(Prologue, just added: It’s true that Carlson’s "fate mirrors that of too many other journalists who have dared to question the dominant foreign policy/national security narrative--especially on Russia.” But that’s where the comparison ends! Carlson is no Sy Hersh, reporting evidence-based “truth.” He’s a China War provocateur, doing all he could to incite U.S. war on China, as can be seen here:
Where this began: Right, we can’t let Ukraine get in the way of the escalation of the already existing state of war with China, which Trump had escalated from a mere “pivot to Asia,” while building "Forward Operating Bases” (FOB) encircling China. And the same with Russia, as with Camp Trump in Poland, and the escalation of US CIA/JSOC operations in Ukraine by Trump in support of Ukrainian fascist attacks upon ethnic Russians. With any war on China necessarily including "War on Russia,” no matter how disingenuously presented, as No. 1, it is U.S. doctrine to see the two indivisible in war, and therefore, each as the “Enemy"; No. 2, as we’re seeing in rhetoric, so long as one provides any “materiel assistance” to the other, they are deemed the “enemy,: and No. 3, they each know if/when the US takes one of them down, the other is next, as revealed in too many DOD statements/documents.
So while one can appreciate “dissent” to the US War on Russia, one shouldn’t be so “stupid” in the Latinate sense, or in The American Conservative sense of ordinary ’stupidity,” and/or, ideological stupidity, to deny that that “dissent,” only goes to the “need” this rival group of warmongers see in attacking China first, and to not dissipate our war machinery in a “premature” war against Russia. And leaving that as a “mopping up operation,” after China is destroyed (they hope, and plan for).
Here’s how “war begins,” not with tanks crossing a border, but in creating the “hostile feelings” Clausewitz understood as the first stage of war. And in that, Tucker Carlson has been the “spearhead” of U.S. war against China, just as TAC was in its “deception campaign” that Trump was ‘"ending the endless war,” by claiming to redeploy some military members out of the Mideast, and by classic “Propaganda by omission,” omitting to say it was because Trump and USMC Gen. Berger were completing the encirclement of China, and increasing the lethality of the USMC for what can only be seen as preparation for Offensive War against China. As I’ve seen first hand a couple times while in the Army for War against Iraq. But here’s Tucker, with his essential war incitement (held to be a war crime at Nuremberg):
Here is Trump “fighting the Blob,” so often repeated by TAC, a lie which Carlson applauded, and propagated:
If it wasn’t so tragic, it would be comical, like Laurel and Hardy (showing my age), of the gullibility/stupidity of the Trumpite/Carlson Right, which even worse, gave Biden a head start for his Goldwaterite inspired, from his days on the SSCI under Goldwater, “Hyper-Militarism.” Which he only had to continue Trump’s military policies, so vigorously applauded by Carlson, and designed as provocation of Russia, going back to the Cheney/Bush administration, and multiple US NATO Commanders.
I’ve given up hope, with the exponentially increased collective IQ (Insanity Quotient) of the American people, but always led by the Republicans/Conservatives, which to whatever amount to war spending the Democrats will call for, the Republicans/Conservatives will alway ”outbid” them by at least $50 billion. Look it up! And spending money is indicative of “goals.”
P.S. No new wars under Trump, as Carlson would lie? What is the Low-Intensity, clandestine war against Iran, Trump and Netanyahu immediately embarked upon when Trump took office? Chopped liver? And Israel’s continuing war against the Palestinians, which Trump fully joined as a “co-belligerent?” The same?
On May 4, 2023, at 2:30 PM, Ted Carpenter via Salon <salon@listserve.com> wrote:
Excellent analysis. Carlson's fate mirrors that of too many other journalists who have dared to question the dominant foreign policy/national security narrative--especially on Russia.
On Thursday, May 4, 2023 at 01:03:02 PM CDT, Bob Randolph via Salon < salon@listserve.com> wrote:
Ed, I have the greatest respect for the constitutional acumen of author of your referenced Substack post below, but he has “jumped the shark” with his unfounded KKK racial slur. There is no basis in fact for the predicate for the KKK allegation, i.e., that the referenced Antifa “creep” was Black. In fact, those who watch the news or have access to reporters like Andy Ngo know that the masked Antifa Black Shirts are overwhelmingly White. There is no reason, either, to have sympathy for hoodlums who launched nightly firebombing attacks over the course of 120 days against the federal courthouse in Portland, Oregon, along with countless arson attacks on local Portland businesses, violent physical attacks on Portland law enforcement officers and violent, anti-First Amendment attacks on speakers with whom they had political and ideological disagreements. These people are, indeed, the “creeps” who have made major cities on the West Coast - San Francisco, Portland, and Seattle - unlivable. What is so interesting about Carlson’s interior monologue is his admitted remorse for having succumbed to the mob mentality. “I should remember that somewhere somebody probably loves this kid, and would be crushed if he was killed. If I don’t care about those things, if I reduce people to their politics, how am I better than he is?” Regrettably, Tucker Carlson was “deplatformed”, not because of racial issues, but because he provided a national voice for the _expression_ of views on the issues important to the Committee for the Republic and most of the participants in our Salon—Empire, War, Peace and adherence to Constitutional principles enunciated by our Founders. With Tucker gone, who will carry the torch on the following issues so important to the continuation of Constitutional government in our country? - Ukraine War. Tucker was virtually the only voice on a national platform who dared to voice criticism of the Ukraine War. Unlike Jamie Raskin, he didn’t turn-tail and run when he had his knuckles rapped by Nancy Pelosi and the media for daring to suggest that we needed a negotiated peace in Ukraine. Unlike virtually every other media personality, Carlson was unable to discern any legitimate national interest that the US might have had in the Donbass and Crimea that would justify spending billions of dollars to prop up a corrupt regime in Kyiv and effect regime change in the Kremlin. He provided a platform for anti-war critics, near and dear to the Salon, like John Mearsheimer, Glenn Greenwald, Tulsi Gabbard and Doug McGregor. With Tucker gone, they will be silenced.
- Russia Hoax. Tucker publicized the role of Michael Morrell, a former CIA director, in inflating the Russia Hoax, at the behest of the Clinton Campaign/DNC, in 2016, and then organizing, at the behest of Tony Blinken, the infamous “50 Fibbers” who used their intelligence community “creds” to effectively squelch the Hunter Biden laptop story as a Russian disinformation operation on the eve of the 2020 election. Morrell either knew, or should have known, that the laptop in the custody of the FBI was both legitimate in fact and a legitimate item of political news that would have been damaging to the Biden campaign. He did, he said, because he wanted to win.
- Disinformation Industrial Complex. Tucker publicized the work of Elon Musk and the Twitter Files team (Matt Taibbi, Michael Shellenberger) in unearthing from the bowels of pre-Musk Twitter the outlines of collusion between Big Tech, government (FBI, Homeland Security/CISA) and legacy media (WAPO/NYT) to form a coordinating committee and hold a “table top exercise” at the Aspen Institute to suppress the expected arrival of the Hunter Biden laptop story as a “hack and dump” operation. Matt Taibbi’s latest Racket posting deals with this matter in detail. However, with Tucker’s departure it is likely that this bombshell will be like a tree falling in the forest. https://www.racket.news/p/who-helped-overturn-the-pentagon?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email
Tucker may had had his faults, but his banishment creates a huge and apparently unfillable void in our national discourse and informed understanding of national and international events. So, I beg to differ. Bruce Fein has an uncompromising Constitutional view of our national opera and this one is true to form regarding Tucker Carlson. I don't agree with all of Bruce's positions but his intellectual honesty is powerful and piercing. If you don't already, you should follow him on the substack.
|