Interview 961 – The Mind Renewed: ISIS and the Strategy of Tension Corbett • 10/26/2014

Interview 961 – The Mind Renewed: ISIS and the Strategy of Tension
Corbett • 10/26/2014

James Corbett, investigative journalist and host of The Corbett Report, joins us once again, this time for a detailed interview on the subject of ISIS.

How are we to understand ISIS? (IS? ISIL? AQI? JTJ? …?) Is it, as often presented, essentially a spontaneous grouping of violent jihadists with aspirations for a global caliphate? Or is it, in reality, a multi-faceted phenomenon, arising out of – and manipulated by – various religious, geopolitical and corporate interests, each with its own vested interests in promoting ongoing destabilisation of the Middle East?

Drawing upon his years of research into geopolitics, and sharing with us from an open-source investigation into ISIS at The Corbett Report, James analyses this bewildering corner of the Grand Chess Board and identifies likely Players to help us interpret the Moves as the deadly Game continues.

I am listening to the first link...

Quite comprehensive. I like the interviewer:

Geopolitics of the war against Syria and against the Daesh

In this new and original analysis, Thierry Meyssan exposes the geopolitical reasons for the failure of the war against Syria and the real objectives of the so-called war against Daesh. This is particularly important for understanding current international relations and the crystallization of conflict in the Levant (Iraq, Syria and Lebanon).
Voltaire Network | Damascus (Syria) | 26 October 2014

How many TRILLIONS did the Pentagon "lose"?

How many TRILLIONS did the Pentagon "lose"? - Questions For Corbett

Published on Oct 27, 2014


In this edition of "Questions For Corbett" James fields your queries on the importance of drills, the Pentagon's missing trillions, Prescott Bush and the Union Banking Corporation, government-run human experiments and much more.

How America Recruited, Protected and Pay Nazis to This Day

Published on Oct 27, 2014

Abby Martin takes a look at two recent investigative reports from the Associated Press and New York Times, uncovering the recruitment of Nazi spies for the CIA and the US’ policy of giving social security payments to former Nazi leadership.

The BFP Roundtable Takes on the Islamic Terror Hype

The BFP Roundtable Takes on the Islamic Terror Hype

Published on Oct 31, 2014

On this edition of the BFP Roundtable the panel gets into a lively discussion on the marketing of the "ISIS" brand of "Islamic Terror." But if the terror boogeyman is the product, then who's the customer and who are they buying from? Join Peter, Sibel, Guillermo and James for an uncensored conversation on terror, black ops, boogeymen and blowback.

Odd man out

Increasingly, I find Peter Collins to be the odd person out in these discussions. He seems simply unable to grasp the points of his colleagues (even as he apparently thinks he understands them well enough to argue against them) that the results being witnessed in the Middle East are 'mission accomplished' for US foreign policy, rather than 'unintended consequences.' When he attempts to cite an example of actual 'blowback,' he refers to the de-Baathification of Iraq and the ensuing political instability and sectarian violence--which instead is one of the clearest examples of the exact opposite, i.e., of very much intended results that are portrayed as unintended 'blowback.' Then, for support, he cites an author like Chalmers Johnson--one of the most limited, establishment-friendly 'critics' of US imperialism around. Even the language Collins uses when discussing the actions of the US government/military/intelligence is revealing: 'we,' 'us,' 'our'. This, to me, is indicative of someone still clinging to notions of representative institutions that aim to act in the interests of the public at large, with which they are supposedly bound through some shared 'nationhood.' Even as Sibel hammers home the point that this is really all about the interests of the top one-half of one-per-cent!

I appreciate his articulateness and his good humor. But I wonder if, one day, one of these roundtable discussions will turn into something resembling an 'intervention,' wherein his colleagues who (in my opinion) see more deeply into the current situation will take turns gently, but persistently, drawing him away from false notions about what's intended and what's not, and what actually serves and does not serve imperial interests.

A similiar refrain of late

is the notion of overreacting to 9/11. To make this argument you have to ignore obvious information that contradicts such a conclusion. For example the 28 JI redacted pages. Or Bush trying to limit investigation into 9/11. Or Thin Thread being rejected even though it worked. There are countless examples that demonstrate that the overreaction theory is not credible. So why does anyone get away with pushing this sort of nonsense?