Tucker Carlson interviews & ideologies

[luc]

Loose lips at high levels are not tolerated.

By that logic, everybody who has ever had a successful career anywhere who has spoken out about something is either dead, or controlled opposition?

I don't see the world as so black and white. Each situation is entirely unique and depends on all kinds of factors. There are no "natural laws" in such matters.

As for Malone, my intuition is that he is completely sincere. Whether he plays a negative role at times because of his own blind spots, emotions etc. is another matter, of course. My sense is that he has been redpilled late, but then in turbo-mode, and has been relentlessly attacked both by the PTB and by parts of the anti-Covid crowd and its drama queens and grifters, which can take its toll and lead to some erratic behavior, but other than that, the guy has done a great job navigating all that from what I can see.

Plus, no psyop guy would ever promote Political Ponerology, which he did a few times on his substack ;)

 

[Zzartemis]

Sorry, but I won't bother watching a video where the description alone is so utterly illogical.

So his case is that Tucker Carlson claimed that he applied to the CIA but was rejected, which proves that he is a psyop, because that's what all good psyops do: claim they applied to the CIA, riiight? But we can't believe him anyway, because you see, if you are not CIA, you just can't make a career in the media, riiight?

The way it works in reality is that you can't make a successful career in the media if you have and state opinions that are outside the approved spectrum. Which Tucker didn't, because, again, he was a neocon jerk. Simple.

(OK, I watched a minute or two of the video now, this is really, really bad.)

Soooo, the following is nonsense also? (Because the video just goes into more detail)
SNIP:
"
Rockefeller Foundation launches a 12-year program designed to promote research leading to “increased understanding of one culture by members of another.” Universities in U.S., Canada, Great Britain, France, Turkey, Germany, India, and Japan receive grants.

The CIA creates its first major propaganda outlet, Radio Free Europe. Over the next several decades, its broadcasts are so blatantly false that for a time it is considered illegal to publish transcripts of them in the U.S.

Operation MOCKINGBIRD – The CIA begins recruiting American news organizations and journalists to become spies and disseminators of propaganda. Frank Wisner, Allan Dulles, Richard Helms and Philip Graham head the effort. Graham is publisher of The Washington Post, which becomes a major CIA player. Eventually, the CIA’s media assets will include ABC, NBC, CBS, Time, Newsweek, Associated Press, United Press International, Reuters, Hearst Newspapers, Scripps-Howard, Copley News Service and more. By the CIA’s own admission, at least 25 organizations and 400 journalists will become CIA assets."

SOURCE:

1949

Chinese Communist Party leader Mao Zedong and his supporters gain power in China. George Adamski, grill cook in a roadside hamburger stand, wrote, in his spare time, a document which he called An I…

cassiopaea.org

 

[benkostka]

Sorry, but I won't bother watching a video where the description alone is so utterly illogical.

So his case is that Tucker Carlson claimed that he applied to the CIA but was rejected, which proves that he is a psyop, because that's what all good psyops do: claim they applied to the CIA, riiight? But we can't believe him anyway, because you see, if you are not CIA, you just can't make a career in the media, riiight?

The way it works in reality is that you can't make a successful career in the media if you have and state opinions that are outside the approved spectrum. Which Tucker didn't, because, again, he was a neocon jerk. Simple.

(OK, I watched a minute or two of the video now, this is really, really bad.)

I watched it, the whole way through and took notes. It’s essentially the workings of a low level midwit who uses easily obtained facts from places like Wikipedia to piece together some sort of insane theory. About the first 18 minutes doesn’t even mention Tucker Carlson except for easy facts like where he went to school and what media organizations he worked for. Then there’s a convoluted mess about Jhoos/Rockefellers/Rothchilds/the UN/CIA ect…. Where the author draws supposed connections that can’t be substantiated.

That’s followed by two or three clips of Tucker taken completely out of context.

Videos like these do a disservice to real reporters like Gary Webb or say Tom O’Neill who get close to the gray zone of reporting where you worry about people going to steal real evidence you’ve found and can understand that there is some sort of man behind the curtain but you can’t quite get all the facts because at that level people destroy evidence ect…. This guy is advertising for Clown World Dating.

The video doesn’t deserve to be taken seriously by anyone and rightly should be mocked. It’s absolutely horrible.

 

[Zzartemis]

Videos like these do a disservice to real reporters like Gary Webb or say Tom O’Neill who get close to the gray zone of reporting where you worry about people going to steal real evidence you’ve found and can understand that there is some sort of man behind the curtain but you can’t quite get all the facts because at that level people destroy evidence ect…. T

You simply amaze me, ben...

https://twitter.com/x/status/1451435126643048451

FROM THE ARTICLE I POSTED:

SNIP:
The CIA funded its dirty war against Nicaragua by helping the Contras to flood America’s Black urban centers with crack cocaine. That is the argument put forward by investigative journalist Gary Webb in his “dark alliance” series for The San Jose Mercury News and later in his book of the same name. The articles were widely republished and caused a storm of indignation across the country, with massive public anger being directed towards the agency.

Fortunately, the CIA could count on the loyalty of many friendly journalists, among them Tucker Carlson, who by 1996 was working for neocon publication The Weekly Standard. In an article titled “A Disgraceful Newspaper Exposé and Its Fans,” Carlson launched a wall-to-wall defense of the organization he had recently applied to join.

Framing it all as a ludicrous accusation, he claimed that there was “no evidence” for Webb’s claims, and presented the CIA as a noble institution under unfair scrutiny and constant attack from forces inside the U.S. that wanted to bring it down. Far from engaging in the drug trade, he claimed that there is “ample evidence” that CIA officials had “moved to remove drug traffickers” from the “Nicaraguan resistance” – an interesting choice of words to describe the Contras.

He also wrote off the Black journalists showing interest in Webb’s findings as conspiracy theorists, stating that “few major media outlets have validated the series by reporting on its charges in any detail,” as if to say that this proved its erroneousness. In his book, “Politicians, Partisans, and Parasites: My Adventures in Cable News,” he would later describe the idea as “ridiculous.”

The CIA was very thankful to Carlson for helping muddy the waters and shooting the messenger. A declassified CIA document cites his Weekly Standard article, among others, as aiding them in “managing a nightmare.”

Webb was subject to a huge campaign to sully his name and hound him out of journalism. He faced intense scrutiny and criticism from the national security state. In 2004, he was found in his home in California with two bullets in his head. His death was officially ruled a suicide. Others believe the messenger was killed.

 

[lilies]

Seriously, criticize Tucker all you want for specific things he says or what he gets wrong, but how is it that people can't recognize courage and integrity when they see it?

He did very good! Several people were saying - opinions voiced on every platform - that when Trump won the 2020 election and the Deep State reversed his numbers to look like he lost, Tucker - an aristocrat himself - should have started the Civil War / Revolution for MAGA, as Noblesse oblige bringing together civilians in the entire territory of the US under his banner to fight for Trump. As we see, he had quite enough to do, as he admits in his interview.

Just as Laura said, I think, most older members on this forum now had the excellent opportunity to create a Work Picture / Photograph of Tucker and do a Work Observation / Analysis on him.

I did that and all things considered, who has awareness & how much, regards awareness-distribution on Earth, Tucker did pretty well. His performance is good, especially for an Obyvatel Aristocrat! I particularly liked his humility regards women and how he admitted his many shortcomings - repeatedly - during this interview and I may risk the statement: those admissions are a proof of a great man!

 

[benkostka]

You simply amaze me, ben...

https://twitter.com/x/status/1451435126643048451

FROM THE ARTICLE I POSTED:

SNIP:
The CIA funded its dirty war against Nicaragua by helping the Contras to flood America’s Black urban centers with crack cocaine. That is the argument put forward by investigative journalist Gary Webb in his “dark alliance” series for The San Jose Mercury News and later in his book of the same name. The articles were widely republished and caused a storm of indignation across the country, with massive public anger being directed towards the agency.

Fortunately, the CIA could count on the loyalty of many friendly journalists, among them Tucker Carlson, who by 1996 was working for neocon publication The Weekly Standard. In an article titled “A Disgraceful Newspaper Exposé and Its Fans,” Carlson launched a wall-to-wall defense of the organization he had recently applied to join.

Framing it all as a ludicrous accusation, he claimed that there was “no evidence” for Webb’s claims, and presented the CIA as a noble institution under unfair scrutiny and constant attack from forces inside the U.S. that wanted to bring it down. Far from engaging in the drug trade, he claimed that there is “ample evidence” that CIA officials had “moved to remove drug traffickers” from the “Nicaraguan resistance” – an interesting choice of words to describe the Contras.

He also wrote off the Black journalists showing interest in Webb’s findings as conspiracy theorists, stating that “few major media outlets have validated the series by reporting on its charges in any detail,” as if to say that this proved its erroneousness. In his book, “Politicians, Partisans, and Parasites: My Adventures in Cable News,” he would later describe the idea as “ridiculous.”

The CIA was very thankful to Carlson for helping muddy the waters and shooting the messenger. A declassified CIA document cites his Weekly Standard article, among others, as aiding them in “managing a nightmare.”

Webb was subject to a huge campaign to sully his name and hound him out of journalism. He faced intense scrutiny and criticism from the national security state. In 2004, he was found in his home in California with two bullets in his head. His death was officially ruled a suicide. Others believe the messenger was killed.

So your argument is that the CIA directed Tucker Carlson to write that article? Tucker as a journalist in 1996 certainly doesn’t have the same experience as he does now in 2023 and perhaps now would be more skeptical of things if he was to contact the CIA PR office for comment. That sort of discernment happens with experience. Say for instance confronting Bill Barr about his blatant lying and learning from the interaction. Hence him admitting in the beginning video that he used to be “part of the problem” by being in legacy media.

I’m familiar with Gary Webb’s story, that’s why I used his name along with Tom O’Neill who also encountered similar resistance trying to report his story on Charles Manson. At some point certain forces get activated to stop certain people, some are unfortunately suicided with absurb explanations about how they shot themselves twice. Others, perhaps like Tucker get warned that their texts are hacked by the NSA. It takes a brain to try and sort these things out….. but it’s easy to make some monolithic conspiracy video like you posted as “proof”.

 

[Adobe]

I have special interest in these threads that, IMO shed light on our forum’s close association and health. Two basic types 1) interloper comes in and becomes an impetuous toddler. And 2) a subject is brought to the table that causes disagreement. (a good thing IMO)

The issue of respect for a fellow forum member, and the tendency to fall into ad hominem, or straw manning, or besmirching one's ability to think etc.

A short hyperbolic example would be: it’s a blue balloon on a string, no it’s a red balloon on a chain. Hey! you are an idiot? And I can believe you would even say such a thing! Is not the best way to get the ball rolling on determining what is in front of us.

How important is that “one” issue, and how important is the relationship with the other forum member as well as the many more who are listening along?

I’m reminded of JP explaining how to argue: do you really want to beat/win and humiliate your wife in an argument, even if you are right? Then sleep with her and trust her to have your back in the future.

I am not asking anyone to change. Carry on. Do it your way. I’m just saying there is more going on here than what’s on the table. And it interests me to observe how this forum treats one another.

 

[Zzartemis]

So your argument is that the CIA directed Tucker Carlson to write that article?

Don't put words in my mouth. I posted an article....And don't call me disingenuous, that's an insult.

Go ahead and stick with Teflon Tucker...I said that I don't believe who he pretends to be. I won't post the lewd and degrading comments he made on the radio about a teenage beauty contestant and other comments pertaining to women and races of people. Of which he said he will not appologize for...

I posted his history and all I got back was...'It can't be true.'

 

[gdpetti]

Saw the last interview... typical I thought, nothing special, maybe ok for beginners. As for Tucker, yes grew up with the usual old school pedigree the old Agency employed quite often, not dissimilar to ole Wolf Blitzer of CNN re Mossad's group of 'reporters'. He is on Fox afterall. Rupert's network of controlled opposition. Anyone not approved is/was disposed of... and this goes back many years...many of them went to RT until RT America was shutdown.
In this recent interview with those two guys, I didn't hear anything new... re UFOs seem to support the current 'release' as well. I must be missing something here... similar re earlier in this thread on that Jewish gay guy Ben Shapiro... all fit the same profile... remember that interview Joe Rogan did with him? Sort of outed himself didn't he? Yet still around as if nothing happened.... because they are members of the club... Usually they are well supported... like that older 'alt' media host... can't remember his name... both parents were CIA... he covers the same events as Tucker.... with more outlandish style... Tucker seems more user friendly. I don't see what others are finding to be so impressive here. If he was a real threat, he would've been dealt with... yet he's still here with so much support... same with Trump and all the others...some might mean well, but no one with a clue of what's really going on get to this level. It's just so obvious isn't it? But yes, you can still get a little glimpse of the truth here and there... all propaganda is based on this kernel of truth... that's the usual hook, right? Most of this interview was chit-chat IMO.... all the UFO stuff was nothing special... again, this might be a nice introduction for beginners, but for anyone that's been around a little bit, this is a big nothingburger... again.. .IMO.

 

[BHelmet]

Wow!! Sparks flying!! I’m going to attempt to comment without getting involved. (Ja ja!! Good luck with that, Buddy!!”) Then I’m going to attempt a neutral vector from there.

It seems to me that all ZzArtemis said was “I am jaded; I agree with what he is saying but I don’t trust him.” Ok. Fine.

Then we get the OMG! Response with the “pattern recognition run amok” knee jerk reaction (Which is itself “pattern recognition run amok!”). It seemed to me a lot of emotion was invested in this response. Coulda just been “hm interesting, I think you are off base and should consider that your cynicism is unjustified and unproductive”. (Not sure “disingenuous” was the right word as I think ZzArtemis was being sincere and honest)

So there are a couple dynamics at play here, OSIT. There is an aspect of “how could you possibly disagree with what I perceive to be the objective consensus which I am aligned with and am therefore ‘right’ and so, justified in trashing your point of view”. As well as, “what is the point in doubting or being cynical about someone who is saying positive things that bring a truer reality to light to a mass of people that is helping to bring about a much needed awakening?”

So is there an even bigger picture here? If so, I think It revolves around the concept and definitions of controlled opposition. How does that work? Sure I would like to believe there is a groundswell of awakening in the USA and that the PTB are incompetent and ultimately ham-fisted and guys like Tucker are leading the way to a broader understanding of reality. But…What happened on election night in 2020? When push came to shove did Tucker cave in and will he cave in the next time he is “asked”? or is this a case of “NOW, I see the light! Wont be fooled again!” IDK.

We all have sins. Faith says to give Tucker the benefit of the doubt at this point. Faith says redemption is possible and does happen. Faith says don’t judge what hatches from the egg by the nest it was sitting in. I know my thoughts and circumstances are very different from my parents and upbringing. Here’s to hoping Tucker is a true hero. But hero-worship has its pitfalls and downfalls.

So the acid test would be to ask just how could Tucker handing out red pills actually in any way be an intentional ploy of the deep state? In what way could Malone actually be a tool of the deep state? How could revelations of corruption and malfeasance actually be intentional by the self same individuals committing the corruption?

Maybe not at all. It makes no sense on one level. But is it totally level-headed to dismiss it entirely out of hand with absolute certainty?

Why Trust Tucker? But why then Trust the articles that are Trashing Tucker? And I think that is one outcome that benefits the deep state: doubt on all sides about everything.( That and rigid polarization. )

Tucker has clearly won a lot of trust in certain circles. Has he really influenced the left? Maybe. If so, that’s good. He is also preaching to the choir. Will he slip in a homily based on bad theology? It remains to be seen. So far so good.

Indeed there is a LOT going on here.

 

[Glenn]

You know, when you talk about controlled opposition, I think back to my early days, of waking up. and I am sure I came across many that you could describe as such. But I think that what was important was I had an inner drive to seek out the truth, and I read just about everything for years and years. Most of which I would consider garbage now.

So let's just assume that Tucker Carlson, is controlled opposition. If he does enough, or says enough to get the attention of someone who is truly seeking, does it really matter what you call him?

Let's say that you are deathly ill, and are administered medicine, that is not perfect, far from it, but it heals you. Would you throw that medicine away?

That video was a real hit piece IMO. That was meant to sing to the choir. At least to my eyes....

 

[Zzartemis]

In what way could Malone actually be a tool of the deep state? How could revelations of corruption and malfeasance actually be intentional by the self same individuals committing the corruption?

I haven't checked the cv thread in ages but inadvertently hit this page/post at the top:

Coronavirus Pandemic: Apocalypse Now! Or exaggerated scare story?

I don't know what R. Malone is smoking but I just saw him post a link on his TG channel to this nonsense: https://rwmalonemd.substack.com/p/whos-on-first-at-the-who It's a transcript of a meeting with a group called 'Committee on the Present Danger China'. :scared:;-D The basic argument appears...

cassiopaea.org

Didn't see anyone rushing in there and speak to the poster like I was spoken to.....So, is it dislike for me? No, I didn't post on Malone but I did on another community board....I wonder if I posted the same as above what response would I get?

And for the record, I've been suspicious of Malone since last year.

I just read today where someone said they are afraid of posting....Not the 1st time said...Yeah, I feel ya.

Thank you all who agreed or respectfully disagreed, and intervened.

 

[BHelmet]

Didn't see anyone rushing in there and speak to the poster like I was spoken to.....So, is it dislike for me? No, I didn't post on Malone but I did on another community board....I wonder if I posted the same as above what response would I get?
........
I just read today where someone said they are afraid of posting....Not the 1st time said...Yeah, I feel ya.

Thank you all who agreed or respectfully disagreed, and intervened.

I would not take any of this personally, if I was you. I don't think anyone said or thought or even felt, "Oh, it is zzartemis! Attack!!" We are all being tested, from many different angles.

 

[Zzartemis]

I would not take any of this personally, if I was you. I don't think anyone said or thought or even felt, "Oh, it is zzartemis! Attack!!" We are all being tested, from many different angles.

Thanks BH....Don't worry, I won't go sulking off like a little girl.

 

[Alejo]

When it comes to Tucker, I think I said a few pages back that I really disliked him, specially in his CNN time, I found him obnoxious and mindless, he was then aligned with the neocon efforts and I do think he defended them from an emotional point of view mixed in with a high intellect that made him sound arrogant.

But today, he has become voice of reason, he has grown quite a bit. Why? couldn't tell you, it could be his conscience or the fact that he sees all the nonsense and is compelled to call it out as he sees it, much like we do here.

Does it come from a place, or the same place that it comes in us? with the same ideals? hardly, I think it comes from someone who is deeply enamored of the greatness of the USA, and sees the ineptitude and perhaps even designs to destroy it. In that sense, even if he has a subjective point of view, his reaction is human, and understandable.

Regarding his ties with the CIA or the Neocons or whatever else, well maybe.. but what do they prove? that he used to see the world differently? sure... does that steal any merit from what he's doing today? I don't think so, it's actually a lot more impressive for him to be where he is today, being where he used to be than if he had always been in agreement with my point of view.

In that sense, if there were sooo many skeletons in his closet, then they would've already used them to get rid of him, much like with Trump, they can't control him because they have nothing on him.. and they hacked his phone. I don't have to like Tucker, or his past, I listen to what he says today and that has incredible value.

Which brings me to, I don't think anyone is deifying him or calling him pure, which would be a mistake. He is simply someone who gets it right a lot of the time lately and is doing something no one else, or maybe Elon Musk to a degree, with that reach is doing.. and that is valuable! and it deserves support.

Which brings me to, does agreeing or seeing the value in what he is saying mean that he will NEVER disappoint us? I don't think so, Jordan Peterson, for all his greatness has some pretty glaring blindspots, I am sure Carlson has them to and they will eventually become apparent. But more importantly, being jaded about the political workings of any nation is a great way to defend oneself, but that defense is truly against disappointment, which fair enough, but it's also a great way to avoid seeing the good things when they do show up.

Agreeing with what someone says today, doesn't mean one has to completely adopt them as one's north, or like them. People are full of shades and some of them are brilliant and some are rotten, we may be in a position where we can say that something someone did or said is good and makes sense, but still disagree with that person on a lot more things.

Having said all that, Tucker Carlson is today a person who is doing something incredibly brave, and deserves commendation and respect and support.

On another note, Zzartemis, and others and this applies to all of us really, sometimes we choose to remain jaded forever, because it is more comfortable to stay there, protected from the world.. and sure, the world is scary and dangerous, but the trouble with that is the way we go about it, sometimes we do not react to a real danger that confirms our fears... Sometimes we look for "proof" that validates our jadedness (very different)... and if you look hard enough at ANYONE, you will eventually find something wrong with EVERYONE. Which is a great way to remain "safe", I say this respectfully, but it may be something to meditate upon, as it could go beyond this topic.

Think of it this way, if you really tried, you could make the case that anyone in this forum who lives in the US and pays taxes, is directly supporting the US war machine... which would be technically true, but does that really define them? Tucker being who he was.. which is undeniable and never denied, does that taint everything he is saying today? I think not.