh, and, you know, he was up on harassment, uh, accusations from employees. And it had come out that while they were pushing Trump in the last election behind the scenes, he was saying that he hated Trump.[00:14:17] Cameron: And Trump was awful and he hoped Trump loses so they wouldn’t have to talk about him anymore. I dunno if that’s in the plus or the minus column for him, but he, you know, he was saying that internally, but publicly [00:14:28] Cameron: praising Trump, you know, so [00:14:30] Tony: Oh, and pushing the, pushing the voter fraud argument for Trump. That’s why he was so pivotal in that Dominion settlement. That’s an interesting book by Michael Wolf, if anyone wants to read it, to go through that whole process and[00:14:41] Tony: how they thought in um, offering up Carlson’s resignation, it might help lower the settlement, but it didn’t.[00:14:46] Tony: Of course, they paid a record settlement to, um, to the Dominion to drop the case.[00:14:52] Cameron: So I’m in no way, shape or form a fan of Tucker Carlson or, uh, uh, trying to apologize for Tucker Carlson. But[00:15:01] Cameron: I, I, I think the, the amount of coverage that’s given in these stories to, instead of coverage of what Putin actually said is disproportionate. [00:15:12] Tony: Right. [00:15:13] Cameron: If they don’t actually, when they do talk about Putin, they don’t tend to address his actual claims.[00:15:18] Cameron: One of the exceptions by the way, is Al Jazeera, like the Al Jazeera coverage is typically very dry and factual. Here are the five major points that Putin made in the interview kind of thing, right? So I agree with you, Al Jazeera increasingly is the place where I go to, if I want to actually find out what’s going on or what was said.[00:15:38] Cameron: Um, they don’t talk about Putin’s actual claims. You know, about NATO enlargement, about the CIA blowing up the Nord Stream pipelines, which we’ve talked about a lot on this show over the last year or so about the US and the UK preventing Ukraine from agreeing to a negotiated end of the conflict early on, which we’ve also talked about a lot on the show.[00:15:58] Cameron: Like a lot of the points that Putin was making are valid. Uh, and you know, we’ve gone over them in previous episodes, so I’m not gonna like reiterate all of them, but the, the. Key issue here is that the Western media, by and large, doesn’t talk about them. If they do, they dismiss them in a couple of words as being nonsense and just move on.[00:16:23] Cameron: Like there’s no real addressing of the issues in a serious way. And the two questions that I have, Tony, is one, why the lying by the media? Why the lying and the distortion? Why is it that the media needs to demonize our enemies and the Western journalists? And it’s not just when it comes to external enemies.[00:16:45] Cameron: This happens over and over with internal enemies. We’ve seen this with Julian Assange, we’ve seen this with Glenn Greenwald, we’ve seen this with Matt Tabe. These are, you know, journalists who, when they’re writing stories that the left in support of, they’re considered heroes of the left when they’re attacking the right.[00:17:07] Cameron: As soon as they write stories that are attacking. The left, particularly the Democrats in the us, they’re vilified not only by, you know, democratic politicians, but all of the Democratic supporters and the media. They attack their own, they eat their young attack. The journalists as being, you know, when Matt Tabe was writing the, uh, Twitter files stuff, he got absolutely attacked mercilessly by the rest of the media.[00:17:36] Cameron: Greenwald gets it every time. He, you know, says something negative about a Democratic administration. Julian Assange obviously still in prison, and, uh, they’re trying to extradite him so he can serve 173 years in jail in the United States for revealing their crimes. And the second question, building on that is, is how is it coordinated?[00:17:59] Cameron: How is it that all of the Western media in this particular instance, seem to have the same script? How does that work? How is it coordinated? Like there’s plenty of clips, I dunno if you’ve seen them on YouTube, where they do this with say, Fox News, where they’ll have, uh, you know, one reporter or on one of the shows on Fox, uh, not just on Fox News, but all the Fox stuff making a statement about, you know, this something wrong with the system.[00:18:28] Cameron: And then they’ll just start adding clips of different Fox hosts saying the exact same words. And it’s just, they, they often when it’s talking about, you know, we’re fair and balanced and giving you independent thinking and it’s just, they’re all reading from the same script. So, and obviously it’s easy to understand how that happens inside of one outlet, but how does it happen right across.[00:18:51] Cameron: Countries, different media outlets, some of them supposedly independent, like not government, uh, or, or the ABC, whatever we call the ABC here. Like it’s a independent government funded media company that supposedly independent and, and, you know, aspires to a higher level of journalistic integrity. But they’re singing from the same hymn sheet as Fox News and MSNBC and everybody else.[00:19:23] Cameron: I can’t figure out really how that works if it’s coordinated or it’s just, Hey, we’re on this side of the, we’re on this side of the camp, so we’re just gonna [00:19:35] Cameron: jump on board. [00:19:36] Tony: Well, I think the answer is multifaceted. I think lazy journalism plays a part. So, you know, if Tucker Carlson broadcasts an interview overnight in Australian time, then there’s probably gonna be something on the wire. So on the Reuters or AAP or whoever else that these news outlets use, summarizing it.[00:19:56] Tony: And they, oftentimes, it’s, it’s not the headline story for Australian News, so they’ll just copy and paste paragraphs and put it into their, their newspaper or into teleprompter for the news, and then maybe a day or two later realize they’ve got some of the things wrong, but it’s the news cycles moved on then.[00:20:12] Tony: So I think lazy journalism is a part, I don’t think there’s a coordinated effort apart from that. I mean, those, those wire services go into every news outlet in the world. So there is a certain amount of similarity in, in what gets reported, [00:20:28] Cameron: A Reuters or an [00:20:28] Cameron: AAP feed that they’re grabbing it from. [00:20:30] Tony: Correct, yeah. Quickly. And, you know, having an editor shout at them that the deadline’s looming and we have to put a story out about Putin.[00:20:39] Tony: Um, I think there’s a bit of that. I think there’s also, unfortunately, these days probably, maybe it’s always been the same, but it didn’t feel that way when I was younger. There’s more of it these days where it’s an echo chamber. The media’s, the media outlets have drawn sides, which I think is also behind the attacks on Tucker Carlson.[00:20:58] Tony: He’s from the other side and he’s an easy target, so we’re gonna focus on him. We’re not of that side because our listeners, our readers wanna hear something, you know, written about. It’s written about what they think. Um, and their, their point of view was they’re against the war in Ukraine, they’re against Putin and therefore against Putin, and they’re against.[00:21:19] Tony: Fox News and therefore Tucker Carlson, even though Tucker Carlson doesn’t work for Fox News anymore. So there’s, there’s that kind of mindset as well. The, the tribalism of the media is more exaggerated these days I think, as well. Um, and then there’s the political sphere of things too. The tribalism either bled from politics or it’s bled into politics from the media, but the same sort of thing.[00:21:40] Tony: I mean, uh, media Bytes a show on the ABC here at nine 30 in Australia on a Monday night regularly shows every morning news presenter across the commercial networks across the ABC saying the same thing, using the same phrase. So, you know, there’s an element of, of, um, it’s quick journalism. It’s coming from the same source, and occasionally they’re putting their[00:22:02] Tony: own slant on it to try and appeal to their audience and[00:22:05] Tony: get them to keep listening and watching what they say.[00:22:08] Cameron: I think you’re probably right. Um, I think media outlets. No, you know, it’s an increasingly competitive media landscape and hard to run a profitable media business. Um, there’s been a number of articles I’ve read over the last month or so about all the major newspapers in the us, including the ones bought by billionaires like Jeff Bezos are struggling to make money.[00:22:34] Cameron: They’re, they’re bleeding money and, uh, you know, smaller media outlets like Vice have shut down ’cause they couldn’t become or maintain profitable. Um, it’s, it’s a tough time out there. So they, you know, there’s business people knowing who their audience is. This is what our audience wants to hear, this is what our advertisers need to hear us say.[00:22:58] Cameron: So they’ll continue to support it and you [00:23:00] Cameron: just toe the line. [00:23:02] Tony: Yeah, I was, I mean, I’d add to that. That, um, it was really the internet which killed journalism because when classified ads moved from newspapers to online, and we had companies like Seek in Australia and Realestate.com.au and Domain, and they’ve got other examples around the world where home ads and job ads go online.[00:23:26] Tony: Then the newspapers lost what was called the rivers of gold, and they became unprofitable and they started sucking journalists to try and, um, cut costs to keep, keep things profitable. So they just isn’t the staff anymore to check. And coupled with, uh, as you say, ad advertisers who. Know that if they take out an ad in the garden, they’re not gonna sell many fridges, but if they take it out in a telegraph, they’re gonna sell all the fridges.[00:23:54] Tony: So then, you know, you get this sort of cycle of we’ll advertise with you as long as you’re engaging with the readers in the western suburbs who are all new homeowners and wanna buy fridges. As soon as you lose that market, we’ll[00:24:06] Tony: take our ads and put it somewhere else. So it’s a, it is a real echo chamber,[00:24:10] Cameron: Or it’s, it’s as simple. Even if that conversation doesn’t happen, it’s like, give me your media kit. Who are your, who are your customers? What are the demographics? Yeah. Okay. That’s not our demographic. Sorry. If you wanna appeal to us, you have to be appealing to [00:24:24] Cameron: that demographic, and that [00:24:26] Tony: And the flips. [00:24:27] Cameron: read you if they hear a certain kind of story. [00:24:29] Tony: and the flip side applies too. Um, if, if, uh, the Guardian in Australia ran an article praising a. Tucker Carlson, it would start to lose readership and it would start to lose advertisements. And there are just different type of supplies with those ads in the Guardian. I mean, I haven’t read the Guardian for a long time, but I imagine it’s, you know, ads for wind farms and alternative energy and things like that.[00:24:51] Tony: And they’re not gonna um, they’re not gonna keep paying the price they pay. Now if the Guardian’s readership goes down.[00:24:58] Cameron: Yeah, so it’s, it’s basic economics, which is driving the slant on the coverage for a lot of these stories. And you know, it reminds me when I first moved to Brisbane, nearly, I don’t know, 16 years ago this year, I guess I was invited to, I think it was University of Queensland to speak as part of a panel to, uh, an incoming bunch of, uh, journalism students.[00:25:29] Cameron: This is about 2008, would’ve been. And middle of 2008, and they got to, you know, my turn. It was, and the other people on the panel were all like editors and, you know, whatever’s, uh, real media, real journalists sort of people. And they’re all like, oh, it’s a very fine profession and it’s a, you know, it’s congratulations and blah, blah, blah.[00:25:52] Cameron: They got to me, it’s a bunch of these poor eighteen-year-old kids. And I said, I just feel sorry for the lot of you because by the time you leave here, there aren’t gonna be any jobs left in journalism. And they’re like, oh, what? And, and, and they were like having a go. And I said, look, it’s just the economics man.[00:26:06] Cameron: Like these journalism businesses are bleeding money and it’s not gonna stop. The economics of the, of the industry has fundamentally changed you. You, there aren’t gonna be any jobs. And they, they all said that I was being hyperbolic, uh, classic Cameron Reilly hyperbole, and blah, blah, blah, blah. And you know, it played out that way.[00:26:25] Cameron: You can’t fight the economics right.[00:26:27] Tony: No, you can’t fight economics [00:26:29] Tony: You’re right. But I think also too, around that time, I, I mean, um, wind the clock back a bit further, when I did intro journalism at Queensland Uni and, uh, I, I worked out pretty soon that, you know, from talking, but being in tutorials with editors from papers and, you know, lots of people would come and talk to the journalism classes almost every week.[00:26:47] Tony: There’d be a different editor or, or someone coming along. They, you know, first of all, sport played a big part in, in journalism in Queensland. And secondly, it was a, it was a club, it was a network and they, the people who would, you know, that they were after were knock about rugby types who could have a beer with anyone and get, you know, catch someone off guard and do a gotcha type article.[00:27:08] Tony: Uh, there there was two camps. There was those types of people, which was I think the, the, the majority. And then there was the, the, um, as you say, the honest independent professionals like Eleanor Taylor, I. Who argue at university. I think she now edits the Guardian, um, who does have, have high journalistic[00:27:26] Tony: standards, but, but they’re in the minority. And and they’re in the minority because they, the careers that that they started off in just weren’t there[00:27:33] Tony: for them in the end.[00:27:35] Cameron: I think they’ve always been in the minority. And have you ever read Chomsky and Herman’s[00:27:40] Cameron: manufacturing consent?[00:27:42] Tony: Yeah. And seen the documentary.[00:27:43] Cameron: Hmm. So the model that they put forward, which was Herman’s model, um, Chomsky gives him credit for it, and they got it from an Australian guy. You ever read the Australian guy that they got that from Herman Got it from, can’t remember his name.[00:27:58] Cameron: He passed away quite young, sadly. Um, but he, he was a, I think he was from Queensland. He wrote a book in the early nineties, um, which I’ve got somewhere. But he, he basically broke down the model in the same way. And they, and Herman and Chomsky reference him and, um, give him credit for breaking it down. But he was basically saying that. You know, uh, and I, I think I talked about this a bit in our psychopath book, but that if you are, when you are interviewing as a journalist to get inside of a media organization, they’re looking for are you gonna fit in? Are you gonna be part of the team? Are you gonna work well? Are you, are you going to fit in with the culture of the organization?[00:28:40] Cameron: And they will weed out people that have views that are diametrically opposed to them politically. Uh, and if somebody sneaks through and who has diametrically opposed, uh, political views and it starts to show up and they’re writing, they’ll be, they’ll be urged to get in line. And if they don’t, they’ll be put on the.[00:29:02] Cameron: You know, a different bait, a sport bait or something that doesn’t have a political leading or, or an independent opportunity for independent thinking, or they’ll get fired or, or, you know, or conditions will be made so difficult for them to continue working there that they will pack their bag and go somewhere else.[00:29:20] Cameron: There are different filter mechanisms that have always been in place to weed out the [00:29:25] Cameron: undesirables. [00:29:27] Tony: And the, the classic example, which happened just recently was Antoinette Latouf at the ABC. [00:29:32] Cameron: exactly. Which you might wanna explain that story for our many international [00:29:36] Cameron: listeners.[00:29:38] Tony: Yeah. So, uh, she was a casual presenter who came in, uh, to the ABC, which is our, our national broadcaster, um, just on a short-term contract. Uh, and it was, you know, a light and breezy type type role. But, but she was, uh, an Arab Australian who was, um, pro-Palestine and, uh, and, and, um, against the Israeli aggression in Gaza.[00:30:05] Tony: And she lasted three days and then was, um, sacked under pressure from a bunch of, uh, well, supposedly under pressure from a bunch of Jewish lawyers. I’m[00:30:13] Tony: not sure if that actually happened, but that was alleged.[00:30:16] Tony: Uh, but she was sacked by the ABC anyway, ’cause of, um, uh, certainly a, a heightened media profile over her stance.[00:30:23] Cameron: Well there, I mean, there’s, there was evidence that the um,[00:30:27] Cameron: Zionist Lobby group of Jewish lawyers, etc. Tried to put pressure on the[00:30:32] Cameron: ABC. Coincidentally or not fired her. So yes, it’s not hard to draw the dots, even though the ABC denies that it had, [00:30:43] Cameron: uh, any influence on it. [00:30:45] Tony: Yeah. And I’ll say it. allegedly happened that way, but, but certainly the fact is she was, she was sacked after three days. [00:30:52] Cameron: So I wanna talk a little bit about, uh, Putin’s, uh, claims[00:30:57] Cameron: about the history. So,[00:30:58] Cameron: uh, early on in[00:30:59] Cameron: the interview, he says to Tucker, are we gonna have a serious conversation or is this just gonna be light frothy entertainment? Um, Tucker says, no, it’s gonna be serious. And Putin says, let me, let me take [00:31:10] Cameron: 30 seconds to explain the history of Russia and [00:31:12] Tony: Yeah. [00:31:14] Cameron: And he’s obviously a fan of my podcasts because [00:31:18] Cameron: half an hour later, [00:31:19] Tony: podcast. Yeah. [00:31:21] Cameron: half an hour later, he finally wrapped that up. But. Uh, a lot of the criticism about Putin in the media when he does this stuff is about his version of the history of Russia and Ukraine. Uh, and I, I’ll give you an example here. This is from the BBC, an article entitled Tucker Carlson Interview Fact Checking, Putin’s Nonsense History.[00:31:49] Cameron: And they say, Sergey Radchenko historian at the John Hopkins School of Advanced International Study says the President’s claim is a complete falsehood. Vladimir Putin is trying to construct a narrative backwards, saying Russia as a state began its development in the ninth century. You could equally say that Ukraine as a state began its development in the ninth century exactly with the same kind of evidence and documents. So you, you see a lot of this in, um, the media coverage sort of. Uh, uh, sweeping attacks on Putin’s version of the history. But then they don’t actually say what he got wrong. It’s a complete falsehood. Alright, what did he actually get wrong? They don’t actually say what he got wrong. It’s just, oh, it’s just all nonsense.[00:32:42] Cameron: So not being an expert on the history of this part of the world, um, what I did was I took the transcript, um, of the interview, took all of Putin’s statements and I put them into ChatGPT and I said, let me give you some quotes about the history of Russia and Ukraine and tell, tell me if they’re factually correct or not.[00:33:08] Cameron: So I threw it all into ChatGPT and basically what it gave me back was, listen, this is actually correct. Um, the interpretation though. Of what this means is, uh, it’s a particular interpretation. Uh, and there are, it could be debated, you know, there are other views and, you know, it’s complicated. State-nation history, state history, very complicated and complex.[00:33:39] Cameron: And there are a lot of intertwining factors and, you know, a, a different points of view that could be debated, et cetera, et cetera. But factually, it didn’t really have, um, any criticisms of, uh, I mean, I, I sent you the, the, the link to the [00:33:55] Cameron: chat. Did you have a chance to read through that? [00:33:58] Tony: I did, yeah. I read the other links too, from the B, B, C, et cetera on what they were saying about, about that too. Um, I, I, I guess, you know, let me preface my comments by saying, I, I think there’s a reason behind Putin spending half an hour at the start of the interview saying what he did. [00:34:13] Cameron: Sure. [00:34:13] Tony: Um, it’s, and it was, I, I, um, looked up.[00:34:18] Tony: You know, the, the history as well. And I came across a Forbes magazine article, which I thought was, um, interesting, where they went into the, the fact that Putin had written an essay about this before the war and was basically regurgitating this in the first part of the interview. Um, I. Yeah. But, um, but, uh, the essence of that, of the Forbes article was that Putin wasn’t speaking to Carlson.[00:34:42] Tony: He was speaking to his own people that, yeah, the, the Forbes article didn’t call it propaganda, but that’s probably what it was. It was Putin laying out his reasons for the war and hugging on the heartstrings of a particular demographic in Russia that, you know, he thought would support it, um, by going through the history of Ukraine, especially people who were older and, and probably had memories from World War II.[00:35:06] Tony: So I, I think that’s one of the reasons why Putin did all that. I think the other reason he did it was it’s not a bad ploy. If you’re being interviewed and you’re not a hundred percent sure that the interview is going to give you a good hearing, it’s just to. To keep talking, to keep pushing your point of view and just see if they push back and ask questions.[00:35:25] Tony: And, and Carlson didn’t, so Putin just laid out his whole manifesto for invading Ukraine, um, and which was, you know, couched in the guise of history. So I think that’s the first thing to say about it. Whether it’s right or wrong, Putin was talking to a demographic in Russia. It was, it was essentially propaganda and Carlson never picked him up.[00:35:44] Tony: The other beautiful thing about that is because probably a lot of journalists didn’t have two hours to listen to the whole interview. They focus on the first 10 minutes. Um, and Criticise the history of it. But, but as we both know, it’s, it. History’s always open to interpretation. You know, I was trying to find analogies to it, and I sort of came up with two.[00:36:04] Tony: One would be to say, if Australia invaded New Zealand on a justification that Captain Cook landed in both places, that, you know, it’s, it’s a pretty weak justification for it. But on the other hand, if the Aboriginals say, you know, we wanna take back Australia and we wanna fight for it because we were invaded, that’s probably a closer analogy to the sort of line that Putin was pushing, that Ukraine was part of Russia historically, and it’s, you know, through various events in history got separated and now it should be rejoined.[00:36:33] Tony: So, you know, I, I get why he’s pushing that argument. But it, but you’re right, it was weak journalism to focus on that and to try, and it was smart of Putin to pick a fight on that. Like, let the journalists debate history with him.[00:36:45] Tony: They’re not gonna win.[00:36:47] Cameron: Yeah, look in Tucker Carlson’s preemptive example to airing the interview, he talked about the history lesson that Putin gave him and that they, he thought it was filibustering. He’s just trying to use up the time. Um, but then he changed his view on that. Uh, I don’t, I disagree that Putin was doing that for a Russian audience because Putin has no trouble.[00:37:13] Cameron: Communicating to a Russian audience in Russia. He, he’s in Russian Media all the time. You know, he’s written articles, he gives speeches. He doesn’t need to tell this story to a Russian audience. The Russian audience that support Putin know this story and they [00:37:29] Cameron: know his views on it. [00:37:30] Tony: Well, sure. But, but this was the biggest story in Russian News. I mean, every, every news outlet was trumpeting the fact that a Western journalist had come to Russia and, and sat, sat down with Putin for two hours,[00:37:41] Tony: and it had been a good interview. So it was getting a higher media profile. And the Russian audience he may have been targeting may not live in Russia.[00:37:47] Tony: They may have[00:37:48] Tony: maybe expats in the west as well.[00:37:51] Cameron: Okay. I I, I do think he’s telling that story for international audiences as well. [00:37:58] Tony: Mm-hmm. [00:37:59] Cameron: But here’s my point, is that whatever his reasons are for telling the story, the story’s not incorrect as far as I can tell. With the limited amount of time I’ve had to research it. And also the fact that when I read the Western Media criticisms of the history, they don’t actually point out where he’s wrong.[00:38:19] Cameron: They don’t say, this is factually incorrect or that is factually incorrect. Look it up. They go, well, yeah, but I could say that about this. Or it’s a, or blanket statements like it’s a complete falsehood, which it’s obviously not. Now I’ve got a lot of time for Sergey Rodchenko read a couple of his books.[00:38:38] Cameron: He’s written a lot of good books on particularly the Cold War and the Atomic Bomb. Now he’s a Russian born academic, uh, I think Canadian academic. Um, Russian Canadian, but based at John Hopkins now. But, um, it’s obviously not a complete falsehood. So again, I have this question in my head is why can’t.[00:39:02] Cameron: Academics or the media that are choosing which academics, and we know that they pick and choose who they’re gonna quote from. Why do they have to lie about this? Why do they have to say, why can’t they say, well, look, factually what he’s saying is correct. However, his interpretation of it is biased. Why does it have to, why do they have to say it’s a complete falsehood?[00:39:24] Cameron: I remember when, um, the invasion first happened and I was on Facebook and I saw his story and friends of mine, um, in, in the US saying the same thing, complete falsehoods, including one guy who comes from that part of the world, complete falsehoods, f you know, Putin’s, fake history, blah, blah, blah. And I go, well, tell me exactly where he is wrong with the history.[00:39:49] Cameron: Then they just disappear and they don’t come back to it. Like, he’s not like Putin’s a, he’s not an idiot. I love the fact that he said, uh, Carlson, I believe your background is in history. Right? ’cause Carlson’s got his Bachelor of history. I was thinking, yeah, Ray’s got a Bachelor of history too. I mean, they’re not worth much in the US apparently.[00:40:06] Cameron: Uh, he, uh, but I’m pretty sure that Putin knows his history. He’s not just making this stuff up. Like he’s, he knows what he’s talking about. He’s, he’s a smart guy. He’s very well, you know, and, and, and the other thing I always think is,[00:40:25] Cameron: I’d love to see an American president sit down and give an hour-long lecture on history.[00:40:32] Cameron: Could you imagine Joe Biden sitting down and giving an hour-long lecture on something that happened, like the history of a region of the world over [00:40:40] Cameron: 1500[00:40:41] Tony: Well, you. You’d need a, like a[00:40:43] Tony: sign language expert beside a, beside just going, no, no, no, no. Just[00:40:48] Tony: He[00:40:48] Tony: didn’t mean the, he didn’t mean the[00:40:49] Tony: president of Mexico. He meant the president [00:40:51] Cameron: Of Egypt. Yeah. Did you see John Stewart on the Daily Show last[00:40:56] Cameron: week covering that? [00:40:58] Tony: no. [00:40:59] Cameron: He was telling the story and you know how the, um, special prosecutor looking into Biden’s Garage document said that he was a, [00:41:08] Cameron: a well-meaning not nice old man with a poor memory. And then he had the bit where Biden got up, uh, in front of the Press Corps to like dispute this.[00:41:16] Cameron: And then he, he walked away from the podium and John was like, yes, you nailed it. And then Putin starts to walk away. And then, uh, sorry. Putin. Biden starts to walk away. Then he stops and turns around and goes back to the party, mean John’s. Like, no, don’t go back. Don’t go back. And that’s when he delivered the president of Mexico line. [00:41:36] Tony: Uh. [00:41:38] Cameron: Like he is like, let, let me do a, let me do a one, uh, man play of what all of Biden’s advisors were doing at this moment. It’s just they’re throwing their notepads and pulling their hair out and screaming. Uh, anyway, um, so again, uh, the key point here is that it, it, it’s often interesting when I’m analyzing media stories about stuff like this to pay attention to what they’re not saying [00:42:05] Tony: Mm-Hmm. [00:42:07] Cameron: versus what they are saying.[00:42:10] Cameron: Again, it’s if he is factually incorrect, if it is a complete falsehood. Why aren’t you telling me how it’s factually incorrect? I mean, that would be the obvious thing to do. It’s complete falsehood. For example, he made, he made points 1, 2, 3, 4, and five, and they’re all, and this is why they’re incorrect, right?[00:42:30] Cameron: When they don’t do that, my bullshit filter goes off and I’m like, hold on a second, and well, why aren’t they telling me why it’s wrong? This article goes on to say, Mr. Radchenko denies Mr. Putin’s claims that Ukraine is not a real country because it was formed in its modern form in the 20th century. Now, Putin never said, Ukraine is not a real country. [00:42:50] Tony: Mm. [00:42:51] Cameron: Carlson said that, [00:42:53] Tony: Yeah. [00:42:55] Cameron: but Putin never said that. So again, they’re putting words in his mouth to make it seem[00:43:04] Cameron: like he’s taking view. Now, what he did say is. After World War II Ukraine received, in addition to the lands that have belonged to Poland before the war, parts of the lands that have previously belonged to Hungary and Romania today, Western Ukraine.[00:43:18] Cameron: So Romania and Hungary had some of their lands taken away and given to the Ukraine, and they still remain part of the Ukraine. So in this sense, we have every reason to affirm that Ukraine is an artificial state that was shaped at Stalin’s will. Now, I don’t think that’s the same as saying Ukraine is not a real country. [00:43:38] Tony: Yeah.[00:43:39] Cameron: Am I being [00:43:40] Tony: Look. No, no. Look, I agree with you a hundred percent. Um, but again, I, I think I’m kind of chomping at the bit to go past the history part of this interview because, uh, you know, I think, I think Putin’s very smart and he knows that a lot of the journalists wouldn’t get past the history part of the interview.[00:43:56] Tony: And you can debate history until the cows come home and, and, uh, you know, he, neither side’s really gonna win. I agree with all your points about, about the attacks being subjective and,[00:44:08] Tony: um, not focusing on the facts and just focusing on interpretation, but I’d much rather talk about some of the other things that Putin’s talked about in the, in the interview.[00:44:19] Tony: Yeah. [00:44:19] Cameron: let’s get to it [00:44:20] Cameron: then. What do you wanna talk about? [00:44:22] Tony: Well, I think all of the, all of the things that, um. He, he spoke about that interests me, were after that. So he, he, he made a claim that Poland started World War II, which I thought was, was interesting about the invasion of Poland and, and how they invited Hitler to, to come into Poland. Um, you know, so again, not [00:44:43] Cameron: no, not that [00:44:44] Tony: historical subjective interpretation, but a quite a big one I thought.[00:44:49] Cameron: he didn’t say they invited him to come into Poland.[00:44:52] Tony: I think he did. I’ll try and find, I’ll try and find the, the, um, art, the article, if I can do it quickly. [00:44:58] Cameron: What he said from memory was that he called[00:45:03] Cameron: Poland a collaborator. he said they collaborated with the, Nazis. Some historians have taken issue with that, and I think that’s a, that’s a fair thing. Like collaboration is a big word, but. What is factually correct is that when Hitler was, um, when, when the Munich agreement was signed, which was going to give Germany some land, and Czechoslovakia, Poland jumped on board and took land from Czechoslovakia as well when they were weak.[00:45:37] Cameron: They took advantage of Czechoslovakia’s, uh, weakness at the time to grab some territory. And then Hitler wanted some territory from Poland. The Danzig corridor. Poland refused to give it up, and so Hitler invaded, but they had been in, in Putin’s words, they collaborated. Now, you know, you could pick that apart.[00:46:06] Cameron: Did they collaborate or did they just take advantage? Like the, the issue that I’ve read that historians have is that collaboration. Suggests, uh, joint strategic diplomatic agreement to attack a, a country in this instance. Um, did they have, were there diplomatic conversations between Nazi, Germany and Poland?[00:46:30] Cameron: Yes. Is that collaboration the way it’s portrayed as well? Poland didn’t have a lot of choice in the matter because Nazi Germany was this more powerful, aggressive country on the border, and so they had to go along with it wasn’t really collaboration. And I’m like, Hmm. Yeah. Well, you know, you could say the same thing about the Munich agreement.[00:46:56] Cameron: Um, you know, was Neville Chamberlain collaborating with Hitler when they agreed to the Munich agreement, or was he just feeling like I. They couldn’t, they didn’t want to have a war with Nazi Germany at the time. So appeasement was the better option. Is that collaboration? I think it maybe is[00:47:18] Tony: Yeah, maybe so. So the, you’re right about, I, I shouldn’t have said that. Putin said Poland invited Hitler in the quote is in 1939. This is Putin speaking After Poland cooperated with Hitler, it did collaborate with Hitler, you know, Hitler offered Poland Peace and a Treaty of Friendship and Alliance. We have all the relevant documents in the archives demanding in return that Poland give back to Germany.[00:47:39] Tony: The,[00:47:40] Tony: so-called Danzig Corridor, which connected the bulk of Germany with East Prussia and Königsberg. Yeah, so the, the, the, the claim was collaboration.[00:47:51] Cameron: collaboration and cooperation, and[00:47:53] Cameron: again, like he’s not wrong. From a particular point of view, you can argue what is the definition[00:48:00] Cameron: of collaboration and cooperation. But they did, you know, they did cooperate, they did take advantage of the situation. You can say, well, they didn’t have much option, but you know, neither did the, the Vichy government in France have much option, but we still criticized them as collaborators.[00:48:22] Cameron: I mean, you can say no and get shot, but, or you can collaborate and try and make the best of a bad situation, [00:48:29] Cameron: I guess. I dunno, [00:48:31] Tony: Yeah, Well, I guess like, [00:48:33] Tony: sorry. No, I’m not disagreeing with you. I guess the reason for raising that is to talk about, there seems to be the, the link between what happened in that part of Europe and World War II and what’s happening in Ukraine and neo-Nazis, and that that was a, a kind of a key point that, that Putin’s making.[00:48:49] Tony: He was, he was saying that one of his reasons for invading Ukraine is a denazification, or that’s one of, one of his requirements for a truce is the Denazification of U of Ukraine. And I thought, I still think that’s very interesting. And, and again, I’m wondering whether he’s, he’s playing to his audience at home on that one because I read a couple of articles.[00:49:10] Tony: NPR was this one. Uh, NPR was a good one. Um, about, about the issue in Ukraine, I won’t read it out, it’s quite long. But basically it says that, um, sure they’re in the N Nazis in Ukraine, about 2% of the population. There’s the people who fall in the, I think it’s called the ZOS Regimen. Um. Before the Ukraine war and during the Ukraine war.[00:49:33] Tony: Uh, but they point out that 2% of the population who claim to be neo-Nazis is actually less than that. The situation in the US where there’s far more ultra-right, uh, members of the public than in Ukraine. So it’s a fairly normal thing in a lot of Western countries. It’s particularly in Europe to have, uh, sort of fringe neo-Nazi element.[00:49:51] Tony: So why, why do you think[00:49:53] Tony: Putin is making a big deal of Denazification, the denazification of[00:49:59] Tony: Ukraine?[00:50:01] Cameron: I think, I think this is, um, part of, you know, his, um, propaganda back to his home audience. Um, and I’ve always felt that this is the weakest of his arguments and his justifications. But what I also have seen happen in the last couple of years is how the Western media has absolutely tried to refute. This argument that there are neo-Nazis in Ukraine when before February, 2000 twenty-two, the Western media was regularly running stories about Nazis being a big problem in Ukraine.[00:50:47] Cameron: And I’ve got an archive of documents about this. Here’s a quote from a rolling, recent Rolling Stone article about the interview. It says, Putin spoke at length about his wish to bring Denazification to Ukraine. And while the nation does have a dark history of association with Nazism and neo-Nazi factions, particularly in the context of World War II experts widely agree, this is a propaganda ploy used as a justification for the invasion.[00:51:13] Cameron: Except, um, you know, there are lots of, uh, articles, as I said that seem to think that West had a problem with the Nazis in Ukraine before the invasion. Here’s a link to a Reuters article. From, um, the 7th of February, 2024, it said, oh, hold on. No, that’s on, uh, that’s on Nord Stream. Let me, um, get to the find.[00:51:49] Cameron: Yes. Here we go. This is from the Guardian in 2014, Azov fighters are Ukraine’s greatest weapon and maybe its greatest threat. And this is around about the time of the beginning of the Donbass situation, the Guardian says, but there is an increasing worry that while the Azov and other volunteer battalions might be Ukraine’s most potent and reliable force on the battlefield against the separatists, they also pose the most serious threat to the Ukrainian government and perhaps even the state.[00:52:17] Cameron: When the conflict in the east is over. The Azov causes particular concern due to the far right, even neo-Nazi leanings of many of its members. The battalion’s symbol is reminiscent of the Nazi wolf’s angel. Though the battalion claims, it is in fact meant to be the letters N and I crossed over each other standing for national idea.[00:52:37] Cameron: Many of its members have links with neo-Nazi groups, and even those who laughed off the idea that they are neo-Nazis did not give the most convincing denials. Fighters from the battalion told the Guardian last month, they expected a new revolution in Ukraine that would bring a more decisive military leader to power in sentiments similar to those of many Azov fighters.[00:52:58] Cameron: Despite the desire of many in the Azov to bring violence to Kiev when the war in the east is over. The battalion receives funding and assistance from the governor of the Donetsk region, the oligarch Serhii Taruta. In 2018, the US declared C-Fourteen or S-Fourteen, the CIS Group, uh, in Ukraine as a hate group.[00:53:23] Cameron: And I’ve got a, an article from Radio Liberty, which is a. US, uh, propaganda Radio station in Europe. Set up part of the Marshall plan says Ivan Stupak, a former SBU employee, SBU being the secret service of the Ukraine with 10 years of experience, said at certain stages the SBU involved its operational contacts.[00:53:49] Cameron: That is, they found certain common points of view with leaders of C-Fourteen, and directed them to solve certain operational tasks. Um, and it goes on to talk about all the connections between government funding and Secret service and the far-right movement, et cetera, et cetera. So there’s plenty of stories like that.[00:54:09] Cameron: Uh, but from before twenty-Twenty-two Western governments and the Western media definitely did see these Nazi groups in Ukraine as a significant issue. But post the twenty-two invasion, oh, it’s all just propaganda that Putin. Is spinning. Now, I do think, as I said, it’s his, probably his weakest argument. I think his strongest justification is for is the Nazi, the NATO, uh, enlargement.[00:54:37] Cameron: But,[00:54:39] Cameron: you know, I do think he is being genuine when he says part of the conditions that they have is the elimination of neo-Nazis off the border between Ukraine and Russia. I mean, I, I, you know, it’s important for us outside of Russia to remember that the Nazis killed 20 million Russians in World War II[00:55:04] Cameron: and you know, part of.[00:55:07] Cameron: The breakup of Germany after World War II was to ensure that the Russians were never bothered by the Germans, the fascists. Again, fascists obviously having a big hatred at the time for communists and Jews, uh, and particularly Jewish communists, um, Ukraine. It’s more Catholic fascists that have been the problem.[00:55:28] Cameron: But, you know, he, it is a, I think it’s a genuine concern and I think it’s a, a genuine issue, whether or not it’s as big a deal as he makes it out to be, [00:55:38] Cameron: you know, [00:55:39] Tony: Well, well actually, I mean, I highlight it because I think, I think you’re right. I think it was a big deal and I think that there was certainly Russian. Speakers in Donbass who were chased out back into Russia by, by, uh, some element of that military slash neo-Nazi, um, power in the Donbass reasons. So I think it is actually an, an issue.[00:56:03] Tony: Um, but, but as you say, that’s one of the things about the war that gets, gets clouded. It’s, uh, the West has gone from a, from acknowledging the existence of these people to saying it’s propaganda by Putin. But I actually think it’s a key issue for them, not just because of the history of fighting against the Nazis and, and all of that, but because in the Donbass region that’s kind of borderland.[00:56:25] Tony: There is a, I can’t, I can’t speak to it being a, a neo-Nazi mentality, I’ll call it the pro-Ukrainian mentality. And there’s a Russian affiliated population, and the two haven’t mixed very well, and I think Putin probably is legitimate in asking for claims. Whether it should be called Denazification or not[00:56:43] Tony: is another issue.[00:56:45] Cameron: The ABC had an article that I read, Tucker Carlson Vladimir Putin interview explained. It said. Russia’s aim to denazify, Eastern Ukraine, a claim that has been described as propaganda by hundreds of historians who study genocide. I read that and I thought, what if historians who, what do historians who have studied genocide have to do with his claims about Nazis in Ukraine?[00:57:11] Cameron: It seems like a non-secretary, but, but I read, um, this article again, this is, um, from Radio Freedom. Facebook bans Ukrainian, far-right Group Over Hate speech, but getting rid of it isn’t easy. And it said Human rights groups such as Free. This is from 2019. Human rights groups such as Freedom House of Warned that Azov’s increasing visibility and impunity is a cause for concern.[00:57:37] Cameron: Far-right? Political forces present a real threat. To the democratic development of Ukrainian society set a recent Freedom House report referring to Azov and similar groups. That threat is not due to political support. Polls show its political party. National Core is supported by less than 1% of Ukrainians.[00:57:54] Cameron: But because the far right is aggressively trying to impose the regender on Ukrainian society, including by using force against those who oppose political and cultural views. Last month, group of seven ambassadors in Kiev sent a letter to Ukrainian Interior Minister Arsen Avakov urging him to act against the groups, which it said threatened to disrupt the country’s election and usurp the role of the Ukrainian National Police.[00:58:20] Cameron: The ambassadors asked the ministers to also consider outlawing the groups down the road. Would you be so kind as to outlaw Nazi groups? That’d be great. Thanks. So in twenty-nineteen, the G-Seven was writing a letter to the Ukrainian government. Say, you’ve gotta denazify your country. Now Putin says it and everyone’s like, [00:58:41] Cameron: ah, what’s he talking about?[00:58:42] Cameron: It’s all [00:58:43] Tony: Yeah. And look, and not just that, but like this NPR article. Uh, talks about, it’s a harmful distortion and dilution of history. They say, talking about the, um, Holocaust experts, even though many people appear not to be buying at this time round. Laura Jakusch, a professor of Holocaust studies at Brandeis University in Massachusetts told NPR over email that Putin’s claims about the Ukrainian army allegedly perpetrating a genocide against Russians in the Donbass region are completely unfounded, but politically useful to him.[00:59:14] Cameron: See, like, [00:59:15] Cameron: so [00:59:15] Tony: Were they there? That’s the first thing. But the other thing too is these articles always end with the point[00:59:20] Tony: being made. Anzalensky is a Jew.[00:59:23] Cameron: yeah. [00:59:24] Tony: As if, as if that kind[00:59:25] Tony: of, you can just go, okay, well, we’ll just wipe our hands of a[00:59:27] Tony: Nazi problem in Ukraine then.[00:59:29] Cameron: Which Putin himself said in the interview, and he said, and Zelensky’s father or grandfather fought the Nazis. He goes, why? I said to this is Putin saying it. He said, I said to Zelensky, why aren’t you getting rid of these guys like your own father or grandfather who was fought against these guys? Seems strange to me that you’re allowing them in your country, but what am I gonna do?[00:59:51] Cameron: Kind of thing. Um, but like, I dunno, man, like it just drives me nuts that Cameron Reilly with a couple of hours on his hands can look up the history of neo-Nazis in Ukraine and there’s all this stuff. And yet the mainstream media seems to think they can just run this stuff. And like, there’s just no sense of, oh, maybe we should [01:00:16] Cameron: just tell the truth about this. And, you[01:00:18] Tony: and there’s, no fact-checking, right? Like you would think NPR, which is the National public radio in the US, would have a more independent stance on things, but. Putin says that he needs to denazify Ukraine. They go straight to an academic who disagrees with that, and they publish the academic side.[01:00:33] Tony: Now, whether this is meant to be balanced journalism, I’ve got Putin’s argument on one hand, and there’s academics on the other. I’m not sure, but it doesn’t, I found it very hard to get to the facts on this, you know, what is happening in the Donbass region? How many, how many Russian speakers had fled across the border back into Russia?[01:00:50] Tony: Was that a legitimate reason for Putin invading and what’s happening now? Why is there a Jewish president in in Ukraine, but he’s allowing the neo-Nazi Azov’s brigade to take a lead part in the war? They’re really interesting questions. I don’t have an opinion either way, but I’m not getting at the facts through the media.[01:01:09] Cameron: Well, you know that before Zelensky was the president of Ukraine, he played the president of Ukraine on television. Which reminds me of, [01:01:17] Cameron: I don’t know, just Ronald, [01:01:19] Tony: Ronald, Reagan Yeah. [01:01:21] Cameron: even to a certain extent. [01:01:23] Tony: Yeah. [01:01:23] Cameron: also, look, we’ve, we’ve talked about this a lot on this show, Tony, but there, um, are you aware of the Victoria Newland[01:01:30] Cameron: phone[01:01:31] Cameron: call from 2014?[01:01:32] Cameron: You’ve [01:01:33] Tony: I’ve heard it on your show before. [01:01:34] Tony: Yeah. [01:01:34] Cameron: Right. So there seems to be, uh, that as evidence that, uh, among other things like her talking in other interviews about[01:01:44] Cameron: how much money they spent on democracy in Ukraine before the Maidan protests it, it just fits the, the template, the CIA’s template that they’ve been following since they overthrew Mossadegh in the early fifties in Iran for going into a country, uh, behind the scenes funding.[01:02:09] Cameron: Protest movements, activists, uh, political troublemakers saying, listen, do this. We’ll, we’ll have your back, you know, we’ll, we’ll give you air cover, et cetera, et cetera, and if you win, we will support, you know, you and your chosen, or we’ll tell you who to put in power, but we’ll give you air cover. It just fits the model.[01:02:29] Cameron: And then when that call was leaked, it just seems to be pretty strong evidence that that’s what was [01:02:35] Cameron: going on behind the[01:02:36] Tony: Yeah, well, I’m gonna draw a longer bow, right? That, that the, if the CIA was gonna fund anybody, it’s more likely to be on the right than on the left. And if, if the, if the military industrial complex in the States is funneling money towards fighting in the Ukraine, and the league group is the ASOS group and they have links to neo-Nazis, and you could also draw the line that America’s happily funding them.[01:03:01] Tony: So[01:03:03] Tony: we’re not finding out what’s going on[01:03:05] Tony: here, unfortunately.[01:03:06] Cameron: Well, the US tends to. Support whoever’s going to best serve their interests, which makes sense, whether they’re on the left or the right, but usually it’s on the right, as you say. Um, there’s the famous, uh, uh, what was her name? Jeannie. Something begins with Letter F doctrine. Can’t remember her name. Fitz Gibbons or something like that.[01:03:36] Cameron: Fitzsimmons. She was a strategic advisor, uh, in the Reagan years and basically her doctrine was, yeah, it’s easier for us to do business with guys who are on the right than guys on the left. Right. You [01:03:52] Tony: Yeah. [01:03:52] Cameron: So they’re usually gonna be the ones we’ll do business with. The other issue that all these articles take is about the outbreak of the conflict in Donbass in 2014, uh, which they usually try and, um, lay at the feet of Putin, make it sound like Putin invaded.[01:04:13] Cameron: But I always point to a Rand Corporation, uh, um, article investigation report on this Rand Corporation being obviously a, an American, um, think tank when they did their report on it, uh, 10 years ago. They said the conflict started as a local affair, but was quickly supported by Russia. Set a coterie of, well-known local political agitators, businessmen and members of fringe political organisations with a Russian imperialist bent led the effort.[01:04:48] Cameron: Moscow sought to foster this movement in Ukraine through oligarchic connections and intertwined circles of powerful regional business interests. Combined with local criminal elements. The tactics appeared to be improvised, employing a diversity of individuals with little in common, other than their opposition to Ukraine’s new government.[01:05:06] Cameron: Russia fostered the subversion with a supporting cast of intelligence operatives, its own citizens and informal network of fighters from the post-Soviet space and local security forces who turned against Ukraine’s government. So if the Americans were running their own. Secret operations to install a pro-American government in Ukraine Russia had their own forces in there to maintain a pro-Russian government.[01:05:33] Cameron: Uh, and the two were fighting behind the scenes. But you know, what ended up happening is the Donbass breakout was genuinely, according to Rand, a civil war. It was a local affair with both sides, you know, having secret support from other major powers. Um, but it was at Moscow marching an army in Now what the distinction is between the two, you know, there’s another [01:06:03] Cameron: story [01:06:05] Tony: Yeah.[01:06:05] Tony: But, uh, that’s, and that’s a good point too. We, we’ve,[01:06:08] Tony: you know, we might sound, I might sound critical of the US on all this, but it happens on[01:06:12] Tony: both sides. We’re just calling it out ’cause it’s not reported.[01:06:15] Cameron: Yeah. I mean, we, anyone who’s spent any time studying Cold War history, uh, knows that this is the way the Cold War has been played out. You know, it’s, uh, uh, uh, it’s a, it’s a soft power. It’s hybrid warfare. You’re trying to influence the, the, the media and the government and the businesses and the politicians in a country using bribery and influence and, uh, promises and all that kind of stuff, and, and all of the major powers, if they can afford to do it, do it.[01:06:48] Cameron: I, I tend to subscribe to John Mearsheimer’s geopolitical realism camp that says that major powers in any region, um, know that if they’re not the strongest power in the region, then they’ll, they’re gonna get attacked. They’re gonna be, you know, attacked by other stronger powers. It gets back to the dark forest hypothesis kind of right, that if.[01:07:15] Cameron: If you are a power in a region and you think there’s another power coming up that may be stronger than you, you kind of have an incentive to get in and hobble them or weaken them or take them over. Because if they become more powerful than you in the future, then you are the victim. [01:07:30] Tony: Mm-Hmm.[01:07:30] Cameron: It’s just political [01:07:32] Tony: And we’re seeing it play out with Australia and the Pacific. Islands at the moment too, as Russia tries to ramp up if its influence and Australia has to counter. So it happens in every, uh, China, I’m[01:07:42] Tony: sorry, China, uh, it happens in every sphere of influence. I agree. But we just don’t read about[01:07:47] Tony: it overtly.[01:07:50] Tony: We try and put the, try and connect the dots, but we don’t read about it overtly. [01:07:53] Cameron: it[01:07:53] Cameron: doesn’t get talked about in, you know, mainstream media outlets, like, okay, Mearsheimer does. But as Mearsheimer says, like increasingly he and his colleagues, uh, who push realism just a shut out of the media. I, I heard him being interviewed. I think it was on Lex Friedman’s podcast a while back, and he was saying like, even in the early two thousands when he and, um, his colleague whose name escapes me, wrote a book on the Is, [01:08:27] Cameron: Hmm,[01:08:27] Tony: Was it Green Wall? [01:08:29] Cameron: no, no, no.[01:08:31] Cameron: Um, he’s passed away, but he was a leading scholar, uh, Stephen Walt when he and Stephen Walt wrote a book called The Israel Lobby, which I read 20 odd years ago, talking about the, the influence that the Israel lobby has in US politics. Uh, he said even though they got attacked right across the board, at least they were given airtime.[01:08:55] Cameron: You know, they were able, they were being interviewed in the New York Times and they were on television and that kinda stuff. He said, now no one will even. Talk to us, uh, about, you know, what’s going on in Russia and Ukraine. It’s like he said, it’s far more of a closed down media ecosystem today than it was 20, 30 years ago [01:09:18] Cameron: in the United States, [01:09:20] Tony: That’s interesting, isn’t it? I mean, that’s, that speaks[01:09:23] Tony: and that speaks volumes though, doesn’t it?[01:09:25] Tony: If, if the, if a media outlet’s applying council culture, rather than saying, come and debate this[01:09:29] Tony: with the Israel lobby, uh, it’s not really journalism, is it?[01:09:33] Cameron: Um, no, it’s, it’s, well, you know, I mean, I, however you wanna define journalism. Um, I’ve got some other[01:09:42] Tony: Yeah. [01:09:43] Cameron: here I wanna run through. So, um, this is, uh, from the BBC for fans who managed to stay tuned any longer. The reward was a rerun of Putin’s top twisted arguments. some neutral journalism for you. Um, he, they go on to say he aired his regular grievance about NATO expanding east into what Russia sees as its area of influence. We never agreed Ukraine could join NATO, as Putin put it, but it’s having an aggressive, unpredictable neighbor like Russia that’s led Ukraine to seek extra security.[01:10:22] Cameron: Not true. Uh, we know the history of this. We know that all of the polls in Ukraine. Said, uh, you know, going back 20, uh, 10, 20 years ago showed that that people had no interest in joining NATO. But then the coup happened and there was, uh, a lot of investment by NATO in, uh, Ukraine to build up, like promotion for NATO.[01:10:53] Cameron: A lot of funding in there. And of course, then they ended up with a pro-American government after the 2014 quote, coup if it in fact was a coup, which, and they’ve been pushed into joining NATO by various forces. But before that, Ukrainians had no interest in joining NATO, nato, uh, it’s, they say Putin has always characterized the mass public protests in Kiev a decade ago as part of a western backed coup, which they were not, says the BBC, according to whom, based on what evidence.[01:11:24] Cameron: Mentioned Victoria Newland’s phone call. No, just, and this is BBC man. [01:11:30] Cameron: Like, um, [01:11:32] Tony: It’s journalism. It’s really, it’s really editorial, isn’t it? It’s not journalism at all. [01:11:36] Cameron: yeah, It’s all editorial these days. Um, New York Times Tucker Carlson’s lesson in the perils of giving airtime to[01:11:43] Cameron: an autocrat. Mr. Putin conducted a history lecture that provided a one-sided, often false narrative about Ukraine says The New York Times one-sided. Yes. False. Probably not. Hillary Clinton in an interview this week with Alex Wagner of MSNBC called, uh, Carlson a useful Idiot, and Mr.[01:12:04] Cameron: Putin’s puppy dog Mr. Carlson gave Mr. Putin room for uninterrupted disquisitions. That’s a new word for me. [01:12:13] Cameron: What’s a disquisition? Tony? You ever use that [01:12:15] Cameron: in a [01:12:16] Tony: no idea. No. [01:12:17] Cameron: On longstanding and decidedly one-sided grievances about Ukraine’s origins and independence movements, said un uninterrupted. He actually did interrupt him a number of times, Carlson, in that first half hour rant.[01:12:32] Cameron: He kept trying to interrupt him, and Putin was just like, just, just hold on. Let me, let me finish my story. And he would [01:12:38] Tony: seconds more, 30 seconds more. [01:12:40] Cameron: he was saying he was uninterrupted, but it’s not. He, Carlson tried to, I interrupt him on a number. Carlson looked very confused and very troubled from the beginning of the [01:12:48] Cameron: whole thing.[01:12:49] Cameron: Like, where’s [01:12:49] Cameron: this going? [01:12:50] Tony: I’d be inclined to agree with someone who said that Carlson Softballed Putin. [01:12:54] Cameron: Softballed him, sure, but [01:12:55] Tony: tried, tried to interrupt a [01:12:56] Tony: couple of times, but but once every 10 minutes isn’t really, you know, [01:13:00] Cameron: but what are you[01:13:01] Cameron: gonna do? I mean, how are you gonna say, look, just shut the fuck up Mr. Putin,[01:13:06] Cameron: and, and answer my questions. I mean, you’re not gonna get anywhere with that, I don’t think Putin’s gonna [01:13:12] Cameron: let you run things. Although the [01:13:14] Tony: I, I must imagine, [01:13:15] Tony: sorry. I, imagine, that the, one of the conditions for the interview was that it couldn’t be edited too otherwise, you know, uh, Carlson may[01:13:23] Tony: have decided just to let it run and then cut it down for use, but he didn’t do that. So I’m guessing that was a condition. [01:13:29] Cameron: Probably. And, um, I was gonna say that, you know, uh, since the interview, Putin has come out in Russian Media and said that he, he found the interview disappointing and almost [01:13:40] Tony: Yeah, [01:13:42] Cameron: Carlson’s taking a victory lap. And Putin’s, like, I actually expected him to ask some hard questions. Like, uh, I, I was prepared for an aggressive[01:13:51] Cameron: interview and it was really not.[01:13:52] Cameron: So, so [01:13:54] Cameron: that’s, [01:13:55] Tony: yeah. No, exactly. [01:13:57] Cameron: Putin’s, even Putin’s not giving him, uh, [01:14:00] Cameron: any, any props for it. [01:14:02] Tony: And Putin said a lot of interesting things. I mean, the whole, there was a discussion, well, there was a, the[01:14:06] Tony: point about Boris Johnson intervening in the, in the Peace[01:14:10] Tony: talks, I Ukraine we’re having with Russia. I mean that, that, that could have been a whole topic of interviewing itself, but it just sort of[01:14:16] Tony: sailed through.[01:14:18] Cameron: Yeah, and we’ve, we’ve talked about that on this show. We, we know that that’s true. Um, we know that they were, you know, Zelensky and, and Putin, uh, all their representatives were on the verge of signing an agreement early in 2022. Then Boris Johnson, when he was still Prime Minister, made a three day trip to Kiev, and then the deal was off.[01:14:40] Cameron: And basically, Boris Johnson in his own words, said that he told Zelensky not to surrender, that he had the full support of the West. Now, what else he said, uh, about what would happen to Zelensky if he did surrender? Um, we don’t know, but it’s, it’s quite obvious that the war would’ve been over. Within a couple of months if the US and the UK hadn’t decided to prolong it forever.[01:15:08] Cameron: Which reminds me a lot of the Afghanistan situation in the late seventies, which I’ve done shows about, it was deliberately extended for 10 years by the United States in the words of Zbigniew, Brzezinski, Jimmy, Carter’s, national Security Advisor, uh, at the time. He later said that he went into Carter and said, if we play this right, we can give the Soviet Union its own Vietnam.[01:15:39] Cameron: And then he was quite proud of the fact that they did that later in life, um, that they managed to economically bogged down and cripple the Soviet Union by supporting the Mujahideen in Afghanistan. And this, to me just looks like the same thing. They’re using the Ukrainians as. Uh, fodder now to try and further weaken [01:16:01] Cameron: Russia economically New York [01:16:04] Tony: Potentially it’s, it’s backfiring though in the us. I mean, they’re, they’re the one who’s bogged down in Congress with contention over paying so much for the war in, in Ukraine. [01:16:13] Cameron: Yeah, but the guys in the US that got the[01:16:15] Cameron: money, it all played out[01:16:18] Cameron: perfectly, right? I mean, the way I’ve always pictured it’s a win-win[01:16:21] Cameron: situation for American businesses with this if they win and they managed to keep control of Ukraine. Then they get access to its markets, they get access to. Its, its natural resources.[01:16:34] Cameron: They, they get, you know, bases again, more bases on the border of Russia to further weaken Russia. I mean, what’s up for grabs is all of the energy supply into [01:16:44] Tony: grain. [01:16:45] Cameron: you know, and grain. Yeah. Right. All of that, all of the economic supply that Russia has a big chunk of, if you’re an American business person with interests in Europe and in the Middle East, et cetera, et cetera, you want to get access to those markets.[01:16:59] Cameron: If they, so if they win the war, they get that, or get to keep that or get more of that. If they lose the war, well, you know, we still got a hundred billion dollars of, uh, American taxpayers money over a few years, like happy days. [01:17:14] Cameron: Right. It’s a[01:17:15] Tony: Yeah. So there’s no incentive to do the, to do a negotiation. Is there a peace negotiation? [01:17:21] Cameron: Not if you are an American businessman or an American politician. Yeah, if you’re a Ukrainian soldier, maybe, or a[01:17:27] Cameron: Russian soldier. Um, another interesting thing in the New York Times, as Putin threatens despair and hedging in Europe,[01:17:35] Cameron: it actually admits that Putin was complaining about NATO expansion back in 2007.[01:17:40] Cameron: It talks about this conference that just happened at the Hotel Bayeriska Hof. It says in the Hotel Bayeriska Hof, the conference stage where Mr. Putin warned in 2007 that NATO’s eastern expansion was a threat to Russia Mr. Navalny’s widow made an emotional appearance on Friday hours after a husband’s death reminding attendees that Mr.[01:18:03] Cameron: Putin would bear responsibility for it. Um, leaving aside the Navalny stuff, uh, it’s a rare admission in the Western media that the NATO expansion issue. Didn’t just start getting invented by Putin in February, 2022. You know, that normally in Western media just gets rejected out hand as being nonsense.[01:18:30] Cameron: Got nothing to do with NATO, despite the fact that Putin and before him, um, you know, going back to Gorbachev and then, um, who was the guy after Gorbachev? I’ve got a mental blank. Uh, Yeltsin, Yeltsin all took issue with the NATO expansion when it started happening in ninety-six under Clinton. I. You know, they’ve been beating on about it for nearly 30 years.[01:18:59] Cameron: Stop the NATO expansion. Stop the NATO expansion. Stop the NATO expansion. Finally, they invade and they say, why are NATO expansion? What? That’s dev. Well, that’s got nothing to do with it. Never heard that before. Like seriously. And again, the way the media just writes it off as that, it’s just nonsense. It’s got nothing to do with NATO expansion.[01:19:16] Cameron: Like it boggles the mind. [01:19:18] Tony: Yeah. [01:19:19] Cameron: CBC, Canadian broadcasters barely mentions Putin’s actual talking points. Only after 30 paragraphs of Criticising Carlson did they get to anything that Putin had to say.[01:19:33] Cameron: Putin, in the Russian interview where he said that the interview was disappointing also said he’d rather have Biden continue as US president because he’s predictable. Can you imagine if he’d said the opposite, how the Democrats would be losing their damn minds at the moment if he said, oh, I’d rather have Trump as president.[01:19:49] Cameron: See? See? Trump’s a Russian puppet. He said, Biden, and this is like [01:19:56] Cameron: crickets. [01:19:57] Tony: Yeah. Biden’s, other Putin puppet. Yeah. No, I, I did see that one too. The other interesting thing I thought, um, that was, let’s slide by Carlson again, was when Putin told his story about,[01:20:08] Tony: uh, going to Clinton and saying, uh, Hey, that Russia joined NATO? Were you, and Clinton said, yeah, okay. And then came back that night and said, no,[01:20:16] Tony: sorry.[01:20:16] Tony: Can’t do it.[01:20:17] Cameron: My advisors told me I can’t do that. Yeah. Yeah. That’s well, uh, documented as well that Russia tried to join NATO. I. Just got shut out. Um, you know, and this goes right back to, um, Gorbachev, plenty of interviews on record about this when they were doing the whole collapsing of the Soviet Union and, uh, you know, the, the promise about No NATO and he agreed to the reunification of Germany.[01:20:48] Cameron: He was putting forward propositions that they form a new security, global security alliance that they could all be part of and, you know, was given nods and winks. Oh, sure, sure, sure. We can do that. And then just shut out. It just, you know, once the Americans felt that they’d won the Cold War, they weren’t giving up any play in anything.[01:21:08] Cameron: Politico called it a two-hour love-in, they mentioned the Russian President’s fanciful history lesson. On the Nord Stream stuff, they said several countries have been publicly blamed for the explosions with varying degrees of evidence. Ukraine has said Russia was responsible, which the Kremlin has denied.[01:21:27] Cameron: While Moscow has previously blamed the UK without presenting any evidence to support that assertion, either, they don’t mention at all the, uh, us, uh, being involved. Seymour Hersh, Pulitzer Prize winning investigative journalist at his sources said it was the CIA. They don’t mention that. They don’t mention that the US blamed Ukraine for it either.[01:21:49] Cameron: Um, just not worth mentioning apparently. Um, there’s, um, I mentioned that, that there’s a Reuters article for the 7th of February. Uh, the Rolling Stone said, um, something about. Uh, we’re talking about the Nord Stream, the Rolling Stone Magazine article said Investigations have yet to determine who was behind the sabotage.[01:22:14] Cameron: And then they link to a Reuters article from the 7th of February. It says, the White House last year dismissed a blog post by a US investigative journalist alleging Washington was behind explosions as utterly false and complete fiction. I was like, they fucking wrote off Seymour Hersh, a Pulitzer, Prize winning investigative journalist who broke the My Lai story massacre in Vietnam, who broke the Abu Ghraib torture story 20 years ago as a blog post by a US investigative journalist.[01:22:49] Cameron: Like it makes it sound like it’s some hack conspiracy, like it’s me sitting in my bedroom writing about it. You know, fucking Seymour Hersh. They just write off [01:23:00] Cameron: like, seriously, this [01:23:02] Tony: they can ’cause none of the, none of the, none of the outlets in the[01:23:04] Tony: America, America picked that up. You’d think the first thing that the head of the Washington Post would do is say, oh, who’s journalists? Let’s, let’s go and talk to them. Let’s see what their sources are. Let’s, let’s, you know, try and replicate the work that they did.[01:23:16] Cameron: all the New York Times where he won a Pulitzer Prize, [01:23:19] Tony: yeah. Oh no. We’ll just take the press release[01:23:22] Tony: from Washington and read. I[01:23:23] Tony: print that.[01:23:24] Cameron: like I’ve, You know, I read Seymour Hurst’s blog, um, and he’s, you know, been saying for, uh, whatever it’s been now, six months since he wrote that story. You can tell by the lack of coverage that my story is getting. [01:23:38] Tony: is accurate. [01:23:39] Cameron: How close to the bone it is, right? Yeah. If it was wrong and they knew it was wrong, they would come out and say that the fact that they are, you know, tackling what’s actually being said in it, um, stands for itself.[01:23:53] Cameron: They go on, sorry. In the Reuters article to say, the US and German Media have reported that the yacht could have been used by Ukrainian or pro-Ukrainian groups citing leaked intelligence reports and people familiar with official investigations. Kiev has repeatedly denied any involvement. The Washington Post citing leaked information posted online wrote last June that the United States learned of a Ukrainian plan to attack the Nord Stream natural gas pipeline three months before they were damaged.[01:24:21] Cameron: So of course what happened is when Seymour Hearst came out with his story, the uh, Washington Post slash US government came out with their own [01:24:30] Cameron: story. Oh, well we heard [01:24:33] Cameron: that it was probably[01:24:34] Tony: Our sources say, [01:24:35] Cameron: did it. Uh. [01:24:38] Cameron: You know, and it just goes on like, um, the, the amount of[01:24:44] Cameron: obfuscation. The other thing that I wanted to point out that Putin talked about a lot that didn’t get any coverage in any of the articles that I saw was the role that the failure of the Minsk agreements [01:24:55] Cameron: played.[01:24:56] Tony: Yeah, I, I was gonna highlight that?[01:24:58] Tony: too.[01:24:58] Cameron: What,[01:24:58] Cameron: what did you have on that? [01:25:00] Tony: No, no. Go ahead. I, I’ve gotta find my notes. [01:25:03] Cameron: Well, for people who, uh, first time listeners, um,[01:25:08] Cameron: uh, uh, when the whole thing broke out in the Donbass region in 2014, there were[01:25:12] Cameron: a number of attempts to try and bring about a peace settlement there. They were called the Minsk agreements because the meetings happens in, in Minsk and Belarus. Um, and it looked like they had a, a template for.[01:25:28] Cameron: Some sort of a settlement in the Donbass region. And again, it just failed. And aspersions were cast around as to who failed and why they failed and who was to blame for not upholding their end of the agreement. A bit like the whole, you know, Palestine Israel thing that’s been going on forever, each side blames the other.[01:25:47] Cameron: But, um, Putin puts the blame on the failure of the Minsk agreements on Ukraine in the West for not upholding their end of it. And there is, there’s a fa uh, um, a fascinating interview with Angela Merkel, who was one of the sponsors of the agreement when she was the Chancellor of Germany. She was interviewed by a German magazine, desight recently, where she said that the Minsk agreements had been an attempt to give Ukraine time to defend itself. She said, um. Putin said, it turns out that no one was gonna fulfill all these Minsk agreements, and the point was only to pump up Ukraine with weapons and prepare it for hostilities. So then I got this from, um, Reuters. Uh, I think according to former German Chancellor, Angela Merkel, the Minsk agreement served to buy time to Rearm Ukraine.[01:26:48] Cameron: I’ve got the actual interview here from Dezeit. It says this is quoting Merkel, but that requires us to also say what exactly the alternatives were at the time. I thought the initiation of NATO accession. By Ukraine and Georgia, which was discussed in 2008, was wrong. The countries neither had the necessary prerequisites for this, nor had the consequences of such a decision been fully thought through, both with regard to Russia’s actions against Georgia and Ukraine and to NATO and its assistance rules.[01:27:21] Cameron: And the 2014 Minsk agreement was an attempt to give Ukraine time. The aim was to gain time through a ceasefire in order to later achieve peace between Russia and Ukraine. She also used this time to become stronger. As you can see today, the Ukraine of 2014 15 is not the Ukraine of today. As we saw in the battle for the Bolshev railway town in Donbass at the beginning of 2015, Putin could have easily overrun them back then, and I very much doubt that the NATO countries could have done as much back then as they do now to help Ukraine. So, um, yeah, basically she seems to be confirming Putin’s assertion that the Minsk agreements were really just, uh, an attempt by the West to buy time to, you know, rearm Ukraine and build them up so they could basically, uh, not sign a peace agreement with [01:28:25] Cameron: Russia, [01:28:27] Tony: And also I think, um, as Putin alluded to, the Minsk agreement never really held, there was always[01:28:31] Tony: ongoing breakouts of fighting over that time as well. And, and you know, basically he was saying he couldn’t trust the signatories to the Minsk agreement.[01:28:41] Cameron: particularly when, you know, one of the key sponsors of it comes out and says, we, we were just using it to buy time in the[01:28:47] Cameron: first place. It [01:28:47] Cameron: wasn’t, wasn’t serious. [01:28:49] Tony: Yeah. And it wasn’t just Merkel, it was the, um, other German, uh, leader before her, I think, I’m just trying to find his name. Uh, Steinem Steinman. Anyway, one of the, one of the, uh, key negotiators and of, of that time might not have been a, sorry, she, he might not have been, uh, Merkel’s equivalent, but certainly someone[01:29:08] Tony: higher up in Germany also came out and said it wasn’t working. [01:29:12] Cameron: Yeah. [01:29:13] Tony: Just trying to find his name now. [01:29:15] Cameron: And [01:29:16] Tony: yeah, sorry.[01:29:17] Cameron: well, and the thing is, I guess my point was gonna be I, This doesn’t get talked about in the Western media. You know, the fact that the Minsk agreements were just a furphy. Secondly, um, again, Putin’s, no dummy. Whatever you think of Putin, if he’s the embodiment of all that is evil or not, he’s no dummy.[01:29:40] Cameron: And if, and, and if he knows that the peace agreements or the, the, the attempts in good faith to negotiate a settlement in the Donbass region would just deploy, used by the Wests to buy time to so they could, um, and fund and, you know, start building bases and putting weapons on the border of Russia. What do you do?[01:30:04] Cameron: This is a question I’ve always asked about this. If, if you are Putin, what do you do? What are your options? If you’ve spent 30 years trying to reach a diplomatic negotiation about NATO expansion, that has just been ignored. And, and, and again, this didn’t come up. I’m surprised it didn’t come up. Carlson asked him when the last time he spoke to Biden was, and Putin just sort of like, I, I don’t know.[01:30:25] Cameron: I don’t remember. I can’t remember everything. I know it was just, it was January, 2022. They discussed, well, Putin tried to discuss. Ukraine joining NATO and Biden told him. It wasn’t open to discussion, it was off the [01:30:42] Cameron: table. [01:30:44] Tony: I mean, I know you’ve done a, a long history podcast on Napoleon, but it’s very Napoleonic. This Putin’s saying, I have tried to defend my border, to defend my country, to keep my people safe, but you keep attacking. I’ve signed Minsk one and Minsk II, and for 10 years we’ve had clashes on the border. Still after I withdrew, what more do I have to do?[01:31:07] Tony: How, how, how can you say I’m the aggressor if I then, you know, cross the border with my tanks trying to[01:31:14] Tony: protect my border.[01:31:15] Cameron: That’s the thing that infuriates me with David Markham. I mean, if you talk about why Napoleon invaded Russia in 1812, David will give you all the arguments where he tried. He tried diplomatic measures to avoid war. But he realized, ’cause he was no dummy, what was going on. They were building up forces on his border and war was coming.[01:31:38] Cameron: So rather than the war happened on his territory, he took it to their territory. And it’s, uh, you know, you you would say that that’s a, a just action. I mean, war is bad, but when you, when your enemy is building up forces on their border and you believe that they have [01:31:54] Cameron: malicious intent, [01:31:56] Tony: And you’ve had 10 years of a history of a broken treaty when you’ve tried to resolve it peacefully. [01:32:01] Cameron: and 30 years in this case of them saying, don’t put NATO, you promised you wouldn’t gonna put NATO bases on our[01:32:07] Cameron: border. And they’re like, shut the fuck up. We’ll do whatever we want. What do you do? That’s always been my question. Do you just like politically, if he just sits there and lets it happen, he’s [01:32:19] Cameron: not gonna survive. [01:32:21] Tony: mm-Hmm, [01:32:21] Cameron: Let alone, you know, for the, the EE economic and military security of the Russian people, he needs to act. I am not justifying. His invasion. I’m just saying that from his perspective, I felt like he, he really had no option. It was [01:32:39] Tony: hmm, [01:32:40] Cameron: We’ve tried everything else. That’s failed. Yeah. A a as Von Klausowitz said, to paraphrase, war is the extension of diplomacy by other means, right?[01:32:51] Cameron: When diplomacy [01:33:03] Tony: with the issue of Gershkovich when Carlson thought he’d be able to take a trophy home from Russia and have an American, uh, released and Putin was all over it straight away with all the facts.[01:33:16] Tony: You know, we are working on this, there’s discussions going on. Uh, there might be a prisoner exchange. We have a mine. This guy, you know, who uh, who was captured by the Americans after he assassinated. Uh, uh, what was the, um,[01:33:30] Tony: oh, I’ve forgotten the name of the place now that, anyway,[01:33:33] Cameron: Che, wasn’t it a [01:33:34] Tony: Chechen. Thank you. The Chechen.[01:33:35] Tony: The Chechen Rebel. Yeah. But, but that was, to me, that was Putin[01:33:38] Tony: just completely and just had all the facts at his fingertips. Wasn’t gonna be gotcha’d,[01:33:44] Cameron: hmm. [01:33:45] Tony: just laid it all out off the cuff. Brilliant.[01:33:47] Cameron: And the thing that always gets me about, uh, I don’t know if you, did you ever watch the Oliver Stone interviews with Putin [01:33:52] Tony: No, I haven’t. [01:33:53] Cameron: going back a few years, but it was like four hours of interviews. Um, late 2000 and like 17, 18, something like that.[01:34:02] Cameron: The thing that always gets me, and this is what Oliver Stone said, ’cause Oliver Stone, you know, he did the same thing with Castro. He did the same thing with Chavez in Venezuela. He, like he said, those guys are big personalities and grand pronouncements and obviously also both very intelligent, very successful leaders of their country, depending on how you wanna measure success, I guess.[01:34:25] Cameron: And Putin is the complete opposite to those guys. The thing that always fascinates me about these Putin interviews is he’s very quietly spoken. He doesn’t rock up wearing a uniform, you know, military badges and everything. Um, you know, Castro always just wore basic greens. You know, you never saw Castro with military, um, adornments, like a Gaddafi.[01:34:45] Cameron: He was just, you know, military greens. ’cause he said, we’re at war and I’m a soldier, so, you know, I come dressed as a soldier, but Putin is just very quietly[01:34:55] Cameron: spoken. Very matter of fact. Very look, here are the facts. You know, I’m laying the facts before you reminds me a lot actually of Assad in Syria, if you’ve ever seen interviews with him.[01:35:08] Cameron: Very, very similar. I I’m not gonna compare the two guys ’cause I don’t think Assad is anywhere near what Putin is in terms of, you know, intellectual power, but very, very simple. Uh, you know, in interviews, very quietly spoken. Very matter of fact. Here’s the facts we see, you know, Putin exudes this quiet intellectual.[01:35:31] Cameron: Confidence about his position, what his facts are. He’s always very respectful too. When, like, when, when, same with Oliver Stone interviews. When Carson was saying, well, what, what happened in this conversation? What happened in this meeting with Biden or with these leaders or with the, he goes, look, it’s not my place.[01:35:51] Cameron: It would be, it would be not right for me to talk about things that were said in private. If you wanna know what your president said, go ask your president if you wanna know what Bill Clinton said. Carson, what do you think happened with Bill Clinton? He goes, it wouldn’t be right for me to, you know, speculate.[01:36:06] Cameron: Go talk to Bill Clinton. Like, he’s always, he’s not advancing conspiracy theories. He is not advancing agendas. He’s just like, it’s not for me to say I, I, I know what I know, but you know, it, it’s the depiction of him in the western media is this bond villain. Doesn’t come across to me in these interviews.[01:36:27] Cameron: Like does he have people assassinated? I don’t know. Quite possibly. Do American presidents have people assassinated? Yeah, absolutely. All the time. Does he arrest journalists? Sure. As Julian Assange in prison because of the us Sure. I mean, he does what he does and they talk about that like, as a Christian leader, you have to kill people.[01:36:46] Cameron: Like how do you, how do you justify that? Right. [01:36:51] Cameron: Um. [01:36:53] Tony: I think you’ve raised the last point I wanted to talk about, and that was the timing of the interview. And, and I, I, I’ve, I don’t want to sound, uh, like any sort of Putin apologist for a minute. Um, apart from saying that he’s a smart guy and he doesn’t get a fair shot in the media, but what did you make of the Novelli.[01:37:12] Tony: Uh,[01:37:12] Tony: death, uh, around the soon after this interview was put to air, it was the interview, the bright shiny object to distract from something going[01:37:20] Tony: on.[01:37:23] Cameron: Look, um, well first of all, I’m not convinced that, you know, there’s any evidence that they like deliberately assassinated him. People die all the time. People die in prisons all the time. [01:37:36] Cameron: Um.[01:37:37] Tony: Especially in subzero Arctic [01:37:40] Cameron: Sure, [01:37:41] Tony: concentration camps. [01:37:42] Cameron: but reports are that like the day or a couple of days before Navalny died, he appeared in court and he seemed to be healthy and un unlike[01:37:49] Cameron: Julian Assange, who apparently is too sick to appear in[01:37:52] Cameron: court. Um, but you know, again, I I, I don’t think Putin would try and time anything like this because I don’t think he really gives a rat’s ass.[01:38:05] Cameron: I don’t think he cares what the Western media says. I don’t think he cares what western governments say. I think he’s a, like, bit like MBF in Saudi. Arabia having Khashoggi hacked to death with a, an axe in a bathtub. He doesn’t care. Like say what you want. I mean, you think I’m a bad guy, okay. I killed one of my enemies.[01:38:24] Cameron: Who cares? What are you gonna do? Not buy my oil, like shut the fuck up. I don’t care. I think, I don’t think Putin really cares about bright, shiny objects. I don’t think he cares what the Americans think. I don’t, I do think he wants to. Finish the war in Ukraine. And in order to do that, he needs the US and the EU to stop funneling weapons into Ukraine.[01:38:46] Cameron: I don’t think he wants a war there. Uh, um, whether or not the Navalny thing was timed with the upcoming Russian election and the interview, look, I, I don’t, I, I don’t think it matters. I don’t, I don’t think Navalny was gonna cause any problems in the Russian election. I’m pretty sure Putin’s got that stitched up by means, fair or foul.[01:39:08] Cameron: I, you know, he is extremely popular. That’s the other thing the media never talk about here. All of the, all of the surveys that get done by credible western, uh, polling organizations say that he’s incredibly popular in Russia. Maybe because he gets all the pro-Russian propaganda from the media. Or maybe just because, you know, look at Russia before him under Yeltsin.[01:39:33] Cameron: It was a basket case. Whatever else you wanna say about him. Like Hitler taking over Germany. He’s made the country stronger. He’s made the country in many ways, more economically viable, stronger, better standard of living. Is it perfect? No, but as he talks about in the, in the, the Oliver Stone interviews, it was a basket case when he took over 20 years ago.[01:39:58] Cameron: It takes a long time to re, you know, not just rebuilding from the Soviet era, but then rebuilding from when the Americans went in, uh, under Yeltsin. Clinton sent his American strategists in and they just sold everything off to the oligarchs. You know, Putin’s been trying to. You know, rebuild the country and it takes time.[01:40:20] Cameron: It’s a hard, it’s a hard slog, particularly when you’re facing all the other things that they’re facing with Western imperialism and all that kind of stuff in their region. So, no, I, I look, I, I dunno whether or not he was behind Navalny’s death. I, I dunno. Uh, you know, and, and every time anyone dies, Putin apparently personally signed the order.[01:40:40] Cameron: I don’t know that that necessarily needs to be the case. There’s probably a lot of people between Putin and the guy that, um, you know, commits the act that, that are making de decisions for themselves. I don’t think the president of the United States personally authorizes everybody that every CIA operative Assassinates know.[01:41:03] Cameron: I don’t know. What [01:41:03] Cameron: do you think? [01:41:05] Tony: No, I, I was just raising the question. I, I, if my personal opinion is, I think Nevali just died of, of, I’ll call it natural causes, and he’s in a subarctic, what’s it called? The polar bear or something facility, um, which is basically a death camp. And it just happened to coincide. But I guess that raises the, um, you know, the other issue for me is that it was a Western pile on, again, when Nevali died, that it was caused by Putin.[01:41:32] Tony: Um, that, you know, see, he may have said some smart things during the interview, but this is what he’s really all[01:41:37] Tony: about. This is what he does. So it’s, um, and I, and you know, I don’t for a minute think that if Putin didn’t do it, that he’s capable of doing it. [01:41:45] Cameron: Sure. [01:41:46] Tony: Yeah, [01:41:46] Cameron: He’s ex-KGB and he is the leader of a country, like he’s capable of doing anything that he thinks is in the best [01:41:52] Cameron: interest of his country. I’m sure. [01:41:54] Tony: Yeah. But also it raises for me the bigger question of, um, of methods of government.[01:41:58] Tony: And, and that could be behind some of the, you know, the slants of the media is like, you know, do, do, do. I do, I think do, do I think that Western democracy is the best form of government? Well, you just have to look at all the leaders we’ve had in the last 15, 20 years, or is a benevolent dictator[01:42:16] Tony: a better form of government,[01:42:18] Tony: um, even though that there are downsides to that if you are in, in opposition.[01:42:22] Tony: Um, so I think that’s an interesting[01:42:23] Tony: question to, to talk about as well.[01:42:26] Cameron: The irony there is that the West loves Lee Kuan. Yew the West couldn’t get enough of Lee Kuan Yew and he was a benevolent dictator, as you say. And their system of government was very much like the Chinese system of government and who, you know, if you believe the books that I’ve been reading basically studied s Singapore’s form of government under Lee, Kuan, Yew and said, yeah, we want, we wanna have that, you know, we wanna be like that.[01:42:53] Cameron: Let’s, let’s find the best and the brightest and give them positions of political power rather than just somebody who’s able to man manipulate the electorate to vote for them. That doesn’t make any sense. [01:43:04] Cameron: Let’s find the best and the brightest. [01:43:05] Tony: Yeah, well the best of the brightest do run power in the West. It’s just that they do it to line their pockets. It’s[01:43:11] Tony: a little bit different.[01:43:12] Cameron: You think Trump is[01:43:13] Cameron: the best and the brightest [01:43:15] Tony: No, I think Trump’s the mouthpiece. He’s the Ronald. Reagan.[01:43:18] Cameron: Oh yeah. Right. Yeah. [01:43:19] Tony: The best of the brightest are on Wall[01:43:21] Cameron: Steve Bannon. Oh, wall Street. Okay. [01:43:24] Cameron: All right. Well, that’s all I got. TK. Thanks for joining me. That was a good[01:43:27] Cameron: chat.[01:43:28] Tony: discussion. Yeah, thank you, [01:43:30] Cameron: than we normally get to talk about these things at [01:43:32] Cameron: the end of QAV. [01:43:34] Tony: It is. Yeah. This could be the first of our after hours [01:43:37] Cameron: Could be. [01:43:38] Tony: podcast.[01:43:39] Cameron: All right. Thank [01:43:40] Cameron: you. TK. Cheers. [01:43:42] Tony: Bye. The post BS 123 – The Carlson / Putin Interview appeared first on The BS Filter.

Hey there, fellow Bullshit Fighter! This page contains some member-only content. If you're already a registered member, LOGIN HERE. If you aren't registered, well you can fix that right now! Find out about our registration options here. My old friend and colleague J. David Markham joined me today to talk about Russia and Ukraine. We planned to get to other topics, but ran out of time. Although we agree on most things related to Napoleon, David and I disagree on nearly everything else related to geopolitics, so this was a fun episode.BS 121 Markham Russia[00:00:00] Cameron: Welcome to a very special edition of the Bullshit Filter. This is episode 121. No Ray with me today, but my The Ray before there was Ray. My pre Ray Ray. My old friend and colleague, J.[00:00:36] Cameron: David Markham, is joining me today. Long awaited return to the Bullshit Filter for J. David Markham. It’s been, yeah, been on the show in the past, but it’s been quite a few years. We had a very, uh, fun time doing a Napoleon reunion episode. Despite the fact that we were talking about a godawful film a few weeks ago.[00:00:57] David: and we talked about it for almost as long as the film was.[00:01:01] Cameron: Yes. And it was a much better use of people’s time too, I think, listening to us than watching the film.[00:01:06] David: course. Of course.[00:01:09] Cameron: So, uh, look, uh, I guess the, the, the setup for this is anyone who has followed us on Facebook over the years knows that whilst we agree violently on Napoleon. We tend to disagree violently on pretty much everything else when it comes to politics, and I, so you know where I’m coming from, I’m not coming into this as a debate, I had to spend an hour trying to convince Chrissy this morning that this wasn’t going to ruin our friendship, I think, look, I am I’m I am genuinely interested in trying to understand more about how David thinks about these issues, because I respect you.[00:01:46] Cameron: You’re my friend, you’re, you’re an intelligent man, you’re a student of politics, and, uh, we have very diverging views on this, and our audience knows my views on this stuff, so it’s, they, I, I don’t need to remind them, and Ray tends to agree with me on everything, because I’ve spent 10 years training him how to think properly. So, uh, I thought it would be useful and healthy and interesting for our audience to hear your views and why your views on some issues diverge from mine. So the things I thought, I mean, the obvious things to talk about, things that we would be talking about on this episode anyway if you weren’t with us is what’s going on in the US presidential election that’s coming up.[00:02:31] Cameron: What’s going on in US politics at a Federal level. Uh, what’s going on in Israel and Gaza, and what’s going on in Russia and Ukraine. They’re the, sort of, the big, well, there’s a lot of geopolitical issues we could talk about, but I guess they’re three of the big ones that, um, we probably have diverging views on, and which makes it interesting.[00:02:52] Cameron: Where would you like to start?[00:02:54] David: I’m gonna guess we do. Uh, you, you, you spent, uh, uh, all those years training Ray. Uh, and the, you, as you know, I had a birthday, uh, a few days ago on Tuesday. It turned 78. So I’m hoping that you will simply accept the wisdom of your elders and, and we’ll, and we will do just fine. And I too, uh,[00:03:18] Cameron: you don’t look a day under 77.[00:03:21] David: Yeah, I knew that was coming.[00:03:23] David: Uh, I, uh, I, I too had some trepidation, uh, about, you know, would we be at each other’s throats and, and, and, and somehow damage, uh, our, our friendship, which my goodness goes back decades at this point. Uh, and I certainly hope not. Uh, You know, I, I also respect you and, and think you’re very intelligent, uh, and, uh, you, uh, I, I, every now and then I’ve, I’ve got a glimpse of some of your political views or, or whatever, and, and yeah, you’re right, I don’t always agree, but I have always prided myself in having friends.[00:04:08] David: With whom I don’t agree on everything politically, or for that matter, Napoleonically, uh, I think it would be a boring life if you only hung around with people who agreed with you in lockstep, uh, and I say that, you know, with, you know, some of the people The, the Trump accolades who, who, who all, you know, adhere to a very narrow point of view, but also some, some groups on, on the left, you know, who, who do not want to tolerate a divergence of opinion on, on, uh, at least on a large number of issues, uh, I’ve always felt that we have.[00:04:49] David: a chance to learn, uh, from each other if we have some disagreement anyway, and without getting into fisticuffs, and since you are, I’m guessing, 10 or 15, 000 miles away, getting into fisticuffs would be somewhat difficult, so we’re safe in that regard.[00:05:09] Cameron: Alright, so where do you want to start? Israel, Russia, or America?[00:05:15] David: Well, I think we ought to end on a relative high note, so We, I think we should save American politics for the end, because if there’s any area where we might actually find some agreement, it might be, it might be that. And it’s also, if there’s any area where I pride myself as, as being an expert, you know, other than Napoleon and a few other historical areas, you know, I’ve, I’ve been involved in, And, and American politics and so forth for, for many, many, many decades.[00:05:50] David: And, uh, you know, like to think that I know a fair amount about them. Of course, I follow them very carefully, even though I live in Canada now, but I’ve been told by many Canadians. Canadians are more likely to follow American politics closely than they are even to follow Canadian politics because of course, it’s the, it’s the, it’s the elephant in the room, you know, kind of thing.[00:06:11] David: I mean, you know, you can love America or hate America or be ambivalent about America. It’s still, you know, an extraordinary, powerful nation with influence around the world and, you know, it, it, you, you, you want to have an idea of what’s going on. So, I guess the, the, the other 2 things, which probably won’t take a huge amount of time, is.[00:06:37] David: You, you crane and, you know, you’re smiling because, you know, you, I have envisioned that this could be the length of, of one of our normal podcasts, which is to say, you know, a little over an hour, we, we, we, no, we averaged about an hour and 15 minutes on the Napoleon podcast. And then, and then we, we, with occasional exceptions, and then the movie thing was two hours.[00:06:58] David: So, Hours and 15 minutes. And with the movie itself being two hours and, and, and 45 minutes . So we came, we, if we’d have been paying attention, we could’ve talked another half hour just, just to say we did it. But, uh, uh, so let’s, you know, so you’re thinking two or three hours. I’m thinking an hour and a half maybe.[00:07:17] David: ’cause I do want to have dinner at a reasonable hour as well. It’s, it’s in the evening here. So let’s talk about Ukraine for starters. Uh, to me. There isn’t a whole lot to say, at least in terms of the, the righteousness of one side or the other, as you know, in 2014, uh, Russia under Vladimir uh Marched into Crimea and simply announced to the world that it was now Russian territory because, of course, it was always meant to be Russian territory, never mind the fact that the United Nations and virtually every country in the world recognized it as part of Ukraine.[00:08:03] David: And the world didn’t do much of anything about that. Uh, and now I think we’re paying the price, you know, uh, now, uh, two years ago. Uh, he, he marched into Eastern and Southern, uh, uh, uh, Ukraine and announced that this was always supposed to be part of Russia. Uh, and therefore, you know, in fact, he tried to, to take over the whole country.[00:08:29] David: He had troops marching from the North on, on Kiev or Kiev, depending on how you prefer to pronounce it. Uh, And that didn’t work out so well for him. What he thought might be over in a few weeks and what, frankly, a lot of the people in the world thought would be over in a few weeks, uh, is still going on and Ukraine has taken back a significant amount of territory in previous, uh, efforts, but this latest, uh, uh, thing has, uh, offensive, counter offensive has, has bogged down and now winter is coming on, which makes, you know, either side’s Progress much more difficult just because of the nature of winter fighting.[00:09:10] David: Much of the world has rallied to the Ukrainian cause, certainly the European Union and NATO and other other people, countries in the world have sent aid. It’s the nature of these things that after a while, people get tired of sending aid if it doesn’t seem to be making a huge difference, and initially it did.[00:09:33] David: I hope that the United States and NATO countries will continue to give them military and economic assistance. I think we should have learned. Uh, in, in World War II, the lead up to World War II, that, that appeasement, that allowing someone to, to take over all of or part of a country just because they have an excuse that could sound sort of legitimate if you, if you’re, if you’re willing to sort of close your eyes to some facts, uh, how dangerous that can be.[00:10:09] David: Uh, and, uh, uh, you know, there’s other countries that, that he, Putin may or may not want to, to move in on and, and do the course. So, it’s, it’s good to stand for the rights of people to determine their own future and clearly Putin has other plans. So, you know, that, that in a nutshell is, is, is how I see it.[00:10:32] David: There’s been a fair amount of barbarity on the part of some of the Russians that has been clearly documented, and there are war crime investigations going on, and there may be some war crime investigations into some of the actions by some soldiers on the Ukrainian side as well. In any war, there’s always a possibility of some of that.[00:10:55] David: The reports I’ve seen have it pretty lopsided in terms of, in terms of, uh, you know, atrocities or, you know, I mean, it’s, it’s very clear that, that Putin is deliberately targeting infrastructure, the civilian infrastructure, uh, with no concerns at all that, that There are no claims that they’re being used by the Ukrainian military, uh, which is a little bit different from the Gaza situation, which we’ll talk about later.[00:11:27] David: Uh, but, uh, uh, you know, I think Putin is trying to, to force submission through, through, through terrorism and, and, you know, that’s, uh, to me unacceptable, but I’d like to hear what your, your thoughts are.[00:11:46] Cameron: So You were talking about what we learned about appeasement in the 30s, and I know, because I’ve heard him say it, that Putin says the exact same thing about what he believes, and Many, uh, Western analysts also believe happened in Ukraine in 2004 and 2014. Uh, and then what was looking like it was going to happen, um, when his discussions with Biden broke down at the beginning of last year about Ukraine entering NATO.[00:12:27] Cameron: I mean, 2004 and 2014, that seemed to have been, if not. Engineered, then supported by the United States and perhaps other Western powers with the intention of overthrowing it. Uh, pro Russian governments in Ukraine and replacing them with pro Western governments. And, you know, Putin has been very clear about the fact that he and, you know, Russians in general, believe that, uh, they can’t allow that to happen.[00:13:05] Cameron: That’s an existential threat. to Russia and Russian peoples, both in Russia itself and also the Russian speaking peoples in Ukraine, if Ukraine gets taken over, uh, in a, in a soft, uh, way by Western powers in engineered revolutions, and then joins NATO on top of that, which Russians see as a, as an existential threat to their country.[00:13:34] David: Well. You know, uh, the, the, the revolutions that you call them were, were, you know, very firmly supported by the Ukrainian people and they were happy to get rid of the, of the pro Soviet leaders. I’ve never seen any, anything to the contrary, you know, Putin. You know, he, he, he may not want Ukraine to, to join NATO, but it’s not his decision to make.[00:14:06] David: It’s the people of Ukraine’s decision to make through their government. And it’s not an existential threat to, to, to, to Putin. NATO was a defensive organization, uh, and, and, and that’s, that’s its fundamental reason for existence. Oh, and by the way. You don’t want expansion in NATO, so you go ahead and invade Ukraine.[00:14:31] David: Well, how’d that work out for you, Mr. Putin? Because you’ve got Finland and probably Sweden joining the, the, the NATO now. And, you know, that’s, that’s thousands of kilometers of additional NATO border on your northern flank. And that, You know, I don’t think that Finland or Sweden have any interest in invading Russia any more than anyone else really wants to invade Russia.[00:14:56] David: I don’t think NATO has any desire to invade Russia. You’re raising your eyebrows, but I’d love to see any evidence you have that NATO wants to invade, you know, uh, and, and countries have chosen, you know, the Baltic countries, other countries, uh, Poland, et cetera, they’ve chosen. Buy the will of their people through their governments to, to, to join NATO because they feared the existential threat from an expansionist Russia, which by the way, those fears have been realized now because it’s not NATO, you know, invading, let’s say, Belarus.[00:15:36] David: It’s Russia invading Ukraine. So, you know, the, the, the, the proof is, is, is, is, is in, is in the facts. And the facts of the matter are that Russia feels it has the right, number one, to control who does or does not join NATO. And number two, oh, there’s a few Russian speaking people there, and some, some reasonably high percentages of Russian speaking people in, in Ukraine.[00:16:02] David: But knowing that they speak Russian doesn’t make them Russian. It doesn’t make the country Russian. If they don’t like living in, in a non Russian country, they always can immigrate to Russia, you know, assuming that they accept immigrants of the very people they claim to want to protect, you know. Anymore, you know, there’s a lot of Russian speaking people in Moldova and, and, and Moscow has troops and supplies illegally, I think, in Moldova, you know, trying to intimidate them lest they decide that they would like to, uh, to say join.[00:16:37] David: Join Rumanian because the language of the country is Romanian, you know, not, not Russian, uh, but I mean, the, the, the weakness to your argument and I understand, I understand your argument and I, and I, and, and, and I, I realize there can be a different point of view about the nature of, of, of NATO or, or the Warsaw Pact or, you know, any, any other so called defensive, uh, military, uh, structure.[00:17:03] David: Bye. Uh, but the, the weakness of, of, of your argument and those, and those who agree with you is the fact that one country has invaded another sovereign country that was not in, in reality, a significant threat. to them, uh, has never shown any interest of being aggressive militarily, may or may not have decided to join NATO.[00:17:30] David: And at any rate, that’s the right of a sovereign country. I do not understand how you or anyone can justify one country simply invading another country en masse, trying to take over the entire country and absorb it. In, into Russia, that didn’t work. And so now they are supposedly going to be quote unquote satisfied if they can get the, the Eastern and Southern portions that they now control and, and, and, and keep, uh, uh, the peninsula.[00:17:59] David: I, I, I do not understand how, how you could justify that. You know, that would, would someone have the right to say, you know, would Singapore have the right to say, we’re going to invade, uh, Uh, Australia, because we, we think that’s really part of the, the, the, the landmass ultimately, or whatever, you know, excuse they would come up with.[00:18:20] David: Uh, it, our, our, would Australia have the right to invade New Zealand? Because after all, that’s a, that’s a piece of land that’s very close to us and it has historic ties to us. So, of course, you know, uh, and they speak English, so they, they, they must be Australian. I mean, to me, it’s dangerous.[00:18:38] Cameron: what about the Solomon Islands?[00:18:43] David: Well, you’ll have to refresh my memory. The Solomon Islands, if I recall, are two things. Number one, very, very, very small. And number two, were taken from Japan, you know, was as part of the, the, the, the, the declared war between Japan And it’s allies in the U. S. and it’s allies. And so, yeah, they, a few islands here and there were, were taken and, and China is trying to take some more north of Japan.[00:19:11] David: Uh, but I, I don’t think that’s even remotely the same. They were, you know, I don’t know how you can make it a comparison at all.[00:19:22] Cameron: Well, about a year ago, the Solomon Islands talked about, uh, allowing China to establish a military base there, and the U. S. Ambassador, Daniel Crittenbrink, Assistant Secretary of State for East Asia and Pacific Affairs said, uh, the U. S. wouldn’t rule out, uh, military action against the Solomon Islands if they allowed China to build a military base there.[00:19:51] David: Well, and you know, you can, nations routinely saber rattle and so forth and so on, but that’s not exactly the same thing as invading a major country with billions of people in it, as opposed to trying to maintain influence over a small set of islands that has some strategic value. You know, you can disagree with the United States on that.[00:20:13] David: You can be in favor of China expanding its military might if you want, but you can’t make a comparison between the Solomon Islands and the nation of Ukraine.[00:20:22] Cameron: doesn’t the Solomon Islands have the right to allow China to build a military base on their country if they want?[00:20:29] David: I would say that if that’s what they, if that’s what they want, they have a right to do that and, and, you know, I don’t know, obviously, I think you’ve got information on your screen and I, I don’t know very much about the Sullivan Island situation. So I have to concede I, I’m, I’m, I’m ill prepared to, to debate the, the nuances of the Sullivan Islands.[00:20:50] David: But, uh, uh, again, even if you want to say that, That China should be able to build bases there. You know, that’s not the same as saying China should be allowed to invade and take over the Solomon Islands or anyone else should be allowed to invade and take over the Solomon Islands. Uh, and.[00:21:11] Cameron: about invading. It was the U. S. that was threatening military action or refusing to rule out military action.[00:21:19] David: And that might have involved in simply, you know, action against, you know, the one part of the island where the Chinese were trying to build a military base. It does not imply they were going to invade and take over the entire country. And, and, and so again, I, I have a hard time seeing how you could make that comparison.[00:21:42] David: You can disagree with the US and maybe you’re approach China and you think it’d be great to have a Chinese military base there, but you can’t say that, that a little savor rattling or even military action is the same thing, is invading an entire large country and trying to take it over and absorb it as, as part of your own country.[00:22:04] Cameron: Isn’t it? Isn’t military, isn’t, isn’t the principle that you’re trying to, um, put forward regarding the Ukraine situation is that Ukraine has the right to join whatever alliance it wants, for whatever alliances it wants, and that Russia has no say in that, even though it’s on their border, and yet the US is claiming the right to interfere with the Solomon Islands sovereign right to form an alliance with China.[00:22:35] David: or to allow China to build a military base. I think, I think it would be a closer analogy, analogy would be if the United States or NATO, uh, decided to build a, a major military base in Ukraine when Ukraine was not a member of, of NATO. Uh, and I suspect Russia would have had some things to say about that.[00:22:56] David: That and maybe you arguably somewhat more, more rightfully is unless Ukraine had chosen to, to go to, uh, uh, into NATO. But again, I mean, we can, we can talk around in circles for another hour on this, but I’m just not going to concede that while there may be some small similarity in principle, uh, you, you simply cannot make the, the, the comparison, but, but between saber rattling over the Solomon Islands and China.[00:23:24] David: Uh, possible linking up, uh, and the blatant invasion with mass destruction, uh, of infrastructure and of, and of people, uh, that the Russian invasion of Ukraine has, uh, has started. It’s just, you know, there’s, there, there’s, there’s, there. Really, in reality, extremely different, even though you might be able to draw some kind of theoretical thread that connects them, the reality on the ground and the importance geopolitically of that reality is far, far different.[00:23:59] David: And I think you know that, honestly.[00:24:02] Cameron: Well, no, I think the principle is the same thing, but I mean, and you know, I don’t want to get into the US’s recent history of invasions, but you know, it often seems to me that you and many other Americans seem to happily play a game of, it’s okay for the US to invade countries. Uh, or overthrow governments of countries, resulting in massive destruction, displacement, deaths, or support other countries military actions, uh, uh, a la Israel, resulting in massive deaths and destruction.[00:24:41] Cameron: Um, and, you know, can justify that to the cows come home. But when a country you don’t like does something similar, all of a sudden they’re the embodiment of evil. But I want to quote. Um, somebody who said, uh, was talking about, um, Napoleon and, uh, uh, his invasion of Russia. In 1812, uh, he said probably a little bit like the Russians today didn’t really appreciate the expansion of NATO right up to their borders.[00:25:20] Cameron: No matter how much America and the NATO allies said to Russia in the 20th century that this is a peaceful movement, not to worry about your old adversary now having their member states right on your border, President Putin and others are not real thrilled with that. Well, it’s very much the same thing in the 19th century.[00:25:36] Cameron: Russia was used to having, you know, buffer states between them and France, and now all of a sudden, a satellite nation in the French Empire is right on the border of Russia, and they’re not too happy about it.[00:25:47] David: Well, yes, and I’m sure that’s a quote for me.[00:25:49] Cameron: J. David[00:25:50] David: that’s, I’m, I’m sure that’s a quote for me, but, you know, context matters. I’m sure I also went on to point out that, uh, the, the, the, the Duchy of Warsaw, which is the buffer state you mentioned, uh, was a problem, but before it even became closer aligned to, uh, to, to, to the French empire because they never really liked having an independent Polish state there.[00:26:14] David: And of course the, the real important thing that, that created the situation in 1812 was the continental system, uh, where, you know, they, the Russians were prepared to, to break the continental system. Uh, and, and, and they, they got all their ducks lined up in a row so they could, they could go into, uh. to a war with France.[00:26:36] David: And so there were, there was, there was a lot more to it than, than, than simply that, but I want to read, I want to reply to, to your earlier remarks. Uh, it’s not true that people like me, as you put it, blithely excuse, uh, American invasions. Uh, the causing great destruction, you know, uh, while, while supporting it, uh, you know, opposing it in Russia and supporting it in, in, in Israel.[00:27:07] David: Uh, you know, I’m, I’m a very proud decorated Vietnam veteran, but I, I, I opposed the war in Vietnam. I thought that was the, at the time, I thought that was the biggest foreign policy mistake the U. S. probably, uh, ever, ever made. Uh, and then the, the second Iraq war came along and, and I determined that it was the biggest foreign policy mistake that America ever made.[00:27:35] David: And, and, and I opposed that, that, that invasion vehemently. I didn’t mind the, the, the first one because that was, Kuwait was being invaded and Kuwait was an ally. And you You go in support of your allies and you help them drive out the invaders, but it’s important to point out that even though we had the Republican Guard of Saddam Hussein on the run at the end of that war, uh, we declined to go in and try to establish a new government in Iraq or much less take it over or establish a military presence there.[00:28:10] David: Uh, we, we, we did not do that. And[00:28:13] Cameron: Iraq was an ally too, we should point out.[00:28:16] David: Yeah, it[00:28:16] Cameron: Hussein was a US ally. You funded his, you funded his attacks on Iran for[00:28:22] David: Yeah, the, the, the, the fight between, between those two and, and, and, and between him and Iran was, was, you know, supported, supported by us, you know, absolutely, but, you know, you can’t, you, you, you, you can’t have, uh, uh, You know, one of your allies being invaded.[00:28:41] David: So[00:28:42] Cameron: Buy another one of your allies.[00:28:45] David: I don’t know if we were really truly allies with Saddam at that stage or not. That’s, that’s something I’d have to go back and look to see what the diplomatic relationship. was between them. Uh, and you have the advantage over me, uh, in that you have talked about this stuff.[00:29:01] David: I’m sure on the bullshit factor or filter, uh, before, and, and you’ve obviously done some research. Uh, you’ve got quotes lined up and so forth where, where I’m just sort of doing this as a conversation between friends who, who, who draw on, on pretty good sources of, of, of, knowledge and understanding. Uh,[00:29:24] Cameron: Okay. So let me,[00:29:25] David: I, I didn’t go to the trouble of putting it together in any old, uh, quotes from you or whatever,[00:29:31] Cameron: You’re just, you’re just like Ray then. You’ve done a bit as much prep as Ray normally does. Let me, let me, do you know who William J. Burns is?[00:29:38] David: I recognize the name, but I couldn’t tell you off the top of my head.[00:29:42] Cameron: He’s currently the director of the CIA.[00:29:44] David: Okay.[00:29:46] Cameron: Um, back in 1995, he was a political officer in the U. S. Embassy in Moscow, and he wrote a memo back to Washington, where he said that hostility to early NATO expansion is almost universally felt across the domestic political spectrum here. In 2008, He was still, had some role, um, in Russia, I think he was the ambassador to Russia at the time or something like that.[00:30:14] Cameron: He wrote a memo to, uh, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice at the time. And the title of the memo was, Nyet means Nyet. And in that memo he said, Ukrainian entry into NATO is the brightest of all red lines for the Russian elite, not just Putin. In more than two and a half years of conversations with key Russian players, I have yet to find anyone who views Ukraine in NATO as anything other than a direct challenge to Russian interests.[00:30:43] Cameron: Ukraine and Georgia’s NATO aspirations not only touch a raw nerve in Russia, they engender serious concerns about the consequences for stability in the region. Not only does Russia perceive encirclement and efforts to undermine Russia’s influence in the region, but it also fears unpredictable and uncontrolled consequences, which would seriously affect Russian security interests. Bernie Sanders gave a speech recently. Where he said, Vladimir Putin may be a liar and a demagogue, but it is hypocritical for the United States to insist that we as a nation do not accept the principle of spheres of influence. For the last 200 years, our country has operated under the Monroe Doctrine, embracing the principle that as the dominant power in the Western Hemisphere, the United States has the right, according to the United States, to intervene against any country that might threaten our alleged interests.[00:31:39] Cameron: That is US policy. And under this doctrine, the United States has undermined and overthrown at least a dozen countries throughout Latin America, Central America, and the Caribbean. As many might recall, in 1962, we came to the brink of nuclear war with the Soviet Union. Now, why was that? Why did we almost come to the brink of nuclear war with the Soviet Union?[00:31:59] Cameron: Well, we did that in response to the placement of Soviet missiles in Cuba, 90 miles from our shore. And the Kennedy administration saw that as an unacceptable threat to national security. We said it is unacceptable for a hostile country to have a significant military presence 90 miles away from our shore.[00:32:17] Cameron: Let us be clear, the Monroe Doctrine is not ancient history. As recently as 2018, Donald Trump’s Secretary of State, Rex Tillerson, called the Monroe Doctrine as relevant today as it was the day it was written. In 2019, former Trump National Security Advisor, John Bolton, declared The Monroe Doctrine is alive and well.[00:32:37] Cameron: To put it simply, even if Russia were not ruled by a corrupt oligarchic authoritarian leader like Vladimir Putin, Russia, like the United States, would still have an interest in the security policies of its neighbors. I want people to think about this. Does anyone really believe that the United States would not have something to say if For example, Mexico or Cuba or any country in Central or Latin America were to form a military alliance with a US adversary.[00:33:03] Cameron: Do you think that members of Congress would stand up and say, well, you know, Mexico is an independent country. They have the right to do anything they want. I doubt that very much. Countries should be free to make their own foreign policy choices. But making those choices wisely requires a serious consideration for the costs and benefits.[00:33:23] Cameron: The fact is that the United States and Ukraine entering into a deeper security relationship is likely to have some very serious costs for both countries. That was early in 2022 when he said that. Um, this is before the invasion and, uh, you know, it, it, you know, you say they have the right to do it and you said earlier that Putin thought the war was going to be over very quickly and it was going to be over very quickly.[00:33:49] Cameron: Very early into his invasion in 2022, uh, Zelensky was ready to meet with him and discuss terms. and come to some sort of a peace agreement until, um, Boris Johnson shuttled in and spent a few days with him and basically told him or convinced him not to sign a peace deal with Putin. And then the U. S.[00:34:18] Cameron: along with its allies, uh, in Europe. You know, I’ve spent, what, how many hundreds of billions of dollars now? 170 billion, 200 billion to keep the war going. So they could have signed a peace deal, March, April, 2022. Instead, the war’s been drawn out for 18 months. How many tens of thousands of people are dead, millions displaced, infrastructure destroyed because the US and the UK didn’t want Zelensky to sign a peace deal with Putin back in the early days?[00:34:52] Cameron: And it would have all been over and done with.[00:34:55] David: well, I, I, I, I dispute a, a fair amount of that. Let me, let me, let me go back a little bit though. You know, it may very well be that this, Mr. Burns and others have, have, have warned that a lot of the Russians don’t like the idea of, of a, uh, of, of, of, you know, Ukraine joining nato. And, and it’s fair enough that.[00:35:20] David: Ukraine may want to make, take that as part of their consideration, making the decision they, whether they decide to, to, to irritate the Russians and join NATO or appease them, maybe compromise by joining the European Union, but, but which is an economic bloc as opposed to the military bloc that NATO is, but ultimately, I Again, it’s not up to Russia to make that decision or the Russian people.[00:35:48] David: Uh, it’s up to the Ukrainian people. My recollection is that it was not exactly certain that Ukraine was ever going to actually join NATO. It was much more likely they would try to join the European Union, at least, at least in the shorter term. Uh, and, uh, you know, as far as the peace treaty, I, I, I That’s not the way I remember the early days at all.[00:36:14] David: Zelensky’s country was attacked. He rallied his forces. He was considered, you know, unexpectedly, because a lot of folks thought he was going to be kind of a lightweight president. You know, he, he didn’t have the strong political background that the, the, some leaders have. Uh, they, they thought that, that he, he, he might turn out to be kind of weak, but he turned out to be a very strong and charismatic leader.[00:36:39] David: Uh, and, and his forces, uh, pushed back the Russians away from Kiev and, and, and basically chased the Northern folks all the way back to Belarus. Uh, and, and then inspired by, by the, the obvious desire of his people not to be taken over by Russia, then other people, uh, you know, started to, to, to lend support.[00:37:03] David: Now, did Boris, uh, uh, come in and, and, and, uh, and urge him to stand fast rather than capitulate? Uh, that may very well be, I honestly don’t know, but nothing that I saw and I followed it Very carefully, every day, the news coverage on multiple networks and newspapers was intense, as you well know. Uh, and I don’t recall anything about how, you know, Zelensky was going to willingly surrender a portion of his country.[00:37:38] Cameron: that’s because it wasn’t covered in the U. S. media. You need to read outside of the U. S. media, so,[00:37:43] David: I do.[00:37:44] Cameron: by Pravda in Ukraine. So[00:37:47] David: Pravda, oh, Pravda is such a good source.[00:37:51] Cameron: David,[00:37:52] David: That’s[00:37:52] Cameron: is, David, David, this is, David, this is Ukranska Pravda, it’s an anti Russian newspaper, slow your roll. In May It reported that, and this didn’t get covered in the West, it reported possibility of talks between Zelensky and Putin came to a halt after Johnson’s visit, according to sources close to close to Zelensky, the prime minister of the United Kingdom, Boris Johnson, who appeared in the Capitol almost without warning.[00:38:22] Cameron: Brought two simple messages. The first is that Putin is a war criminal. He should be pressured, not negotiated with. The second is that even if Ukraine is ready to sign some agreements on guarantees with Putin, they, meaning the collective West, are not. Three days after Johnson left for Britain, Putin went public and said talks with Ukraine had turned into a dead end.[00:38:43] Cameron: Foreign Affairs in September, October 2022 said, According to multiple former senior U. S. officials we spoke with, in April 2022, Russian and Ukrainian negotiators appeared to have tentatively agreed on the outlines of a negotiated interim settlement. Russia would withdraw to its position on February 23rd when it controlled part of the Donbass region and all of Crimea, and in exchange, Ukraine would promise not to seek NATO membership and instead receive security guarantees from a number of countries.[00:39:15] Cameron: So, plenty of news sites in June last year covered the story that Boris was still saying he was worried that Ukraine would make a peace deal with Russia. But this story about how the, uh, negotiations got scuppered didn’t get a lot of coverage in the Western media, only in Foreign Affairs six months after the[00:39:32] David: know, and you, you, you, you always like to blame the U. S. and in this case, I guess it’s U. S. ‘s ally, Great Britain, but the reality is, so, Boris Johnson went and said, you know, we would prefer to see you in the U. S. Stand fast and stand up to Putin. Okay. That’s his opinion. Russia’s opinion is we would prefer you to capitulate and join us, you know, in our, in our socialist utopia.[00:40:03] David: Okay. That’s his opinion. Now, Zelensky and his government and, you know, and the people, they have to decide what they feel is best for them. And you could say he was pressured and he was being pressured from both sides, by the way. I mean, Putin was obviously, you know, trying to, to, to say, okay, we, this is our territory now.[00:40:25] David: You have to accept that. And, and Boris Johnson was apparently trying to say, we really think you should stand up to him because he is in fact, And this is true. In fact, a war criminal, uh, and, and, and, and for you to capitulate to him would be a disaster. And Zelensky has to make his choice. So whether he was pressured or not, the ultimate choice was Zelensky’s and his government’s to make.[00:40:54] David: And they made the choice probably helped by the fact that they had. somewhat unexpected success, you know, in, in repelling the, the, the Russian invasion. The Russian invasion was not well thought out, as it turns out, sort of strategically and tactically. Uh, they, they, they made a number of mistakes, uh, reminiscent, I suppose you could say, of of the choice of formations that Napoleon chose at the end of the Battle of Waterloo, you know, not necessarily going the way it would have been perhaps a little more effective.[00:41:28] David: And so as a result, Russians suffered heavy losses, both in the north and also in the south, and now it’s dragged on for a long time. But, you know, we’re talking in circles. The reality is that Zelensky is not going To capitulate and unless he is defeated militarily, if he’s defeated militarily, he may or may not be able to hang on to, to North, uh, Western, uh, Central and Northwestern Ukraine and Odessa, you know, maybe Putin for now, we’ll just stop where he is.[00:42:13] David: Uh, uh, or, or he, he may have to have further concessions and it’s probably not in the best interest of, of the people of Ukraine who are showing extreme bravery, uh, and determination to maintain their independence. And so again, uh, we’ll end up where we started off in my case, it is my sincere hope. that the U.[00:42:39] David: S. and its allies will continue to, to support, uh, uh, Ukraine and, and their fight against this illegal, by international law, clearly illegal and, and brutal, uh, attack. And I’m not sure we can have much more to say than, than, than what we’ve said, but[00:42:59] Cameron: Oh, I’ve got plenty more to say. You said earlier on that, you know, um, you’ve said two things that I think the quote I just read out from Foreign Affairs puts light to. Um, the first is that Putin’s early attacks weren’t successful. Well, Zelensky was ready by the sounds of it to sign a peace deal. So it was successful.[00:43:19] Cameron: His plan, his initial plan was successful. He seemed to have[00:43:24] David: he tried, he tried to take Kiev, he tried to take Kiev and he was beaten back. They thought they would, they would lose their capital. They, they attacked the capital from the South and the North. And in both cases, they were repelled. But[00:43:37] Cameron: Yeah, well, whether or not he was trying to take it or just trying to distract the armed forces of Ukraine while he was doing other stuff depends on what his strategy actually was. We, none of us know what his strategy really was. But the point is that Zelensky sounds, by the sounds of it, by both Ukrainian media and foreign affairs, uh, Zelensky was ready to come to terms very early on in the whole process.[00:44:02] Cameron: Secondly, you’ve said a number of times that Putin wanted to take all of Ukraine. According to, again, Foreign Affairs, he didn’t. He was ready to settle for back where they were at February 23, which was taking some of the Donbass region. That was his goal, a buffer zone, and also to guarantee, get guarantees from Zelensky.[00:44:23] Cameron: That Ukraine wouldn’t join NATO. And it sounds like Zelensky was ready to agree to that until the UK and the USA interfered in the process and dragged it out even longer. And in terms of the NATO stuff, let me quote NATO chief Jens Stoltenberg.[00:44:42] David: let me, let me, let me respond before I forget. You know, you see, you keep saying, well, it sounds like he was willing to cut a deal. And it sounds like Putin was willing. It sounds like a sound, but you don’t, you don’t have evidence for that. It may seem that way to some people and someone who wrote an article on may have felt that was the way it was.[00:45:00] David: It was going to come down. Uh, I have a very hard. time believing that, that, that Zelensky was prepared to almost immediately, in your words, uh, sign off on losing most of Southern Ukraine, certainly all of it along the, the coastline, so that Russia would have a land, uh, uh, bridge to, to, uh, to Crimea. To go along with the, the other bridge and, and also his sea routes.[00:45:29] David: Uh, I, I have a hard time, but you, you, you said, we don’t know really what Putin’s goal was. And it’s presumptuous of me to say he was going to take over all of Ukraine. That I don’t know that for sure. Cause I don’t know. I’ve not looked into his mind and that’s fair enough. It seemed like it was, given the military operation, but you don’t know either what Zelensky was really going to do.[00:45:56] David: You’ve read some people who say they believe that Zelensky was prepared to sign a peace deal, but they don’t know. You don’t know. And by the way, I don’t know really what was in his mind and the mind of his advisors, what ultimately he was going to do. He was getting advice from both sides. I don’t dispute that, that, that Morris Johnson gave him advice on one side and, uh, as Putin and, and, and, and other people, you know, from, from his branch, uh, Belarus and so forth, I’m sure we’re pressuring him to, to, to.[00:46:31] David: Take a different approach. The fact of the matter is, regardless of what advice he got and what pressure he had, He chose to defend his country. Russia was pushed back out of the north completely. A lot of the northeast and, and, and sort of south central part of Ukraine was retaken by Ukraine in the first counteroffensive.[00:47:00] David: In the second counteroffensive, Neither side has gained much. I mean, you know, one side gains, you know, control of both sides of, of, of, of the river at a strategic point. Another side gains a couple of villages, which are bombed out Hulks of themselves. I would say. Any, any, any military strategists would tell you right now.[00:47:22] David: You know, after some pretty good success in the first counter offensive, it’s basically a stalemate for, for the winter chances of anything other than the occasional ship sinking or, or something along that line, uh, that, that might happen, any, any real land progress is going to be extremely limited and, and until, you know, after the spring, the spring thaws, everything turns to quagmire of mud.[00:47:49] David: So that, that’s. Slows things down dramatically. And then next summer, either side can decide to, to mount some kind of a major offensive, uh, either, either, either the Russians are pushing North again, or, or, or, or the Ukrainians pushing South at East again, and, you know, time, time will tell how, how that goes.[00:48:11] David: Uh, we, we just don’t know. Uh, all, all we can do in our minds is decide. For ourselves, do we think that Ukraine should be supported in its fight to maintain its independence, or do you think that they should be encouraged to sign some kind of a treaty, uh, that Putin reports say is allegedly open to some kind of a treaty, as long as he can say he won, and that would mean keeping the territory he now currently controls.[00:48:47] David: You know, you could make an argument on both sides of that. I think the Ukrainian people at this point have made it pretty clear, and certainly Zelensky and his government, they want to keep going. They want to get back the territory, including Crimea that was taken from them. You know, a reasonable argument can be made that maybe, you know, you should quit while you still have The vast majority of your country, assuming that we can trust Putin’s treaties and we can get, you know, some kind of of guaranteed security from elsewhere, or maybe that Putin has to, you know, Putin gets territory, but maybe Putin has to concede that Ukraine can join NATO because it’s a sovereign country.[00:49:30] David: You know, there are various configurations of potential deals that could be made. Uh. But my argument is that’s up to Zelensky and his government. They have to make a decision. You and I can, can encourage them from afar and our various respective governments on all sides can encourage them more, more, more importantly, more directly.[00:49:55] David: But ultimately, it’s going to come down to. Two things. What does Zelensky ultimately want to have happen? And two, are his current allies, which is to say, primarily NATO countries, the United States being the biggest provider of funds, but Germany and Finland and others. Japan is now talking about routing some missiles through the U.[00:50:21] David: S. so they can be sent to Ukraine. You know, so there’s a fair amount of international support for Defending Ukraine’s right to, to, to, to, to self defense. Um, but again, ultimately, we’re just going to have to wait and see what Zelensky and his government decide is the appropriate thing to do. You and I have, are very good at having good ideas and, and I respect your ideas and, and, and I certainly respect your, your, your research.[00:50:51] David: Uh, but Zelensky’s not going to listen to you, and he’s not going to listen to me. So we could just have to, we’re just going to have to agree to disagree and, and wait and see ultimately what happens.[00:51:02] Cameron: Yeah, it looks like, just from the media coverage recently, it looks like the West is starting to pull back from supporting Ukraine. NBC News had a story a couple of days ago, the war in Ukraine is revitalizing Putin as Zelensky struggles with resources and morale. You know, you say the Ukrainians are wanting to defend their country, but Zelensky has had to, uh, arrest and imprison a lot of his leadership, um, that he’s accused of.[00:51:32] Cameron: He’s accused of betraying the country. He’s, you know, delayed elections. He’s basically Well, you call it[00:51:40] David: He’s having to deal with corruption and, and, and that’s something that, that, you know, we should all applaud, uh, he’s doing a lot of that in response to the requirements of joining the European Union, you know, while the European Union Requires that a government that wants to join show that it is not full of corruption.[00:52:02] David: And there were definitely corrupt people in, in, in, in that country as there are in, in, in Russia and elsewhere, there were people making, making money, you know, off of the war and, and, and this, that, and the other thing. You know, no, Hunter Biden’s got nothing to do with it, though, if you’re going to start[00:52:19] Cameron: Corruption in Ukraine?[00:52:21] David: yeah, yeah, we’re not going to talk about Hunter Biden.[00:52:24] David: But that’s, that’s, that’s just,[00:52:26] Cameron: you’re taking the Joe Biden[00:52:27] David: is, it has been totally debunked. Uh,[00:52:31] Cameron: It hasn’t been totally[00:52:32] David: a, it’s a, it’s a big nothing burger.[00:52:35] Cameron: It is not an, that’s, that’s, that’s, uh, would be, that’s a convenient way of avoiding a discussion about the facts, but we’re talking about corruption in Ukraine, and that’s very much part of it. And that gets back to, like, this whole thing, you tend to start your storyline with, you know, early 22 or Putin’s invasion of Crimea.[00:52:54] Cameron: As I said earlier on, from the From a Russian perspective, and many international observers agree, the, the coups in Ukraine in 2004 and 2014 were either engineered by the United States or at least vigorously supported by the United States. Let me quote Ian Traynor. The Guardian’s European editor, writing in the Guardian in 2004, this is after the Orange Revolution, uh, he says, but while the gains of the orange bedecked chestnut revolution in Ukraine’s the campaign is an American creation.[00:53:33] Cameron: A sophisticated and brilliantly conceived exercise in Western branding and mass marketing that in four countries in four years has been used to try to salvage rigged elections and topple unsavory regimes. Funded and organized by the US government. Deploying U. S. consultancies, pollsters, diplomats, the two big American parties, and U.[00:53:54] Cameron: S. non government organizations. The campaign was first used in Europe in Belgrade in 2000 to beat Slobodan Milosevic at the ballot box. Richard Miles, the U. S. ambassador in Belgrade, played a key role. And by last year, as U. S. ambassador in Tbilisi, he repeated the trick in Georgia. Coaching Mikhail Shashkevili in how to bring down Edward Shevnazi.[00:54:18] Cameron: Ten months after the success in Belgrade, the US ambassador in Minsk, Michael Kozak, a veteran of similar operations in Central America, notably in Nicaragua, organized a near identical campaign to try to defeat the Belarus hard man Alexander Lukashenko. That one failed. There will be no Kostunica in Belarus, the Belarus president declared, referring to the victory in Belgrade.[00:54:41] Cameron: But experience gained in Serbia, Georgia and Belarus has been invaluable in plotting to beat the regime of Leonid Kuchma in Kiev. The operation, engineering democracy through the ballot box and civil disobedience, is now so slick that the methods have matured into a template for winning other people’s elections.[00:55:02] David: Well, yeah, it’s one person’s opinion, and you have a long history of, of blame America. There’s no question about it, uh, you know, every, every bad thing that happens, you, you do your best to trace it back to being, you know, because of a influence or a plot or, or, or, or, or whatever by the United States of America.[00:55:24] David: Uh, you’ve, you’ve, you’ve been that way as long as I’ve known you, uh, and, and, you know, it’s, it’s okay. You’re, you’re, you’re entitled to that, but I, I reject. The idea that America was behind and a major influencer, it probably did support because the two people that were thrown out, particularly the last one that was tossed out of Ukraine, were notably corrupt and unpopular with the people.[00:55:59] David: Ukraine is, is, is better off with, with, with Zelensky. And, and by the way, where, where, where did the last guy go? He, he, he, he hightailed it to Russia because he, in fact, was a Russian puppet. You want to talk about, you know, America’s influence. What about Russia’s influence? They, they had their own puppet in, in, in there, Putin’s puppet.[00:56:19] David: And, and he got, he got overthrown and, and, and, and went, went back to Russia, you know? So, you know, again, I, I, I don’t see. and we’re running low on time, uh, I, I don’t see that we’re[00:56:33] Cameron: Right on track, as far as I’m concerned.[00:56:36] David: Well, I don’t[00:56:37] Cameron: you know about, do you know about the Victoria Newland phone call in 2014 after the Maidon Revolution?[00:56:46] David: Well, you’re reading from your screen, but no, I, I don’t recall that offhand.[00:56:50] Cameron: Do you know who Victoria Newland is?[00:56:53] David: Well, why don’t you tell us all?[00:56:56] Cameron: People who listen to this show know who she is. She is, I’m looking you up her current role. She is currently, uh, Undersecretary of State. for political affairs since 2021. But in 2014, she was the assistant secretary of state for European and Eurasian affairs at the Department of State. February 4th, 2014, sort of in the middle of the Maidan revolution, she telephoned Jeffrey Payette.[00:57:27] Cameron: The US ambassador to Ukraine. Um, and, uh, they had a telephone conversation, um, basically where they were planning on who was going to run the Ukrainian government after the revolution was over. It got bugged. Somebody bugged their telephone call and released it a few days later. Probably the Russians. Um, but it’s very.[00:57:50] Cameron: Clear in the conversation. This is a famous conversation too, where she said, fuck the eu. Uh, the EU won’t be happy about it, but fuck the eu. Uh, but she, she and Jeffrey Piat were basically talking amongst themselves who was going to be the leader of the Ukrainian government, and I think it was Yook. They decided former European central banker, and he then became the next leader of Ukraine.[00:58:16] Cameron: So. We have that evidence that she and Jeffrey Piatt determined who was going to be, they were talking about getting Biden on the phone, making the call, sorting it all out, that they, in the middle of the Maidan protests, they were figuring out who was going to lead the country afterwards. So we have, we have like lots of people around the world, there’s lots of scholars who study this region who believe that the U.[00:58:40] Cameron: S. was involved in overthrowing the country and certainly Putin believes that, many Russians believe that the U. S. overthrew. The democratically elected governments of Ukraine, not once, but twice in, in a decade. Have you watched, um, Oliver Stone’s four hour interview with Vladimir Putin that he did a couple of years ago? I highly recommend it. I’ve recommended it on this show many times just to see, like, it’s four hours of conversations with Putin that he did. I think sort of 2018, 2019, something like that. Um. You know, just to see Putin’s perspective coming out of his own mouth. He is a, he is not a dummy. He is a[00:59:24] David: he’s not. I agree.[00:59:26] Cameron: very intelligent, very softly spoken.[00:59:30] Cameron: He understands history. He understands global geopolitical[00:59:34] David: Oh, and by the way, he also kills his political adversaries or throws them into gulags and Siberia and so on. So, you know, he may be intelligent and soft spoken, but he’s also a murderous dictator who’s probably guilty of multiple war crimes. So while I agree, listen to him. And I have listened to interviews with him.[00:59:55] David: I’ve not listened to that particular interview, but I have listened. to, to interviews with him on, on various networks. And I do find it interesting to, to see, you know, and hear, you know, what his perspective is, given that, of course, he’s putting on a show to some extent, I mean, as would anyone being interviewed, any, any leader of any country is putting on a show when they’re being interviewed, you know, by the news media.[01:00:19] David: And so you have to always take at least a little grain of salt with. with how they come across. They’re going to, they’re doing their best to put their best face forward. And that’s understandable. And again, that’s universal. It isn’t just a Putin thing. Uh, but, uh, you know, again, it’s interesting to know where he’s coming from and it’s, it’s instructive.[01:00:41] David: And it can provide information that allow you to judge what your response should or should not be and how you should or should not approach relationship with Putin and, and with his Russia, that doesn’t mean that Again, I get back to the fundamental thing. I don’t care what you say about the Solomon Islands or Belarus or Georgia or any of these other things.[01:01:13] David: Those may be interesting comparisons, and you may or may not agree with what happened in those situations. But we’re talking about Ukraine being invaded by Russia. And what is the world going to do or not going to do about it? We can say what we think they should or should not do, and on that we differ.[01:01:40] David: I think one thing we agree on is you and I are just going to have to wait and see because there’s a lot of complexities out there as to what happens next in terms of a potential peace treaty. Potential stalemate, potential gains or losses by one side or the other in the, in next summer’s campaign, assuming the things continue, you know, the, the, the effect of more or the same, or, or, or a big cutback in, in, in aid.[01:02:10] David: Military and financial aid from essentially NATO countries and a few other countries around the world. These are all important factors that are going to determine the ultimate fate of the situation there. And maybe if peace in that part of the world, uh, ultimately, you know, that, that remains to be seen.[01:02:32] David: Uh, but, uh, I think the whole point of this conversation was for us to sort of expose our points of view and let people hear your point of view and my point of view. I don’t think either one of us really expects we’re going Going to convince the other that, oh, I don’t think Cameron Raleigh is going to say, you know, geez, Markham, you’re, you’re right.[01:02:54] David: I’ve been wrong all along about this, you know, and I don’t think you expect me to say, you know, Cameron, you’re right. The U. S. is just an abysmal, horrible beast of, it’s always trying to do this, that, and the other thing. And, and, and, and Russia is basically just, Peace loving and trying to preserve the peace by invading it’s next door neighbor.[01:03:13] David: We’re not, we’re not going to convince each other. So there’s no real point in trying.[01:03:19] Cameron: let’s,[01:03:19] David: what we’re trying to do is show our listeners, you know, here, here are our two different points of view.[01:03:26] Cameron: It’s, it’s, it’s, you know, very lazy, uh, uh, like debate approach always to accuse me of blaming America and hating America and all that kind of stuff. I’ve said this to you for years. My, I don’t hate America. I, you know, my wife’s American, my kid’s half American, a lot of my friends and colleagues are Americans.[01:03:49] Cameron: I love a lot of things about America. All the films and the music and the books and everything that I’ve consumed over my lifetime is largely American. I’m just a geopolitical realist. I believe that America, like every country, does things that it thinks is, um, supporting, promoting its economic interests at the end of the day.[01:04:12] Cameron: I think Russia does the same thing. I think, uh, the, the, the monarchs of Europe during Napoleon’s time were doing the same thing. I think Napoleon was doing that. I think that’s basically what leaders of countries generally try and do. And not just political leaders. I’m talking about the, the, the elite, the economic power within the country.[01:04:31] Cameron: They’re trying to support their rational interests and they, they will often do that at the cost of lives of their own people when they send their own people off to war and often other people. And I think the Ukraine thing, the basic story of what’s happening in Ukraine to me is, the essential story is that since the end of the cold war in the early nineties, when the world became unipolar, In terms of political and military power for a couple of decades, the U.[01:05:09] Cameron: S. saw it as an opportunity, a once in a lifetime, a once in a century opportunity to take as much as it could in terms of, uh, forming or solidifying its economic block, or its trading block around the world. Part of that was, uh, you know, uh, uh, Taking over, or no, let’s say replacing regimes in countries that were run by governments that weren’t quite friendly to the United States trading bloc, with governments that were friendly to it.[01:05:46] Cameron: And that was the colour revolutions in the early 2000s, um, you know, Clinton started expanding NATO in 96 after the US and the UK promised Gorbachev that they wouldn’t do it. But, uh, Russia has spent 30 years Trying to, uh, ask NATO and the U. S. predominantly not to expand NATO right up to their border, not to encircle them, and the U.[01:06:12] Cameron: S. has basically told Russia to go fuck itself for[01:06:16] David: Well, and by the way, I’m going to, I’m going to interrupt you here. I want to reply to that because you’ve used that term several times. Encircling. They don’t want to be encircled. Take a look at the map. This is not encircling them. This is just Encircling them. Adding someone to an area where they already, you know, have the bulk of NATO nations against them.[01:06:39] David: They’ve created a little bit of encircling on their own because of their actions leading to Finland and most likely Sweden in the North, you know, but they’re still looking at basically their Western front. They’ve, they’ve got China, they’ve got, they’ve got Asia, they’ve got all sorts of that are nothing to do with any of this on the other two thirds of of their border.[01:07:03] David: This is not encirclement. It is simply adding bulk, if you will, to the border that they already have with NATO.[01:07:12] Cameron: well I’m just quoting the[01:07:13] David: is[01:07:13] Cameron: of the, I’m quoting the director of the CIA, David, he, he used the word encirclement,[01:07:18] David: And[01:07:19] Cameron: so take it up, take it up with the director of the CIA,[01:07:22] David: director of the CIA is quoting what he says is Putin’s concern. Putin likes to call it[01:07:29] Cameron: not Putin, all of the Russian elite. He said, not just Putin,[01:07:35] David: all the Russian elite use that term as well, but it’s still not encirclement.[01:07:40] David: It isn’t.[01:07:41] Cameron: David, see, this is the problem. It doesn’t matter whether or not you think it’s encirclement. It doesn’t matter whether or not you think NATO is defensive[01:07:49] David: Well, the map shows that it’s not encirclement.[01:07:52] Cameron: It, what matters in these situations is what the Russians feel is threatening them.[01:07:58] Cameron: I mean, again, you, you always, um, you know, you always try to get me to say, which side do I support? Do I, you know, do, do I justify, am I justifying this? Am I supporting that? I don’t, I don’t feel. Like, it’s my job to justify or support anything. What I’m trying to do on this show is understand the levers.[01:08:19] Cameron: Why are countries doing what they’re doing? It’s not my job to justify. Americans tend to have this very red team, blue team mentality. You gotta pick a side. I don’t have that[01:08:31] David: That’s probably true.[01:08:33] Cameron: Yeah, I don’t have that view, you know, I just try and understand why things happen. Why did Napoleon invade Russia in 1812?[01:08:43] Cameron: I don’t need to take a side, although of course I take Napoleon’s side, that goes without question, but I don’t need to. But, you know, it’s very evident in this case that Russia, since Gorbachev, has been trying to prevent NATO expansion through diplomatic means. For 30 years, they tried to prevent NATO expansion diplomatically and it just failed over and over again.[01:09:10] Cameron: Jen Stoltenberg, I was trying to quote before the head of NATO, said this recently. The background to the Ukraine invasion was that President Putin declared in the autumn of 2021 and actually sent a draft treaty that they wanted NATO to sign to promise no more NATO enlargement. That was what he sent us, and was a precondition to not invade Ukraine.[01:09:31] Cameron: Of course, we didn’t sign that. The opposite happened. He wanted us to sign that promise, never to enlarge NATO. He wanted us to remove our military infrastructure and all allies that have joined NATO since 1997, meaning half of NATO. All the Central and Eastern Europe, we should remove NATO from that part of our alliance, introducing some kind of B or second class membership.[01:09:53] Cameron: We rejected that, so we went to war to prevent NATO, more NATO, close to his borders. He has got the exact opposite.[01:10:01] David: Of course.[01:10:03] Cameron: So, hold on,[01:10:04] David: that. We don’t let him dictate to us.[01:10:07] Cameron: so, the point is, okay, so that’s fine, but this is what happens, if you keep putting enemy bases closer and closer to a country that feels more and more threatened, what do you think’s gonna happen?[01:10:22] Cameron: Eventually, they’re going to have to do something about it. He can’t just sit there, decade after decade after decade. with diplomacy failing over and over and over and over again when he’s[01:10:36] David: about signing a[01:10:38] Cameron: he’s trying to,[01:10:39] David: with NATO, a non aggression pact with NATO? What Putin[01:10:42] Cameron: they tried that, they tried that. Gorbachev and Yeltsin and Putin all tried to create new alliances that would bring Russia into NATO in a new kind of alliance. It got rejected over and again. NATO refused to look at entering Russia into a new kind of alliance. Obviously, NATO was set up as an anti Soviet alliance in the first place, so they were trying to create new alliances.[01:11:11] Cameron: Gorbachev was suggesting that in the early 90s. They’ve been trying that for 30 years too. And they, they, my point is, what do you expect to happen when diplomacy fails? Decade after decade after decade, eventually, this is what guys like John Mearsheimer have been saying for decades. It’s what Chomsky’s been saying for decades.[01:11:32] Cameron: If the, it’s what. Bloody, um, uh, George Kennan said, you know, George Kennan, the George Kennan, when Clinton, he was still alive. He was in his early nineties when Clinton started enlarging NATO. George Kennan, the creator of America’s Cold War containment strategy. He himself in, uh, 1996, let me get the quote, I’ve got it in my notes here.[01:12:04] Cameron: Um, hold on,[01:12:11] Cameron: why does it, ah, I hate it when this doesn’t come up. Uh, yeah,[01:12:15] David: know the feeling, my friend, trust me. Well, while you’re looking for it, let[01:12:19] Cameron: from him. Yeah, sorry,[01:12:21] David: while you’re looking, let me, let me say something, you know, you, several times you said when Clinton started expanding NATO, you know, Clinton doesn’t have the power to expand NATO. Individual countries have to decide they want to become members of NATO.[01:12:37] David: They have to jump through a number of hoops in order to show that, that they are deserving of it. And then every single country of NATO has to vote approval. That’s why Sweden is not. member of NATO yet. There are still two holdouts, although that appears to be to be coming to to an end now. But every single NATO country has to agree after NATO’s governing body says that, okay, they’ve, they’ve met the qualifications to, to join us, the economic, military, or whatever qualifications.[01:13:10] David: So to say that, you know, you make a sound like Clinton is moving pieces of Chess on a, you know, chess pieces on a, on a chessboard. You know, he may have been influencing it and maybe encouraging it. There’s no question about it. I don’t deny, and by the way, I don’t generally say that you hate America. I generally say you blame America, you know, for, for, for virtually everything.[01:13:31] David: I’ve had, I’ve said that once or twice in private conversations, but I didn’t say it tonight. You’ll, you’ll, you’ll notice I was very careful not to say that because I tend to believe that you don’t really hate America. You just, you hate what we do politically and foreign policy and stuff, you know, to[01:13:46] Cameron: I don’t hate it either. I’m just, I just, I try to understand it. I’m a realist. Here’s what George Kennan said in the mid nineties. He said, of course this is about NATO expansion. He said, of course there’s gonna be a bad reaction from Russia, and then the NATO expanders will say that. We always told you that’s how the Russians are, but this is just wrong.[01:14:07] Cameron: And this is exactly the point. He was exactly right. The NATO keeps expanding closer and closer to Russia. Eventually Russia reacts to that, and then you go, oh, look at Russia. They’re invading Ukraine. Yeah. Well, they told you for 30 years, stop it, cut it out, or we’re going to have to do something. And you knew that, you understood that, the director of the CIA has known that for decades.[01:14:34] Cameron: You did it anyway, what you knew was gonna happen, happened, and then you go, Oh my god, look at Russia, they invaded Ukraine. It just, it’s like, it’s just, uh, ridiculous to me that everyone acts surprised when it’s almost like you pushed them into this over decades. You knew this would happen, in fact, I have to think that you wanted it to happen.[01:14:56] Cameron: So you could use it as justification for more military industrial spending, you know, increasing the sizes of the military industrial complex and, and use it to try and, for regime change in Russia. Why else would you keep doing[01:15:09] David: well,[01:15:10] Cameron: want it to happen?[01:15:11] David: now I find you insulting. Honestly, no one wants the kind of destruction that you’re, that you see in Ukraine right now with the, the, the, yeah, real, well, maybe the Russians do, and maybe Putin does, because he thinks[01:15:24] Cameron: Then why did, then why did, why did you guys tell Zelensky, if this happened, don’t sign a peace deal, go to war, if you didn’t want to see this destruction happen?[01:15:34] David: Well, you know, first of all, we, we did not necessarily know that, that, that Putin would deliberately target civilians and civilian infrastructure. But secondly, again, you,[01:15:48] Cameron: a war is a war, man.[01:15:49] David: keep, yeah, you keep, you keep saying that you don’t want to justify things. You just want to understand them. But your entire discussion on this, this.[01:16:01] David: Now, uh, two hours, uh, has been just, yes, it has. Since we first started that we did, we had our conversation about computers for a few minutes before, but you know, we’ve been talking for,[01:16:15] Cameron: of recorded conversation.[01:16:17] David: yeah, well, that’s, that’s, that’s a lot. Uh,[01:16:20] Cameron: an hour a topic.[01:16:22] David: it, it’s, yeah. And we’re like, we don’t have time to do that. Uh, at any rate. Much of what you’ve done tonight is in fact try to justify[01:16:32] Cameron: No, I’m talking about[01:16:33] David: We should have known better.[01:16:36] Cameron: I’m talking about what Putin’s justification is for it. It’s not my justification, it’s his justification. It’s Russia’s justification. And what America’s justification was for So, helping in large part create the situation in the first place.[01:16:54] David: Well,[01:16:55] Cameron: You can’t deny that the US[01:16:57] David: you, if you say, if you think If you say that, that supporting the, the survival of a democratically elected government of a country from an illegal and immoral invasion with no, in fact, direct pretext, the, I, I, they may not have liked it. The, the, the expansion of NATO, but they had no right to invade any country just because they were afraid it might join NATO.[01:17:31] David: NATO has not shown any inclination to invade Russia. It’s a defensive organization. It wasn’t even clear that,[01:17:40] Cameron: about the bombing of Yugoslavia, the bombing of Libya, the bombing of the Bosnian Serb army? NATO’s not defensive. It’s led at least three aggressive actions in the last 20 30 years.[01:17:52] David: well, we don’t have time to get into those. They were much more complex than simply NATO invading or whatever.[01:17:59] Cameron: But they did.[01:18:00] David: great deal of complexity. We need to stick to what we’re talking about and and and[01:18:06] Cameron: this, this, this positioning of NATO as a purely defensive organization just doesn’t hold water. They’re, they’re, they’ve been an aggressive actor at least three times in the last, you know,[01:18:17] David: Yes, but, but not in terms of Russia. Russia has no reason to believe. Russia is a lot different than Yugoslavia[01:18:26] Cameron: you can’t say that. Russia, Russia does believe, the director of the CIA told Condoleezza Rice 15 years ago that Russia believed it. You can’t say they have no reason to believe when they obviously do believe it. So they obviously do have reason to believe it.[01:18:45] David: let’s, and, and I, I’m going to have to go now, because this is pretty quickly here, because I have, I don’t have three hours, like you apparently do. Uh, we, we, we don’t have, we have three topics. We, I’m not going to do an hour on topic. We’ll do the other topics another time. I’ll be glad to come back and continue this.[01:19:02] David: But, but the fact that the fact.[01:19:04] Cameron: a bladder thing? Is it a, is it a bladder thing?[01:19:06] David: no, it’s, it’s, it’s maybe getting hungry thing and, and, you know, and, you know, it’s, it’s seven o’clock in the evening here now. And, and, and, and I have a wife in the other room who might like to have dinner with me or whatever, but[01:19:20] Cameron: me an email saying she was looking[01:19:21] David: yeah, I know she, we have peace and quiet for Aetna.[01:19:24] David: I know I saw, I saw that, you know, we, we joke about that. She, she told me, oh good, take your time, David. Peace and quiet for Aetna, you know. That’s that’s one of her mantras. You know, I go on a trip, you know, so we’re all good. So peace and quiet for Edna, you know. Uh, but, uh, you know, you, you say you don’t want to, you know, blame or support or, or whatever, but, but you, I’ll just, I’ll close my, my comments by saying.[01:19:55] David: Even if Russia thought they were being encircled, even if Russia didn’t really want NATO to expand and had said so, the idea that they were going to get inside a treaty where NATO gives up or makes sub partners the eastern portion of NATO is ludicrous. And if Sweden or Finland ever decided they wanted to join, or if Ukraine wanted to join, and they met the qualifications to do that, Russia may not like it, may feel uncomfortable, and maybe the West should do their best to, to mollify Russia and say, listen, you know, we want you to understand, you know, but.[01:20:42] David: You know, Russia’s been backing out of, of, of various treaties on nuclear weapons, for example, and so forth. So, you know, that’s, that’s a little problematic. Uh, but the bottom line is, we should do our best to make President Putin understand and feel that this is not meant to be a threat. As long as he doesn’t invade us, we’re not going to invade him.[01:21:11] David: And he’s got plenty of military muscle. You know, to, to make sure that, you know, the U. S. and NATO don’t do something foolish like trying to invade, you know, Russia or Belarus as his good buddy and so on. But, after doing that, the bottom line is Russia had no right by international law to invade Ukraine.[01:21:39] David: It’s a violation of international law. And I would like to think that you believe that countries should follow international law. And I’m not going to say that, that Putin’s the only country and Russia’s the only country that’s ever violated international law. There are other examples. Of course, you, you can,[01:21:58] Cameron: including the United States on a regular basis.[01:22:01] David: Well, I would say it’s possible the United States in some situations, I’d have to really go through and look at the nature of international law because, you know, what you call invasions of America tend to be more nuanced.[01:22:15] David: There’s nothing nuanced about Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. It’s a straight send your armies and other military across the border and try to take it over. Anyway, I have enjoyed this thoroughly. We have, as expected, disagreed. I hope you’re not too disappointed that I don’t want to spend three hours doing this, but, you know, my energy level is not the same as yours, perhaps, and I have, you know, my hunger pains are not the same as yours, and so on.[01:22:48] David: But let’s do it again, by all means. Uh, and then next time, maybe your cohort in crime, uh, Ray Harris will, will be able to join us. And, and it won’t just be, you know, uh, you beating up on me, it’ll be the two of you beating up on me probably, but, you know, uh, but regardless, I.[01:23:06] Cameron: he’ll just sit there and chew on his uh, weed gummies and get high and[01:23:10] David: Oh,[01:23:11] Cameron: That’s what he normally does.[01:23:13] David: okay. But no, I, I, I enjoy talking this kind of stuff and I enjoy talking through with you, uh, probably much more than if you actually agreed with me on everything. It’d be nice if you occasionally said that I had a good point to make, you know, I,[01:23:30] Cameron: you ever make one, I’ll,[01:23:31] David: That wouldn’t have been too bad, you know, but, but, uh, other than, yeah, other than that, uh, I, I’ve, I’ve enjoyed hearing your points of view and, and I hope you’ve enjoyed hearing my points of view, and much more importantly, I hope our, I hope our listeners have found this to be a.[01:23:46] David: Not only entertaining, uh, but also informative, you know, the two sides with very opposing points of view, making, making their argument for, for their point of view and, and then let, let our listeners decide how, how they come down on the issue. But I appreciate the invitation to do this, my friend, and, you know, you will always be a very dear friend in spite of our disagreements on some political stuff, and, uh, that’s not ever going to change, and I look forward to doing it again.[01:24:17] Cameron: thank you. It was delightful. Good fun. Thank you, David. Have a good, enjoy your meal. Give my best to Edna. The post BS 121 – J. David Markham / Ukraine appeared first on The BS Filter.

Hey there, fellow Bullshit Fighter! This page contains some member-only content. If you're already a registered member, LOGIN HERE. If you aren't registered, well you can fix that right now! Find out about our registration options here. On this episode, we’re fact checking the claims that Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, and earlier annexation of Crimea, are all about getting their hands on Ukraine’s gas and oil reserves. We also talk about how to use ChatGPT to de-bias a news article, “The Blob”, Chris Hedges’ analysis of “the pimps of war“, and Alessandro Gagaridis’ analysis of Prigozhin’s Mutiny.   The post BS 119 – Ukraine’s Energy Reserves appeared first on The BS Filter.

Hey there, fellow Bullshit Fighter! This page contains some member-only content. If you're already a registered member, LOGIN HERE. If you aren't registered, well you can fix that right now! Find out about our registration options here. In this two hour episode, we’re looking at the current war in Sudan – who and what is behind it, and the history of the region, going back to the good ol’ days of British colonialism, US sanctions, Clinton’s Wag The Dog bombing of a medicine factory, Obama’s invention of South Sudan, Russia’s Wagner Group extracting Sudanese gold to pay for the war in Ukraine, and more. The post BS 116 – The War in Sudan appeared first on The BS Filter.