Spot on! These are the very conversations we should be having with our fellow citizens rather than the raw politics of one-upmanship. Thank you and blessings for all you do to help illuminate our path.
Thank you for this interesting conversation. The part about education I found heartening. I also supported Biden's decision to get out of Afghanistan, and his decision to avoid a direct shooting conflict with Russia.
However, it seems to me the Ukraine narrative presented here omitted some critically important facts. These omissions match the omissions in our official Establishment narrative, as given by both the media and political Establishments. And these omissions are the same type of omissions used to deceive the public about the wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, and Vietnam. And in all these cases the omitted evidence shows that the US oligarchs provoked the conflict, willingly, and with ulterior motives. For good measure, the Establishment narratives also include some complete fictions about the other side. This deception by the mainstream media occurs because controlling share of the media companies are owned by a small group of war profiteering oligarchs.
Several years ago foreign affairs expert Professor John Mearsheimer explained why the Ukraine conflict was the fault of Washington-NATO.
Here's a more recent discussion of the conflict by four knowledgeable people hosted by "Consortium News", which fills in much of this omitted information.
Consortium News is an independent news outlet that features old-fashioned reporting, with actual digging into the facts rather than simply parroting Pentagon talking points, and interviewing independent experts on the subject. They have provided the most thorugh coverage of the persecution of Julian Assange as "our" Establishment has attacked our freedom of speech. And they have been doing deep, real coverage of the Ukraine conflict.
I'm not going to go into details here, but these two videos provide a solid education in the fundamentals of this conflict. They enable one to see beyond "our" war profiteering Establishment's narrative and think intelligently about our situation.
The gist of the story which independent objective experts agree upon is that the US oligarchs have been deceptive, treacherous, and dishonorable in the Ukraine situation, setting up Ukraine to be a staging ground for a "regime change" attack on Russia. They further agree that Russia has been reasonable and patient. When the American oligarchs' attack on Russia became imminent, Russia took action to (1) stop the 8 years of shelling ethnic Russians in eastern Ukraine (Donbass) by the Nazi portion of the Ukraine military, (2) take out the military installations set in place by the US oligarchs for their attack on Russia, and (3) surround key cities, all while (4) proceeding slowly to minimize civilian casualties and damage to civilian infrastructure. (In contrast, the US oligarchs' approach in Iraq was massive death and destruction.)
As a sitting member of Congress, if Ro Khanna were to bring up any of these facts the US oligarchy would target him with a vicious smear campaign, produce a primary opponent with unlimited campaign money, destroy him in their media (including lies), and he would probably be gone from Congress.
Pcost script: Here's one of our best independent reporters, Glenn Greenwald, discussing the breaking story of US bioweapons labs in Ukraine.
"Victoria Nuland: Ukraine Has 'Biological Research Facilities,' Worried Russia May Seize Them"
I appreciate his moral clarity re Putin's invasion of Ukraine. He also spoke about our military's superior ability to protect, and that any Nato country wouldn't have to worry about not being protected. I'm assuming we would protect Nato countries if they were invaded then, even in the event of another insane nuclear threat coming from Putin. Or would we sanction all the way to Kingdom Come?
"My Kingdom for a horse" someone said. Now it's no horse... it's for lack of a piece of paper. So do we protect because of and based on written agreements or out of moral clarity about defending against a brutal invasion?
I know and know and totally get the nuclear threat. Anything at all could be a pretext for issuing that threat. No I don't want nuclear winter, and no I'm not ignorant about what that means. I hope we are doing more to protect them from this slaughter then we are being led to believe. And if so, obviously we shouldn't be privy to that info. The world is being held hostage by a nuclear terrorist - I wonder if it's giving anybody else any ideas.
Something feels off about the response. Not suggesting that "free the skys" is the answer.
Maddening to be watching a ritual sacrifice that feels so wrong.
P.S.
(Yes there have been so many other slaughters in this century. I googled genocides in the 20th and 21st centuries. The list is staggering with a multicultural cast of victims and perpetrators. I don't even know if they have a list that extends well into the B.C. era. Plenty of whatabouts to go around and around and around .. for those interested in that response tactic.)
This is your second time interviewing Ro Khanna ... I love him ... and for me ... he's a bit to smooth and a bit to quick to defend the status quo ... (the party line) ... and I loved the way you challenged him ... We need a Leader in the White House that can play poker ... (knows when to bet ... when to bluff ... and when to quit) ... not a follower and not a head counter ... You seem to be getting better and better at what you're doing ... perhaps it's the food you're eating ... whatever it is ... please keep doing it ... and it seems like every time I see you ... you seem to be getting younger ... so you must be doing something right ... Wish you the Best ... Great interview!
Excellent dialogue! This is how we solve the problems of the world! Honest dialogue.
Spot on! These are the very conversations we should be having with our fellow citizens rather than the raw politics of one-upmanship. Thank you and blessings for all you do to help illuminate our path.
Thank you for this interesting conversation. The part about education I found heartening. I also supported Biden's decision to get out of Afghanistan, and his decision to avoid a direct shooting conflict with Russia.
However, it seems to me the Ukraine narrative presented here omitted some critically important facts. These omissions match the omissions in our official Establishment narrative, as given by both the media and political Establishments. And these omissions are the same type of omissions used to deceive the public about the wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, and Vietnam. And in all these cases the omitted evidence shows that the US oligarchs provoked the conflict, willingly, and with ulterior motives. For good measure, the Establishment narratives also include some complete fictions about the other side. This deception by the mainstream media occurs because controlling share of the media companies are owned by a small group of war profiteering oligarchs.
Several years ago foreign affairs expert Professor John Mearsheimer explained why the Ukraine conflict was the fault of Washington-NATO.
"Why is Ukraine the West's Fault?"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JrMiSQAGOS4
Here's a more recent discussion of the conflict by four knowledgeable people hosted by "Consortium News", which fills in much of this omitted information.
"CN Live! — ‘Russia Hits Back"
https://consortiumnews.com/2022/02/25/watch-cn-live-russia-hits-back/
Consortium News is an independent news outlet that features old-fashioned reporting, with actual digging into the facts rather than simply parroting Pentagon talking points, and interviewing independent experts on the subject. They have provided the most thorugh coverage of the persecution of Julian Assange as "our" Establishment has attacked our freedom of speech. And they have been doing deep, real coverage of the Ukraine conflict.
I'm not going to go into details here, but these two videos provide a solid education in the fundamentals of this conflict. They enable one to see beyond "our" war profiteering Establishment's narrative and think intelligently about our situation.
The gist of the story which independent objective experts agree upon is that the US oligarchs have been deceptive, treacherous, and dishonorable in the Ukraine situation, setting up Ukraine to be a staging ground for a "regime change" attack on Russia. They further agree that Russia has been reasonable and patient. When the American oligarchs' attack on Russia became imminent, Russia took action to (1) stop the 8 years of shelling ethnic Russians in eastern Ukraine (Donbass) by the Nazi portion of the Ukraine military, (2) take out the military installations set in place by the US oligarchs for their attack on Russia, and (3) surround key cities, all while (4) proceeding slowly to minimize civilian casualties and damage to civilian infrastructure. (In contrast, the US oligarchs' approach in Iraq was massive death and destruction.)
As a sitting member of Congress, if Ro Khanna were to bring up any of these facts the US oligarchy would target him with a vicious smear campaign, produce a primary opponent with unlimited campaign money, destroy him in their media (including lies), and he would probably be gone from Congress.
Pcost script: Here's one of our best independent reporters, Glenn Greenwald, discussing the breaking story of US bioweapons labs in Ukraine.
"Victoria Nuland: Ukraine Has 'Biological Research Facilities,' Worried Russia May Seize Them"
https://greenwald.substack.com/p/victoria-nuland-ukraine-has-biological?s=r
I appreciate his moral clarity re Putin's invasion of Ukraine. He also spoke about our military's superior ability to protect, and that any Nato country wouldn't have to worry about not being protected. I'm assuming we would protect Nato countries if they were invaded then, even in the event of another insane nuclear threat coming from Putin. Or would we sanction all the way to Kingdom Come?
"My Kingdom for a horse" someone said. Now it's no horse... it's for lack of a piece of paper. So do we protect because of and based on written agreements or out of moral clarity about defending against a brutal invasion?
I know and know and totally get the nuclear threat. Anything at all could be a pretext for issuing that threat. No I don't want nuclear winter, and no I'm not ignorant about what that means. I hope we are doing more to protect them from this slaughter then we are being led to believe. And if so, obviously we shouldn't be privy to that info. The world is being held hostage by a nuclear terrorist - I wonder if it's giving anybody else any ideas.
Something feels off about the response. Not suggesting that "free the skys" is the answer.
Maddening to be watching a ritual sacrifice that feels so wrong.
P.S.
(Yes there have been so many other slaughters in this century. I googled genocides in the 20th and 21st centuries. The list is staggering with a multicultural cast of victims and perpetrators. I don't even know if they have a list that extends well into the B.C. era. Plenty of whatabouts to go around and around and around .. for those interested in that response tactic.)
This is your second time interviewing Ro Khanna ... I love him ... and for me ... he's a bit to smooth and a bit to quick to defend the status quo ... (the party line) ... and I loved the way you challenged him ... We need a Leader in the White House that can play poker ... (knows when to bet ... when to bluff ... and when to quit) ... not a follower and not a head counter ... You seem to be getting better and better at what you're doing ... perhaps it's the food you're eating ... whatever it is ... please keep doing it ... and it seems like every time I see you ... you seem to be getting younger ... so you must be doing something right ... Wish you the Best ... Great interview!
I have been an admirer - since all the way back to - touched by an angel
Very interesting! I hope for changes! Thank you!⭐️
Terrific. Thankyou.