Boiling Frogs Post’s Eric Draitser in Response to Webster Tarpley…

It is sad that, despite all the news about Boston and Central Asia, the continued collapse of the US economy, the further mobilization of the police state apparatus, and so much more, that I have to write something in response to Webster Tarpley.  However, that is precisely the situation I find myself in, having to respond to spurious charges and baseless demonization by someone who should spend more time in self-examination and less time attacking people out of pitiful jealousy.  Let me first explain the connection I have had with Tarpley and the likely reasons for this attack…

I first met Tarpley back in 2011 at an event here in New York City in commemoration of the 1oth anniversary of 9-11.  Though I had been following his work for a few years, this was the first time I had ever met him.  He was impressed by my knowledge of a number of critical issues beyond simply 9-11 and false flag terror, so much so, that I spent the rest of the event and the evening with him and another colleague of mine, having dinner and discussing political issues.  At the time, this was a thrill for me as I had read Tarpley’s books, in particular his book 9-11 Synthetic Terror.  For me, I felt like I was forming a relationship with someone who I had only known through appearances on Infowars and his own radio show.  However, due to circumstances, our working relationship took on an additional dimension within weeks as, no more than a few days after meeting Tarpley, Zuccotti Park was occupied by a bunch of kids, and the phenomenon of Occupy began in earnest.

The historical significance of this moment was immediately apparent to me, and I rushed down to the park within days of the occupation.  It was my first-hand knowledge with, and experience in, Occupy that prompted Tarpley to put me on his radio show – my first actual radio appearance.  I was on his program a number of times in the weeks to come, providing detailed accounts of Occupy, the sabotage of the movement, and the continued efforts to push it in a positive direction (I realize now the fundamental flaw in such a strategy).  These weekly appearances on Tarpley’s program, along with my teach-ins at Occupy and working relationship with other independent media, encouraged me to consider beginning my own show and website.  Hence, StopImperialism.com and the Stop Imperialism podcast were born.  It would be dishonest to say that my connection with Tarpley wasn’t at least part of my motivation.

As weeks became months, and I began to develop my own unique style and voice, Stop Imperialism took shape.  It allowed me to explore issues that I felt no one was sufficiently covering, not the least of which being the true alternative media.  In so doing, I began to realize just how much the likes of Tarpley refused to address, including issues of the environment, big agribusiness, pharmaceutical companies, and countless other issues (more on that later). I felt myself drifting further and further from the quasi-Larouchian polemics of Tarpley and toward a more nuanced understanding of critical issues.  However, it was in attempting to work with Tarpley that his true colors were revealed and, simultaneously, my connection to him was permanently and inexorably severed.

The kernel of the idea to develop an anti-austerity organization came from Dan A. (a mutual friend of mine and Webster’s) however, for a number of reasons, Dan could not actually be part of building such an organization.  So, the responsibility passed on to me, and I began to run with it.  I thought (and still do think) it was a great idea and one whose time had come.  In the midst of a farcical presidential election, with both parties preparing to ravage the sick, the elderly, minorities, and countless others who depend on vital social programs, I thought an anti-austerity coalition would be essential to building an effective resistance movement in the US.  Frankly, it seems less of an idea and more of a mandate, as if history had left me no choice.  Naturally, because the idea had originated in a conversation that included Webster, he was the first person I approached about this idea.

I had only about 6 weeks between having the idea to put on an anti-austerity event in NYC and the event itself.  In that time, I managed to secure a number of notable speakers/guests, secure the space in which to hold the event, and organize the efforts of a handful of others to accomplish all the small tasks that had to be done in order to pull off the event.  In the meantime, Webster was busy preparing his plans for what I thought would be an anti-austerity movement but which turned out to be little more than a Webster Tarpley movement – one that sought not to work with others and build a coalition (as I had planned), but that instead promoted little more than Tarpley’s political and economic program.  In other words, a movement that I had never regarded as “mine”, was now most certainly becoming “his”.  Though the event went off without a hitch and was undoubtedly a success, I immediately withdrew membership in the organization I had created.  There were a number of reasons for this, the most important being that I had no interest in being the grand marshal of the Tarpley parade.  A few people asked me why I didn’t try to just reclaim control of the group.  The only answer I can give is that, when it comes to people like Tarpley, the less adversarial contact, the better.  He, and people like him, thrive on that sort of thing and, frankly speaking, I was too busy trying to build my own site and show to tie myself to that sinking ship.

So, I have not had any direct contact with Tarpley since the event last fall, nor do I plan on it in the near future.  Now, I would here like to say that I do not write this article because I want to engage in a tit-for-tat about the issue with Tarpley or anyone else.  Nor do I think Sibel or James needs me to defend them as they can fight their own battles.  I write this to explain what is undoubtedly one of the main motivating factors for Tarpley to attack Boiling Frogs – it’s his way of “getting back at me” for abandoning my own organization which, in his egomaniacal mind, is an abandonment of him.  The writers that BFP has “bought off” is a reference to me…pity is all I feel when I read such nonsense.

Now, since I’ve gone this far, I might as well lay it all out there.  There are a number of topics about which I learned a great deal from Tarpley’s analysis over the years: the nature of false flag terror and how it’s carried out, speculation, derivatives and their impact on the global economy, as well as a handful of other key issues.  However, his analysis is always partial at best as he refuses to address any issues pertaining to the environment which he regards as “anti-progress” Malthusianism.  He never discusses the criminality of Monsanto and big Agribusiness or the pharmaceutical industry for fear of being labeled “anti-science”.  He devotes his undying love and affection for nuclear power and, in the wake of Fukushima, his only analysis was that the world needs more nuclear power.  These are just a few of the countless examples that could be provided to illustrate his severely limited understanding of the real world.

Of course, no critical analysis of Tarpley would be complete without a very real questioning of his past.  Tarpley spent more than 30 years in the movement of Lyndon Larouche.  Anyone who knows anything about that organization should know that they are a proto-fascist, political personality cult that did little more than intimidate, attack, and otherwise subvert organizations and movements on the “Left” since at least the early 1970s.  It should be said that, to his credit, Tarpley claims to have left that organization in the late 1990s.  However, an analysis of his political views as mentioned above demonstrates quite clearly that,  though he may have left that organization in name, he certainly has not in spirit.

I have never had less fun writing an article than I have this one.  I find it an utterly odious task to write something solely for the purposes of attacking someone else.  However, in these circumstances, I think it is unavoidable as I cannot sit idly by while someone verbally attacks people like Sibel and James who I love and have tremendous respect for.  I make no secret about my own views and, particularly in terms of economic issues; I know that I stand in direct opposition to the “free market” ideology espoused by some of the contributors and subscribers to Boiling Frogs.  Frankly, I am happy that this is the case because, just as I said when forming the anti-austerity group, the only way to win in this fight is to work together, build our alliances and mutual understanding, develop a common language and key principles, and fight the transnational imperial-corporate system.  I am proud to stand with people like Sibel and James.  I am sorry that Tarpley has chosen irrelevance. But, so be it. The struggle is only just starting…

# # # #

FB Like

Share This

This site depends….

This site depends exclusively on readers’ support. Please help us continue by SUBSCRIBING and/or DONATING.

Comments

  1. Thank you for this article, Eric. I, too, have learned much from Tarpley from being on Infowars and from his own website. I also have the chance to meet him at the Vancouver 9/11 Conference last spring. As much as I repect his great intellect and research, he does seem to actively court confrontation in his speaking style which I had witnessed first hand at said conference. On his weekly podcasts, he avoids very obviously giving any other fellow “alternative” researchers any credit or airtime and only looks to bring up others in order to be dismissive. He will not acknowledge any rivals.
    As I have said in a previous thread, I find Tarpley’s attack on Sibel and Corbett to be very disappointing and deflating. Unfortunately, in the so-called “truther” community there seems to be many with very large egos (I don’t include Sibel or James here) that are very defensive of their turf. I will still try to listen to as many researchers as I can that I find credible including Tarpley, but its kind of upsetting that I think some should come with a “personality warning”.

  2. guitarman says:

    Awesome explanation. I found it so weird when I heard the attack on his Saturday show especially using purposeful disinformation that it would take less than 5 minutes of research to determine. He can’t feign ignorance on what he said so his future credibility totally plummeted in my book. And he did make some reference to Larouche during the show but I forgot the context. I’m not impressed with groups who stand on the corner and hand out literature like Jehovahs Witnesses.

    Sorry you had to go through that with WT. He genuinely seems to have quite a bit of expertise in a lot of things but he acted so puerile with his petty slander. And his little knock on James was ridiculous but I did learn a new word 🙂

    In the midst of all the new developments in the last few weeks and the genuine critical analysis needed by the average Joe, this was really unnecessary from Tarp.

  3. @guitarman. I know WT attacks Larouche quite often on his twitter feed so that association may be permanently severed.

    And, yes, I learned a new word too!

  4. carnegie45 says:

    Very disappointing to see disagreement in the ranks. But people will not always agree on everything. However the main thing is to stick together on who the real criminals are(Obama,Bush, CIA, Mosad,Pentagon and did I mention CIA). James, Eric and Sibel are my favorite people on the Web, so that’s a mark against on of my, used-to-be-also, favorite, Webster Tarpley. Maybe it’s time for Webster to fade away in the fog of obscurity.

  5. Great article, Eric. As one who is familiar with WT’s work, I have found his research to be timely if somewhat limited by his own biases. That said, as a student and past denizen of what John Le Carre’ so presciently referred to as “The Secret World”, I have been a reader & follower of “alternative” news and history for some 40+ years. I applaud you for your spirited and cogent defense of Edmonds and Corbett. In my 5 or so years of association with her and BFP, I have witnessed my own respect and esteem for her and the work she does here grow incalculably. As her choices of contributors has expanded beyond your humble correspondent to include the likes of Corbett, Rick Rozoff,AG Marshall Stephen Lendmann and you, I have come to depend on and regard BFP as the seminal source for unbiased, open-source intelligence analyses unmatched by any news organization today. I feel priveledged and honored to be her friend and fellow colleague despite the humble and spotty nature of my contributions.

    in the 1960’s, one of my earliest influences was the news reporter for San Francisco radio station KSAN, Scoop Nisker. Scoop’s tagline at the end of his report was always the following,”If you DON’T Like the News, Go out and make some of your own.” What I interpret the attacks by Tarpley and others against BFP is tacit acknowledgement that BFP IS making news of our own. That’s why they feel so threatened by it. It truly IS a unbiased, non-partisan News organization totally committed to Truth that can encompass Libertarians, Conservatives, Progressives and even the odd Zen Marxist like your humble correspondant. You are a part of that continuum and of the work we do here as I have been. So, Well Done, Colleague.

  6. Simple terms WT is a know it all, to his credit he does know much.A great wealth of knowledge, but a bit lacking in ppl skills.

  7. “in the 1960′s, one of my earliest influences was the news reporter for San Francisco”….a few years beyond, early seventies(?) do you recall “the hippy dippy weatherman”? some hippy stoner who did the bay area weather. Funny stuff! local TV

  8. That was George Carlin’s Al Sleet persona. He got a lot more dangerous in the ensuing decades.

  9. alicorn_twilight says:

    Eric, I can’t express how much more I value your analysis than Tarpley’s, to whom I can attach some choice adjectives but won’t bother, and for whom I have even less regard now that he’s decided to attack BFP and induce you to expend valuable time and effort. He’s just another broken clock and I feel confident in continuing to ignore him.

    But you, Eric, are personally and singly the reason I joined BFP, and I stay around for you, Nile Bowie, and William Blum primarily. So just keep doing what you’re doing; I really value your geopolitical AND economic perspective.

  10. Wow Eric, this was a very well argued piece on a difficult topic.

    Something that we should learn to acknowledge more is that everyone understands reality up to a certain level. The more one specializes during life, the more one will explain the world in terms of one’s expertise and the more one be confronted with the limits of what can be understood with specialist knowledge and limited domain rationality. This will lead to feelings of inadequacy.

    Conversely, the broader one develops oneself, the more one will develop a deep and pervasive understanding of reality that allows one to build a basis of deep and validated confidence and wisdom. I interpret the scrimmage between WT and BFP authors in these terms. Poor WT: he showed his limits.

    As BFP contributors and readers we strive to continually improve our understanding of reality. But all of us are sometimes caught up in ideas and explanations that are suboptimal. We need a diversity of ideas: to learn new ideas, to discover why we disagree, and to discover why we believe our beliefs. It is a sign of intellectual maturity to do this constructively, honestly, and gracefully. It is a sign of intellectual immaturity if one can not.

    I am grateful of all that I learned from WT. But for all his knowledge, zeal, and insights, he is no match for the BFP-team.

  11. “He devotes his undying love and affection for nuclear power and, in the wake of Fukushima, his only analysis was that the world needs more nuclear power.” ED about WT.
    Did you know that Occupy is alive and well? I met a few cryptographers recently who assured me that it is through pgp algorithms and their ongoing work. Here is a letter of doom that I recently wrote based upon Leuren Moret’s research:

    Leuren Moret: Fukushima HAARP nuclear attack by CIA, DOE, BP for London banks May 9, 2011

    In an exclusive ExopolitcsTV interview by Alfred Lambremont Webre released May 9, 2011, independent scientist Leuren Moret has stated that the Fukushima HAARP tectonic nuclear attack was done by an international racketeering war crimes network within the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), Department of Energy (DOE), and BP (British Petroleum) on behalf of City of London bankers.
    Ms. Moret states that the war crimes network behind the March 11, 2011 events at the Fukushima nuclear plant is the same war crimes racketeering organization behind the false flag operations of Septemeber 11,2001, Hurricane Katrina (2005), the Haiti earthquake (2010) and other HAARP-triggered false flag operations.
    Leuren Moret – Fukushima HAARP nuclear attack by CIA, DOE, BP for London banks:

    The Fukushima tectonic nuclear attack is an intentional genocidal depopulation of the northern and southern hemispheres, Ms. Moret states. The west coasts of the United States and Canada, Mexico, and Hawaii are being intentionally targeted by dangerous radiation from the March 11, 2011 tectonic warfare earthquake and nuclear meltdown events at Fukushima, Japan.
    These areas of the United States and Canada, and Mexico, Ms. Moret indicates, are the major food producing areas for North America. Radiation from the Japan quake/nuclear meltdown events at Fukushima is intentionally being steered into these areas in order to dose the land and the food with radiation.
    Danger of radiation in the rain
    Ms. Moret warned that the U.S. government is covering up the radiation danger in North America, and stated that individuals should venture out in the rain with their bodies fully covered, including gloves.
    During WWII, it was discovered that the most effective method of nuclear warfare was to detonate an atomic bomb in a raincloud, and let the radiation rain down on the target population.
    The weather warfare capabilities of HAARP and the GWEN towers systems are being used to create weather patterns (such as tornadoes) and rain that bring radiation as high as in the Fukushima area of Japan on the southeast, mid west, southwest and west coasts of the United States.

    For my friends this information above can be linked and corroborated in so many ways that I am concerned that either I am programmed or we really are on the brink.
    1. HAARP is a real weapons system. I have independently confirmed it through the research of Robert C. Beck. Bernard Eastlund had released much of his research on HAARP on the Internet before we recognized its military importance. B.P. And BAE own these patents now, and my cousin who works for Defense assures me that no foreign power has access to this technology.
    2. Shaw International is the parent company to Stone & Webster that first came to light through John Perkins in ‘Confessions of an Economic Hitman’. It was their initial failures and bribes that caused the Fukushima disaster.
    3. Further research indicates that disposal of radioactive waste from these nuclear meltdowns is surely coming our way once again.
    4. B.P. paid UC Berkeley through Stephen Chu of DOE $500 million just prior to his appointment.
    5. Shell Oil lost its bid to introduce hydrogen fuel cell technology through Chu’s denial of service. (from personal conversation with John Hofmeister, CEO Shell Oil 2005-2008)
    6. Recent confirmation by Paul Craig Roberts – former Assistant Secretary of the US Treasury: Another source of the stock market’s rise is the Federal Reserve’s policy of quantitative easing, that is, the printing of $1,000 billion ($1 trillion) dollars annually with which to support the too-big-to-fail banks’ balance sheets and to finance the federal budget deficit.
    7. Goldman Sachs International and B.P. engineered the collapse of the Greek economy and other European economic crises.

    I leave you with the words from Amos 3:15 And I will smite the winter house with the summer house; and the houses of ivory shall perish, and the great houses shall have a end, saith the Lord. Be of good cheer. The good guys win in the end.

  12. Thanks for the post, Eric. We are lucky to have you here at BFP. It means a lot that you would share the details of your story and relationships, in order to help us understand this attack a little more. I hope you know that I meant no negative connotation when I brought up your name in the other comment thread where we learned (or at least where I learned) about WT’s attack.

    @carnegie45, gogetem, thevine, Tjeerd:
    I don’t think this was a “disagreement”, as Eric points out and as I and others have in a separate thread. It was a pure dis-information attack. Lies. WT has forfeited all credibility and should not be trusted, listened to, or treated as a team member with a character flaw.

    And, I think that this was more than retaliation. This was also the workings of a sociopath. I wouldn’t be surprised to find any kind of ugliness about him, after his attack on Sibel, Eric (implied), and BFP. If we consider the value of BFP in the war on truth and the fight against the police state, what could be uglier than what he has just done?

  13. Where exactly can I find these statements from tarpley? Google is showing nothing to me so far…

  14. Ismael-I was 7 yrs old, vacation….weird how memory can alter things as I still recall, yet now they blend. thnx

    “I don’t think this was a “disagreement”, as Eric points out and as I and others have in a separate thread. It was a pure dis-information attack. Lies. WT has forfeited all credibility and should not be trusted, listened to, or treated as a team member with a character flaw”
    Interesting, I kept comment to a minimum as I have yet to read/hear,only now chkng. That is unfortunate.
    Thnx for the heads up.

  15. guitarman says:

    @steveyk, I am copying and pasting Xicha’s wonderful and exhausting transcription/analysis of Tarpley’s remarks about Sibel from an April 28th post on BFP.

    Xicha, I hope it’s ok to post your remarks for those who are interested to know what Tarpley said. If you want me take them down, let me know although I’m not sure I know how since I’m new here lol.
    ————————————————————-
    Xicha Says:

    After the previous comments about Webster Tarpley attacking Sibel on his radio broadcast, I took a listen to his April 27, 2013 broadcast of World Crisis Radio. Here are my quick notes and review of what he said. I noted a couple of start times for the two sections I found.

    45:00 – Webster Tarpley says Sibel Edmonds is running around saying the Russians aren’t saying anything. Says the Russians are saying a lot, such as that they had warned the FBI twice about the boys.

    What he doesn’t say is that:
    1) Sibel did say that the Russians had warned the FBI twice
    2) The Russians are not saying anything about Gladio Plan B, which they surely must know a lot about, since they had Zawahiri and his laptop in custody.
    3) The scope of what the Russians could talk about is much greater than just the Boston event. They could relate the Boston event to the global, criminal, Strategy of Tension.
    4) They could show real evidence of US/NATO orchestration of terrorist events for the last 20 years, including 9/11/2001.
    5) They could show real evidence of US/NATO orchestration of the opium trade.
    6) They could show real evidence of US/NATO blackmale of elected officials.
    7) They could show real evidence of the US/NATO run illegal arms and nuclear secrets trade.

    Xicha: Maybe he has not listened to Sibel and James’ Gladio series, in which she talks about these at length.

    56:20 – Webster Tarpley begins talking about the website boilingfrogspost.com

    Major points:
    1) Sibel’s thesis is that the Boston event leads us to a dirty deal between Russia and the US. That the US will help Russia with the Chechen rebels if Russia drops support for Syria.
    2) He states that Sibel’s thesis is crudely interesting on the surface, but that it seems to him to be disinformation.
    3) Sibel presents her thesis with a very fishy, anti-Putin undertone.
    4) Sibel is congratulating herself. She has been writing about Chechen terrorism for a decade.
    5) Says his own record will go up against any of that.
    6) The problem with Sibel Edmonds is that she is a whistle blower and that we have a problem with whistle blowers who confirm the official version of the events in question.
    7) 58:40 Example – the most recent take that Sibel Edmonds has on illuminating the 9/11 story (from wikipedia) 2/1/2011 Sibel publishes on BFP adding details of event of April 2001. She sends a doc to FBI agents saying Bin Laden’s group is planning a massive terrorist attack on the US, ordering attacks on major cities, blah, blah, blah, blah. Sibel says that the FBI bungled, which even the 9/11 Commissioners will tell us.
    8) What do we do with whistle blowers whose stories tend to reinforce the official version or a variant thereof. No attack on the official version. Sibel reinforces that there is a Bin Laden group who commits terrorism and the FBI blew it. Does not talk about patsies and technicians.
    9) Sibel Edmonds and the philidoxer (?) Corbett says she doesn’t like blowback. Good blowback is no good – it is the official story. LIHOP is equally bad. And Sibel’s whistle blowing is LIHOP. Grants everything that the intelligence agencies need. Confirms terrorism and suggests bungling as an excuse.
    10) WT’s position is that LIHOP is a big lie. MIHOP No Bin Laden – he’s a patsy. Al Qaeda is the CIA Arab Legion. Any fool can see that in Libya or Syria. WT would discount this kind of analysis. Blowback is bad but LIHOP is as bad or worse. Therefor we have to ask ourselves, what is the position of Russia.
    11) Sibel’s aligations don’t add up: The Russians are taking civilians out of Syria – well that’s true of course we need to watch Syria. The Chechen rebelion too big to be stopped by the CIA – it has taken on a life of its own. Certainly thrives with foreign support – maybe Saudi support more important than US support at this time. The rebellion has been quelled compared to the 90′s. Then again it’s too late for Putin to pull back on Syria. WT doesn’t expect that. Let’s see who has the golden ring. Anybody can call themselves a whistle blower – like Julian Assange! Therefor BFP analysis doesn’t hold up.
    12) BFP is well financed – they buy people up. They buy up authors, how interesting. I wonder where they get all that. That would have to be regarded “cun grano sales”.

    Ends 1:02:36

    Then he rambles on about Boston, domestic terrorism, and the march of “facistization”.

    Xicha: He sounds a little envious of Sibel, since she actually has first-hand experience with the evidence, while all he has are an opinion and a condescending attitude and speaking style. I have seen others with this same disposition (some recently close to BFP) and I am disgusted by their witting/unwitting damage to the efforts of truth tellers, whistle blowers, and honest investigative journalists. Probably driven by greed and/or a chip on their shoulders. Beware the know-it-all a-holes.

    This reminds me of another commenter we recently had here at BFP and who deservedly got booted. He wouldn’t stop talking about HOP definitions and dissuading interest in post after post. Good riddance.

    If Eric Draitser or others know, work with, or support Webster Tarpley, I think it would be appropriate for a little defense of BFP and Sibel. I only mention Eric because I thought I heard him mention WT in the context of the anti-austerity group.

    Note to Webster Tarpley: Please listen to Sibel and James’ series on Gladio Plan B. Then pull your head out of your LIHOP, before someone accuses you of disinformation

  16. guitarman says:

    Humorous thought – I’m still cracking up over WT’s use of the word “philodoxer”. I can’t think of a word better to describe Tarpley himself. Out of curiosity, is there a similar word for an author who loves to read their own words over and over again? If not, should we make one up?

    I’m gonna try to use “philodoxer” in a complete sentence in a real life situation as soon as a situation merits it.

  17. For sure, guitarman. I’m honored. Plus I’d say it’s always okay to reuse others’ comments, when appropriate and credited. I’m traveling so I appreciate your quick response to the question.

    I’m continually amazed by Sibel, the BFP team, and the level of discourse of BFP commentators. I hope that, someday soon, BFP truly will be well financed.

  18. libertyorslavery says:

    Few comments…
    First the article… how many people here have gone to Christopher Bollyn’s site and read what he says about who WT… about his daughter and wife working for a man connected to 911’s long story? Believe this is under his… “2013 911” way down the long posts… .

    Eric here says concerning Lyndon Larouche…
    “Anyone who knows anything about that organization should know that they are a proto-fascist, political personality cult… ”

    Exactly who with a strong personality at its head let along… hundreds of politician followers… of a specific politician… do not have an element of “personality cult” in them?

    IF the Larouche organization had done nothing else but publish “DOPE INC.” – humanity would still be in great debt to them. Has the author read it?

    As for the term “fascist”… . After what is close to 90 Hollywood movies about Fascist and Nazis and Jews… without any except for two that I can think of… about Bolshevism … the word to me… only confirms a person a reactionary who has be successfully propagandized.

    The word… should never be used in my opinion to define any… movement historical or current.

    The Banking Cartel who largely speaking run both War Inc. and Dope Inc. and used ‘fascists,’ funded them… and used Marxists and funded them… who funded Lenin and who funded Hitler… who funded Israel and who were behind the Federal Reserve Law/IRS which… allowed the funding of both WW1 and WW11 BOTH SIDES… (really the same long event…) are not Left or Right or fascist or socialist/Communist, they are largely tribal… Jewish in the main element; although that must be to a degree qualified in terms of the City of London and aspects of WASPy Wall Street.

    I have found WT to be an intelligent man incessantly talking in 20th century socialist lingo.

    “Fascist” comes out of his mouth as “nice day,” comes out of the average person’s.

    He is on the short side, bald and rides his considerable mind in barely suppressed aggressions… in part over those two facts.

    I have never heard Webster extend ANY polite acknowledgement to another person without sensing a manipulative purpose behind these very rare gestures. He is not naturally truthful… he always measures his affect… and his, effect.

    A political warrior may find danger in any level of warm hearted
    meeting of another, half way… but I find it sometimes as an inclination… a mark of a Great man and its mirror image a mark of a little spirit.

    History sometimes elevates the dark hearted to teach the Light.

    As for the internecine quarrels of the ‘Truth’ movements… we weaken ourselves when we do anything but… hold up creative free action and its political means Liberty… as our goal.

    I don’t think I have EVER heard Webster use the term “Liberty.”

    As far a Sibel and her whistle blowing… she was a relatively newly minted American I believe, with idealism… .

    “Chatter” in intelligence in America is used to lay “bread crumbs,” but… one should assume that, too much focus of OBL before the 911 EVENT… may have brought the “hijackers” if they existed… too quickly to the attention of some patriotic FBI,CIA or military intelligence agent… one loyal to the U.S. Constitution, say?

    Sibel said after Boston… in effect, ‘lets look at what happens.’

    So far Russia appears to have used the event broadly, as she suggested… to crack down… it is at least reported… on Muslim elements… or… has it?

    Sibel said lets see if anything happens in Syria that seems to be related to the Boston Lock Down Event.

    Tarpley’s criticisms reported in a post above… seem an extension of his ego as the post infers. Nothing surprising there… the man stumbles over his ego in every sentence.

    WT’s criticism of Liberty based movements like Ron Paul… are narrow and reactionary BUT and other Libertarian think tanks today do seem to carry water for world empire banking racists… and this reflects my own thinking.

    Webster, has no affection for liberty or the American Constitution… NONE.

    “Neocons”… largely Jewish, supposedly American Libertarians, are in their policy outcomes… ALWAYS supportive of one thing, Israeli goals and are therefore… deeply tainted by the 911 Event, which leads to their door. But… the Event’s cover up… is more squarely the responsibility of the lowered moral character of the average American.

    Obviously… “Free Markets,” have nothing to do with America’s interests as played out in the WTO etc. and its gutting of the American manufacturing base. Lyndon Larouche too has great affection for FDR supposed flavors of economic policy which was again historically banking cartel policy.

    Webster would order… individuals to work or to camps or to vote or to think… all mitigated by an intellectual elite’s supposedly deeper insights… . This is his nature.

    Webster disdains the idea of individual liberty as even a possibility my third ear, hears him say.

    In Russia he would have worn Bolshevik narrow rimmed glasses… a long coat and moved millions as needed into camps or… rationalize starvations.

    The man’s soul is torpid.

    If a man can not be learned from… spiritually… then no matter how bright… he should be avoided and never be taken serious.

  19. Eric it’s your co-worker Ry

    Look at this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9i7bzyKUBoU It’s Tarpley’s interview with Adam Kokesh. See what a pro-statist train wreck Tarpley is. The guy wrote a book with ZERO sources in it. He is full of propaganda and completely ignorant on subjects like economics which he confidently talks about anyway despite his glaring ignorance on every aspects of how markets work. Hit me up any time, I keep files on all the main kooks. His is one of the largest.

  20. EDraitser says:

    I appreciate the comments Ryan. I will tell you this, and believe me when I say I’m not trying to start anything with anyone, but I have no respect for Kokesh intellectually. He mouths the usual Ayn Rand & Murray Rothbard talking points without actually being able to debate them. He does not believe in any rights beyond the right of property. I could go on and on. And I mean no offense if you agree with those positions, but I find them utterly repellent. Like I said, I don’t want to bash someone, especially not in a forum where he doesn’t have a chance to respond, so I’ll refrain from that. My objection to Tarpley was that he attacked Sibel, James, and me for no good reason and that he is the reason I had to abandon my own anti-austerity project. There’s more there, but I’d rather not go into it. However, to be fair, I don’t agree that he has no grasp of economics, rather I think his rigid orthodoxy limits the scope of his understanding. I think there must be a balance between rigid adherence to an economic or political ideology and being true to one’s own ideals. I’m not a rigid adherent of any particular ideology (there’s no -ism that I can clearly identify with), however I find incredibly suspect any so-called “expert” or propagandist (which is what Kokesh refers to himself as) who rejects innate and inalienable rights with the exception of property. I believe education, health care, housing, etc. are RIGHTS, not privileges to be taken away at the whim of a corporation or political backroom deal. People like Kokesh do not recognize this, and he has said as much. Again, I don’t want to get into a whole thing about it, and I know you’re a genuine guy so please don’t take this as insulting, but I find that sort of thinking totally backward. I find Tarpley’s brand of vitriol equally distasteful.

    E

  21. That’s sad news that your once-promising anti-austerity initiative was taken over. It’s not a good thing when an organisation has to deal with corrosive personalities and in-fighting. In listening to Tarpley, I was always impressed by his knowledge and analysis, but I never became a fan because I had the nagging suspicion that he is an egotist. I am not happy to be right. Eric, I hope you will continue to carry the flag of anti-austerity nonetheless.

  22. metrobusman says:

    My only complaint with this is the author’s characterization of the LaRouchies as proto-fascist–I don’t see the need for the prefix!

  23. djpetrik says:

    I discovered the alternative media about 3 years ago. I had never been exposed to any political ideas other than Republican v Democrat, and it had never even crossed my mind that there were alternatives. Mr. Tarpley’s knowledge of history impressed me. For the first time I saw that almost all the present struggles had happened in the past and are recurring.
    I noticed a change in Mr. Tarpley’s attitude about 18 months ago when he had a heated argument with Alex Jones. An urgency for action in Mr. Tarpley seems to have replaced any desire for further debate or discussion of things we already understand e.g. imperialism, austerity, tyrannical polices. I do not understand Mr. Tarpley’s calumnies for the Boiling Frogs Team, but those aside, I can understand his desire to stop talking and start making an attempt to gain political power. We can endlessly report on abuses and discuss solutions, but I believe Mr. Tarpley is correct that we ought to figure out the details of nuclear power, GMO’s, and multinational corporations after we are in a position of parity with them. Mr. Tarpley is attempting to come up with a strategy that will bring the maximum support for the acquisition of political power. I think he has chosen the correct points. Most of the population of the world would rather have electricity and running water provided with nuclear power now–or whatever source will provide the most energy with celerity–, than to wait around another generation while we come up with a better solution. Once we have a position of political power, believes Mr. Tarpley, then we can debate the details and fine tune the policies. At present we can do nothing other than preach to the choir.
    It is disheartening to learn that there is so much fighting behind the scenes between the alternative media iconoclasts, but I suppose it is natural as we grow as a nascent force in society. I value the opinions and respect the intellectual and peripatetic work of Mr. Draitser, Ms. Edmonds, Mr. Corbett, and Mr. Tarpley.
    *************************************************
    I couldn’t find “philodoxer” or “philodoxster” in any dictionary. The best I can guess by derivation of “philo-” love + “doxa” opinion is “love of opinion or love of belief”? Used as a pejorative then meaning perhaps “love of unproven beliefs”?

  24. @djpetrik: “It is disheartening to learn that there is so much fighting behind the scenes between the alternative media iconoclasts, but I suppose it is natural as we grow as a nascent force in society.”

    Again, for some reason, this attack on Sibel, Eric, and BFP, by Mr. Tarpley, is being characterized as something between two parties, i.e. a disagreement, argument, whatever.

    It is not.

    Mr. Tarpley simply spouted some lies and disinformation, which we have easily shown to be so.

    There is no fight. Have you listened to or read the WT remarks in question?

    IMO, this behavior should cause everyone to stop trusting anything he says. Just because you can agree with some of what he says, you will never know when he is throwing disinformation in the mix. It’s a matter of trust. This has nothing to do with any points with which you agree or disagree. It’s about trusting a known liar and producer of disinformation – or not. Can you understand this question, as distinct from the points of agreement you brought up?

  25. tonywicher says:

    Eric,

    I listened to Tarpley religiously for several years. I thought he was the the best political analyst on the Net. I read all his books. I loved 9/11 Synthetic Terror and the Unauthorized Biographies of Obama and the earlier one wih Tony Chaitkin of George H.W. Bush. This prompted my to fly from California to NY for the UFAA founding meeting in New York where I also saw you. Afterwards I took Webster to dinner and spent a few hours talking with him. Among other topics, I brought up Sibel Edmonds. I was appalled to hear him disparage her at that time, accusing her of being an intelligence agent. It was clear to me that he had no grounds for doing so other than that he viewed her as a competitor. This quickly changed my view of him. We did not argue but my time with him convinced me that he had serious personality flaws, that he has a pathological ego and is intellectually dishonest. I now find that BFP, the Corbett Report and many other sources are better and more reliable than Tarpley. I believe we are in full agreement about him. He can now be regarded as a has-been.

    There is one important point where I differ with you, however. It derives from the fact that some of the things Tarpley said about LaRouche made me curious enough to take a closer look at the LaRouche movement. My father had told me LaRouche was a crank somewhere back in the 70’s, and I never took a look at them, although I would sometimes see them at their tables in a mall with their baseball caps and their leaflets and would laugh at them for looking like Trotskyites in a time warp, kind of like Deadheads at a Grateful Dead concert. I was happy to forgive Tarpley for his long association with LaRouche, since he had broken with the movement ten or fifteen years ago and now vehemently denounced and dissociated himself from them. But when I did finally get around to taking a real look at the LaRouche movement, what I found to my great surprise was that all of Tarpley’s GOOD ideas about political economy that I really liked, that I was hearing for several years of reading and listening to Tarpley, ALL came from LaRouche. So then, I proceeded to make contact with the LaRouche movement, and what I found is that they are good, honest, hard-working people like you and me, not “proto-fascists” at all but true-blue American progressives, proponents of Hamiltonian and New Deal American System economics. Yes, they are too doctrinaire and LaRouche centered, and I certainly don’t agree with them about everything, from nuclear power to Issac Newton, and especially their culture Nazi attitude about the degeneracy of all non-Classical music forms, but I find it is not difficult to reserve my disagreements about these matters by considering them as “wedge issues” and to work with them on the basis of our common political objectives. At this point our common objectives are the restoration of the Roosevelt Glass-Steagall Banking Act of 1933, which would completely restructure the economy, destroy the power of the finance capitalists and bring down the Empire, and the impeachment of Wall Street stooge Obama to accomplish this. These are objectives we all share. At this point I have enough experience with the LaRouche people to consider them to be the best, most effective political organizers in the business. I recommend that you work with them as I do. They have gotten a bill introduced into the House, HR 129, the Return to Prudent Banking Act of 2013, sponsored by Democrat Marcy Kaptur that fully restores Glass-Steagall. Tarpley has called this a mere “process reform”. For that alone he should never be forgiven. He knows better, but he says it solely because LaRouche is a rival whom he wants to belittle. It is actually a fundamental restructuring of the economy that restores the separation of commercial and investment banking. It constitutes an orderly take-down of the whole Trans-Atlantic investment banking system, and is a sine qua non for a real economic recovery. LaRouche is proposing to replace the current bankrupt monetarist system with a Hamiltonian credit system with a national bank that makes the investments necessary for economic growth and full recovery. Any ideas along these lines that Tarpley has proposed come from LaRouche. LaRouche has converted me to Hamiltonian economics. It combines all the best features of socialism and capitalism. I was raised a Marxist, but I have now come to realize that Hamilton long ago figured out the right way to implement socialism, which is known as the American System of economics, and was the original basis of the Union that was the United States, now long buried and forgotten beneath centuries of imperialist propaganda.

    From what you said about LaRouche, I gather all you know is what you heard somewhere or what you read in the Wikipedia biography, which, as may not surprise you, is disinformation from beginning to end. In other words, you are where I was on the subject of LaRouche about a year ago. So I would very much like to recommend that you take a few hours of your time to read the following documents, because I hope you will come to see the LaRouche movement as a valuable and positive resource, as I do.

    HR 129 Bill to restore Glass-Steagall now with 60 co-sponsors:
    http://beta.congress.gov/bill/113th-congress/house-bill/129

    Support for HR 129:

    http://larouchepac.com/hr129support

    Platform for a full economic recovery:

    http://larouchepac.com/fullrecoveryplatform

    Draft Legislation to Restore the Original Bank of the United States:

    http://larouchepac.com/restorethebank

    I personally drove up to Sacramento and talked to my Assemblyman, Republican Tim Donally, yesterday as part of the LaRouche campaign for HR 129, to urge our state representatives to pass a resolution in favor of restoring Glass-Steagall, as the LaRouche movement has already accomplished in four other states. I only had a couple of minutes with him and I didn’t even get to Glass-Seagall. Like some other Republicans, he is concerned with the erosion of civil rights by the NDAA, so we talked about the “War on Terror” and the Marathon bombing. Now here is an issue that progressive Democrats can share with Republicans. I told him that I think Obama should be impeached. I think Obama has cut off the balls of progressives and the only way they can get them back is to dump him. The LaRouche picture of Obama with the Hitler moustache works just fine for me. I am going to be sending Donnelly a lot of literature on both terrorism and economics, and I expect this to be a fruitful ongoing relationship.

    Current National Call To Action:

    http://larouchepac.com/call_to_action

  26. guitarman says:

    My new favorite word.

    philodox, philodoxer One who is especially fond of his/her own opinions or someone who loves to hear herself/himself talk; a chatterbox; a dogmatist.

    http://www.encyclo.co.uk/define/philodoxer

  27. djpetrik says:

    @Xicha:”Can you understand this question, as distinct from the points of agreement you brought up?”

    I did listen to the World Crisis Radio episode containing the initial insults, but after reading Mr. Draitser’s responses, it seems to me there is allusion about personal disagreements between the two of them. If Mr. Tarpley had an ephemeral outburst of obloquy after passionate arguments with Mr. Draitser than I am not going to dismiss Tarpley as unworthy, washed-up, or irrelevant. I will ruminate on your suggestions, though, and keep my ears open when I listen to WCR to hear if Mr. Tarpley continues ad hominem tirades.

  28. @djpetrik: I also noticed tonywicher’s comment about going to dinner with Tarpley (seems like everyone is going to dinner with himwho picks up the check?). Tarpley was reported to have called Sibel an intel disinformation agent at that occasion as well. Looks like a pattern.

    I’d look for an apology and explanation before giving him any more attention. And, your critical listening approach is always a good idea.

    Thanks for the response. I hope I’m not insulting anyone with my statements about Tarpley. I just don’t know what else to say about someone who is so wrong and belligerent towards Sibel. She is very important to me and a lot of us, and I think a strong, uncompromising position is warranted in this situation. This is because there is no validity to what he is saying about Sibel. And that is the part that we shouldn’t treat as a “disagreement”.

  29. tonywicher says:

    Xicha,

    I just listened to Tarpley’s World Crisis Radio broadcast for this week and I heard what might be described as a backhanded apology from Tarpley to Boiling Frogs Post at in the last couple of minutes. It was framed as a plea that people at BFP should stop their ad hominem attacks and personal denigration of Tarpley. There was no admission by him that the reason for these attacks was that Tarpley had personally attacked and denigrated Sibel and impugned her integrity to me and others for absolutely no good reason, just out of pure ego. He richly deserved everything that has been said about him on this thread. That said, if Tarpley will now stop this childish behavior, I’m a man of peace who is always willing to forgive and forget. I’ll even apologize for calling him a “has-been”, because I did find his broadcast interesting and thought-provoking. I very much agree with his support for the Warren-Tierney Bank on Students Act which will requires the Fed to finance student loans at the same rate 0.75% rate that they not give to the “too big to fail” banks to back up their derivatives. But Tarpley needs to understand that this bill is complimentary to the Kaptur-Harding bill to restore Glass-Steagall in its original, ironclad form. The Fed must be required to invest in future productivity by financing education, and it must at the same time be PREVENTED from financing speculation. Glass-Steagall (HR 129 in the House and S. 985 in the Senate) breaks up the so-called TBTF banks and ends bailouts and quantitative easing, freeing up credit for real economic development, including education but also infrastructure. I repeat that Tarpley is hugely misleading everybody by calling this a mere “process reform”. It is a fundamental restructuring of the economy, a reorientation to production instead of speculation, just as it was in 1933 when it was originally enacted. As an economist and historian Tarpley knows this very well, and it is again only ego and competitiveness, in this case with the LaRouche people who have been leading the fight to reinstate Glass-Steagall for years, that leads him to say this. He should be ashamed of himself. I said he should never be forgiven for this, but again as a man peace I am willing to forget and forgive if he changes his behavior. He should strongly support Glass-Steagall, and the LaRouche people should strongly support Warren’s bill in return. This is the way to advance our common objectives.

  30. Hi tonywicher,

    I took a listen – there was no apology. I wouldn’t give him the time of day. Thanks for the heads-up anyway.

    It does sound like he might be reading here, so @Tarpley: You are a dick and you know it. There’s your ad hominem. I know you’re proud of yourself, but you’re still a dick.

    Honestly, there’s been a lot of talk about strategy in the comments here, but I really don’t see anything valid except what might take place in a criminal courtroom. The government is completely corrupt. Unless we have some prosecutions for corruption, war crimes, US sponsored terrorism, etc., I don’t see things changing away from the GWOT, security state, fascist narrative.

    I still find refuge here at BFP, as it is the closest thing to a justice oriented, evidence-based, criminal investigation available. That’s why it works to have such variety in the perspective. The whistle blowers and excellent producers here all have my respect.

  31. tonywicher says:

    Xicha,

    It is good to be among good people. I am advocating a very general strategy that goes beyond exchanging ideas and information on sites such as BFP. I hope that you are being too pessimistic when you say that the government is “totally corrupt”. I would say that the fish rots from the head, and the worst corruption is at the top of the executive branch, in the various security agencies, regulatory agencies and in the Federal Reserve. The reach of this gang extends into all branches of government at all levels, but at the lower levels most people are not corrupt, they are trying to do an honest job and are just uninformed or misled. Although they may not like the way things are going, they don’t think they can do anything about it. I think this applies to many legislators as well as judges. It could also apply to your mayor, your city council, your school principal or your minister or your police captain. I think our strategy must be to try to get through to such people. To get through to them you have to get to know them. This takes patience and persistence but it is possible. As I said, I see this as our responsibility as informed, educated citizens – it’s up to us to lead, to educate, organize and activate our fellow citizens to restore a government of, by and for the people. That is what some people did back around 1776, and we can do it too. It takes an informed, active minority to change things – such as the irate minority here at BFP.

  32. @tonywicher,

    I appreciate your optimism. I think I need to move to a better climate, where I can see that glowing warm thing in the sky more often.

    One comment on your analogy: once the fish’s head has started to rot, it is unlikely that it will swim again.

    Might be good for compost. Though it might be an inorganic cyborg fish at this point. A drone.

  33. tonywicher says:

    Xicha,

    Here’s something that might cheer you up. It’s an interview on Coast to Coast with Karen Hudes, a whistleblower from the World Bank. Somehow she has managed to maintain a sunny disposition. The interview begins at Hour 2:

    http://www.coasttocoastam.com/show/2013/05/25

  34. tonywicher says:

    I just listened to Tarpley’s weekly broadcast, which I will say was pretty good and worth a listen. In his discussion of Syria, he noted that the Russians have staunchly stood by Syria, thus disproving what the “Boiling Toads” (i.e. Sibel) have predicted concerning the likelihood of Russia making a deal with the U.S. to sell out Syria, and he notes that so far Sibel has said nothing to retract this statement or admit that she might be wrong on this. Now I will agree that so far it looks like what Sibel called her “hypothesis” is wrong, and I thank goodness that Russia appears to be drawing the line against imperial aggression here. There is nothing wrong with making hypotheses that turn out not to be disproved. This is how we proceed in life as in science, by making hypotheses, discarding the ones that get falsified by experience and keeping the ones that are not falsified. But it is good if the one who publicly states a hypothesis also publicly states that the hypothesis has been disproved. So if Sibel is following this thread, I would appreciate some further discussion from her on the strong support by Russia for Syria we have seen since her previous remarks. I don’t really mind Tarpley calling us “the Boiling Toads”, which is sort of funny in a juvenile kind of way, except that it still indicates the kind of rivalry between groups fighting against imperialism that can only benefit our enemies. What I would like to see is full co-operation and an end to factional rivalry.

  35. Sorry, tonywicher, there is no factional rivalry, no matter how much you or tarpley want to insert one. I thought this was addressed already. Can you count the number of people tarpley has accused of being intel dis-info shills? I just heard about a couple more and I’m not even going to mention who, because I want to discontinue this distraction.

    As for your other request, how long does she have, in your book? What’s your deadline? Have a little patience. Look for another roundtable with Pepe and Peter B, where this was discussed openly. Maybe post your comments there, instead of on this thread, where your comments about the topic are confounded with the distraction.

  36. tonywicher says:

    Hi, Xicha – You’re touchy. I never said BFP was engaged in factional rivalry and I certainly am not trying to insert any. I have only accused Tarpley of that. For myself, I try to be a partisan only of the truth, and as Plato says, friends of the truth are friends of each other. So let’s be friends. I was not being impatient. I am just interested to see how the dialogue on this issue develops, and I hope it will be constructive and not acrimonious. OK?

  37. That’s what happens with text communication sometimes; I was actually being laid back and very pleasant.

    Context should be considered with statements about truth. What I read was “tarpley’s humorously mean, but has a point.”

    I don’t think he is valid so I suggested separating your own concerns from his. My comments on timliness were a direct result of the mixed context of your request.

    Constructive ok by me. Thanks!

Speak Your Mind