freely sara share messages at this point. now the internet experts at this point have been speculating that this could have been an issue that involves the d n. s, which is called the can domain no network system, which is often compared to a phone book or an address book for the internet which points the web browsers to the computer systems that are serving a specific websites. a here we're talking about facebook in particular, but the consequences of this are already massive a. there are reports that facebook c o mark zuckerberg has lost more than $6000000000.00 during these 4 hours. and we know that the, the shares of the major american are t giants are down, but the, there are further reports. again, like i didn't say, like i said, this is something that's compared to an avalanche because reportedly facebook

workers cannot even access their office in america. and we don't know when this is going to end, because the i t johns are not telling us the only thing they're saying is that they're working on the issues. definitely a black monday for one of the wells biggest websites. it's a facebook group there, okay? alia patricia, thanks very much for that. i will keep you posted on that. i can tell you that i'll tell you when i'm going to go offline, we're going to stay right here. so i hope you can stay with his to, i'll have the next update in just and often outside oh, join me every thursday on the alex simon show. and i'll be speaking to guess of the world politics. small business. i'm show business. i'll see you then. mm. ah,

ah hello and welcome to cross stock where all things are considered. i'm peter lavelle . one would think the humiliating withdrawal from afghanistan would be the start of a washington wine down of the forever wars. is this really the case also? you tubes war on creators, and it's not only about so called coven misinformation. ah! discuss these issues and more. i'm joined by my guess. i drink hennington in plymouth. he's the editor and foundry. 21st century wire dot com, and in budapest, george. anyway, he is a podcast or at the gaggle which can be found on youtube and locals, or

a gentleman, cross stock rules in effect. that means you can jump in any time you want, and i always appreciate it. okay, let's start off with patrick. one of the interesting things as the dust settles with the humiliating evacuation of the capitol, our airport by us forces after 20 years. there, there's been an assessment. i mean, is the beginning of something. is this an aberration? is it some kind of hiatus? because it's very unclear even to some there are those that are saying that the u. s. a could possibly even have a deal already with the taliban. hence leaving all about equipment behind. i'm not gonna make any judgment at this point whatsoever, but it's very interesting to me. is this a one off thing or is it something a part of a trend? what are your thoughts? go ahead patrick. i think this is, this is just the beginning. this is the beginning, but in reality, the started all this trajectory is or of eventual waning us influence in the

middle east and central asia. i think this trajectory began a long time ago because america's greatest advantage throughout history is also its greatest liability. it's shown more than any other will power that it's willing to sacrifice blood and treasure for its national interest or what is perceived to be national interest. but that is also become its biggest liability. and i think the clock started running a really with the bombing of afghanistan, it post $911.00, the iraq or the clock began running then. but that clock was really running from the vietnam war. so there's a limited amount of patients that the american people, appetite for war. so pardon me. so, so you have iraq, syria, yemen. these 3 wars are in the balance right now. and so there are things that have happened, watershed points in each of these that i think are now coming to the for biden. is

it a week week point? the white house is incredibly weak. america's, at its weakest point politically. they have a foreign policy teen meta, or young. jake solven's, 43 years old. you've got, you know, ben, roads and these are the people, obama, hold overs and insurance that her for are advising as president. so i don't really think they really have a clue. they're really trying to just piece together what's really a broken jigsaw puzzle from the obama administration and trump administration was very dysfunctional. trump wanted to pull out of some of these but was thwarted by the lindsay grounds by the deep state and so forth. so i think that afghan was really the beginning with acceleration right now it's, it's a mixed bag. ok, and that's why we're doing this. what are your thoughts going to because i think we have a parson words here. i mean, well, it's a gemini, all of these can be defined in a different way. i mean,

you can continue to have influenced by selling a lot of arms, which they continue to do. all right. you know, they give me the abraham affords. ok for me it's it's, it's just a windfall for the army producers. ok? i don't, i don't really see the political mix except for some kind of hodge podge and i ran policy, which is really got know where the last 2 ministration that we quoted by 3. go ahead. yeah, i can just say that the afghanistan thing was a wow. i don't believe that the united states for the future as any intentional withdrawing from the middle east. i think they are there in syria to say, i mean, they just keep coming up with a new rationale. what's like, the ice is preventing the consolidation of the machine and make sure that russia around increase their influence. and then even when you think about iraq,

trump, you know, we, we get talking about ending forever, was and ending interventions. and he never, never said that america should withdraw from iraq. so i think that america has, in this is a huge amount of the decades in saudi arabia, the gulf states, and the middle east, and go straight to who they are vital points in the world. and so, if there is indeed a rivalry and you know, some sort of a cold war coming with china, then control all the go will be as important as strategic goal of the united states as it was during the cold war. an interesting case because of the americans to say, you know, yes, they gave up on vietnam, cambodia, and loss. but, you know, they still got indonesia, malaysia, japan,

which at that time at least as far as american perceptions are going to the communist. so say you know, our intervention, she is goals that we prevented wholesale picture of communism in asia. so it wasn't probably just a matter of giving up on the americans. let me to do both to be a 1st to patrick here. i can agree with both of you with the same time for different reasons. i think, i mean, i think, you know, what point is it negative returns? i mean, these are not cost free. ok. number one, number one, they're very, very expensive. you know, 3 trillions plus for afghan, a standard. so and then i mean, and then there's the blood issue here and we have over the last 3 election cycles. these wars are very, very unpopular. how is it sustainable, the cost and the unpopularity? if $1.00 would think, maybe maybe one would think it has to come to some kind of tipping point, patrick,

1st. sure. in terms of popularity, i think the establishment in the united states is willing to take that on the chin that some of these intervention might be on popular. because the whole point of u. s. foreign policy is to open up markets for certain trends. national trade corporations and so forth. this is allowed the us to have, it's had your money. america's greatest preponderance isn't it isn't military. in fact, although it might seem like that it's the u. s. dollar. and it's, it's economic preponderance is financial preponderance more than military, military is just a tool to open up, to allow it to dominate globally financially. but i think george pointed out something that's interesting, you know, the middle east will become in a new cold war with china. the middle east will become a sort of contested zone law. george or wells geopolitical math in 1094. this endless war with east asia, but the middle east is changed and it's changed because of us action. so there is

now an arc of resistance that very well network, very well equipped and fortified, which stretches from iran all the way to lebanon. that's a direct result of us and its allies, various operations and escapades in places like syria and iraq. and i think there was a tipping point came in january 2020 when iran fired missiles, a dozen missiles at 22 us bases. and the u. s. did not strike back. so i mean that that was a really, to me, one of the biggest, besides, couldn't entrance into the steering war in october 2015. this moved by iran as a retaliation of the assassination of general cost, some sort of money and iraqi joan and us that was triggered. i think it's slow, a major realignment in terms of west asian geo politics. i think it's irreversible

because the u. s. is power is also based on it's the opponents ability to fear them or to respect them. and iran basically called their bluff and look what's happened . nothing has happened to ron. there's been a lot of saber adding. israel is assassinating you, nuclear scientist, etc. that's going on the fringes, but geopolitically, iraq is also changing their orientation. again, you know, antique more anti u. s. and the clock is ticking. the u. s. will eventually have to leave iraq. i don't know how long they'll be able to keep that going. and now iraqi kurdistan is now basically under threat as well by some of the same forces. but it's interesting, i think they're the kind of where the circle conversation here. i mean, these words from both of you. i mean, you know, we're going from a gemini, george gemini to contest it. i mean, that's an interesting strategy right there. ok. because then you lower the cost would, will cost economic costs. but you may still have the,

the financial leverage, as patrick was talking about this, there is a calibration going on. i don't know how conscious it is. and i don't know how conscious it is a grand strategy. or is it a concrete concrete thing like iraq, which is kind of a outlier when we come to look at these other things here? what do you think george? go ahead. well, i think the financial aspect is a fortune, but you want to bear in mind that what the united states did in iraq and afghanistan was quite extreme by us standards. i mean, those will full scale invasions, and that is very problematic because that's where you get casualties. as long as you can wage was sort of dishes li, using for as long as you can exert your influence on sales for through trade by, as a dollar. and minimize casualties. then the united states can still continue

with this policy. actually, it becomes very problematic when you go into vietnam war and you have 500000 troops. and then you can see it full scale invasion of iraq. and so it is, calculation was made by the united states as by the soviet union in the late 1008 is the you know, whatever the strategic value of, and maybe it isn't worth the normal blood and treasure that's involved in, in continuous talk you. but that doesn't mean that you give up on all the other ways, and i don't mean i don't think americans just going to give up in the middle east just like that. yeah, well, i think it's, it's still problematic. let me go to you for we end up part of the program here, but, you know, we, we have to, we can't discount the players on the ground. and there's a lot, a chatter,

a lot of re reassessing bag bellows talking to each other. recalibrating around is in the mix and all that. i think we can talk all about what the u. s. and its allies. but there's a lot of murmurings going on in the ground and then it is a psychological issue. they lost ok. they can be to beat it. ok. so i, that's one kind of balling in between. both of you here. go ahead with that. there's also just a technical aspect of waging war or having military dominance is that you need to be able to take territory whole territory in the real modern war in terms of what i think is the new u. s. policy, which is to use local enforcers to pull its assets offshore, use local enforcers. so they pulled out of cats are largely and used to saudi arabia as the front person for the yemen war from from march of 20. 15 forward to u. s. is really backing that logistically, satellites air force pilots in some cases, air refueling, munitions,

everything. so it was a great cash cow for the us. it made the money from the war. saudi paid them as well. for the services they were billed. same with the iraqi government was built for air strike, a part of my last comment. i would bet the farm on saudi arabia. gentlemen, i'm going to jump in here. we're going to go to a short break after lunch break. we'll continue our discussion on some real, stay with, oh ah, these are the full people who pulled the trigger or 5 something, survival or hardest things that we had to face with. a face at a low expectation, a life accepted. accept. i mean, that's why we had no fears. jell change pretty fast for shots.

different stories behind the bullets. oh, i am with welcome back to cross that were all things are considered on peter la bell. this is the home addition to remind you were discussing some real news with

i'm gonna go back to george in, in budapest. well, you tube is on the warpath again, against against creators, obviously, in the station that we're all on right now, our team has been thrown into the fray. and for the most part, at least at this point in time, it's about cobit misinformation. but when i find terrifying, actually, and sort of disappointing, as i see, this is just the cudgel to control control the narrative and to return of gemini in the media sphere back to the guild media, the new york times, washington po, cnn. all the other rest of them. and this is, and it's all layered with medical emergency and that's quite compelling. fear mongering by definition is compelling. that's why they do it. it's not about coven george. maybe this in this moment in time. but it's really much more. busy at stake

here than cobra misinformation. yeah. so you're spot because the whole sense to ship the black for me moving people all started long before it started immediately in the aftermath of the 2016 election with the hysteria about the russian boss and the misinformation over that the russians and the, the rain is we're providing and he was indeed the mainstream media for the internet giant to the platform, people who are providing no wrong information about the clinton. so this is seized on this issue, but it, so how much much bigger seem which was about this in the, in internet, which really democratize the availability of information. she does, i don't want to see in the information we want to control information. you know,

you have to listen to us and they, well, the pressure on the internet. so they just were literally a little wary of the black will make the pressure and then a bowl from the democrats. if you follow our big, unless you get rid of all of these pro russian boss, we're going to comment you and we're going to parcels of legislation. you're not going to like and, you know, the internet giants are on the list. so it is a matter of, you know, the politicians and the media for example, this wow, it's quite problematic as to what to do about this. yeah, i think i'm a rush game because that was kind of in my mind, it was a drive to see how much damage they rock will listen to them who it follow, who remain silent and then who would challenge them. and then we had under, by the laptop, which is, you know, that somebody special project, you know, they,

they're really proud of that. see how we just cut a huge hole through the internet. you know, on this one issue here. and they were very effective. and now it's co business information that they've learned from russia game they've learned from the under by lab. they know what to do now. they actually have a plate. that's my opinion. that's how i see it now from an extension from the hunter biden laptop. suppression of that story was after the election, any talk of election fraud, and he thought of it not being a free election. they came out formally and said they're going to take out, take down any videos or in the other social media because they were sanitizing their platforms. the same way. that's just not that much to any society that claims to be democratic that you can even have discussion or discourse, whether it be partisan or not. but the irony is that is completely partisan what they're doing on that side. but this extends geopolitically. and so back to the

taking down of our tea deutsche very dangerous that this platform will take state media and not only state media, a member of the un security council major channel had 600000 subscribers, hundreds of millions of views out competing. some of the german english language channels as well, and that's just down to what people are. they prefer to watch in terms of content. but this is dangerous. they did this depress t, v. a rainy and state media, they did it to syria, t v. not many people cared because syria t, v. what, what's the point? the point is, if you're at war, if you're a perpetual war, if the west sees itself as being in perpetual warfare all the time, which is in there, if you look at their integrated operating concepts, the things that are being released to white papers coming out of the u. k, for instance, they're viewing this as a spectrum that is constantly moving domestically and internationally. no difference between home in a way pitch. so this is,

this is what's being done. so i think this media war, the tit for tat to dangerous, because russia could been you tube within russian territory, then you're into a whole, another range of problems. but i think you have this merger. people have to remember when censorship is done by a company like google or youtube. it's not just, it's an american company, but the censorship is global. they have dominion over the entire planet, information space, and they can even have different policies for different countries, which facebook does, which google and youtube have done. and it doesn't matter what the regime is, that the policy is totally customized to whatever the political situation and their business relationship is in that country as far as medical misinformation, which is what they used to get the strike that took down the r t channel. they're doing that to millions of views of millions of pieces of content which their ceo admitted. and it's very vague. you k column,

the channel that i'm on as well. we had our channel deleted for medical misinformation. no specific was even 10 year old channels, thousands of videos. they don't tell you what the offending article is. it's left intentionally vague. as you said in, as george said it's, it's a convenient cultural. and the medical misinformation tactic could be used in the geo political sense. to take down because these governments are very close contact with these firms. we know this from the senate hearings. we know this from recent news report. so to think that they're not in touch with the state department or they're not influenced that's being pushed. and silicon valley from the political side would be very naive. you know, judging, we should never be surprised in this case. it's the internet, but we go back with newspapers and things like that. we should never be surprised that there, there are people that are ideologically predisposed to certain ideas, other marketplace issues here. but there's, what's new in the mix for me is that it's the people that claim to be journalist.

they're the ones that are spearheading this. they are the ones that are most keen on censorship, banning sadder banding and all of this because, you know, you can have people and you to google that have certain ideas. but i still wonder if they think, well, you know what, just make some money. ok. and then you have the, there's the pressure out there to conform because, you know, being the people that are sending this information. i mean, in the scheme of things, it's minuscule compared to what these platforms hold here. and that's why we believe it is political here. but then if anything is it's journalist, so news outlets, the ones that are sharing the loudest, but the worst possible thing ever happened to the internet in that is censorship. go ahead. yes. and there's a real irony there because the new york times that do this drum, this patrick said it's directed very much the rest of the rochester, you know, we have a roster. these is the malevolent factor because they engineer from selection

battery, they provide the information about rick lynch again. now, roches, the back is providing bad information back scenes and, you know, misinforming the public. so there's the geopolitical aspect. but what's really important is that these journals, these outlets like cnn, which i'll talk about this information and you know, conservancy here is pedal by russia. i mean there are few outlets in the world that are responsible for more bad news. news with c n, n. and then, you know, i mean the home to buy and i mean, you know, they, you know, they had all the nonsense. i'm to buy a laptop was, i was a russian intelligence operation. they federal the nonsense about the whole world of the russian gate conspiracy. a collusion they had all the nonsense about the russian bounties on us soldiers in afghanistan today. so you know,

we don't even have to go back to the iraq weapons of mass destruction. so they are responsible for long was this information then anything to me to volunteer usually get something wrong. i usually because a record of some mainstream media outlets are wrong, but they never got so many big things wrong. as these are the media outlets that are calling for censorship, i think by the standard me, the, the 10s of thousands of hours at c and n a m s m, b, c. they should be deleted by the standard that they are claiming about dis, information. and, and what, what, what add insult to injury is that when you go to you, no matter what you watch, they propose and you watch mainstream media. so, you know, they, that they know, you know, they don't have a dog in this, in the spite of course, they do, they're losing their market share. and market share is money. it's a, this is a business proposition for them. and they want it for money. they're willing to see

freedom of speech completely oblivious. they could there last there, bottom line in their shareholders. it's very pernicious. go ahead and below every video that you tube flagging that, they haven't taken down. there's a little coven, 19 information bar, or, or it'll be about russian state media. they put a russian state media under every r t video, but the, the cov, it link goes to wikipedia, and wikipedia is completely games in terms of information. this has been proven beyond a doubt, so this is the, or wells ministry of truth in action. but geopolitical, you have to realize that now, you know, the, all the fake news uproar during trump and after trump and this misinformation dis, information. the military are using these terms in nato countries, in their defense reviews, in their defense documents. and they're viewing this as a threat to the consensus and they're calling this space democratically protected.

so this is become a national security alien. so the g 7 launch something that a lot of people missed, which is the rapid response mechanism in 2018 when theresa may was prime minister. and what it meant that all g 7 countries had to have streamline messaging on anything national security related. and this is almost like a treaty. ok. so if you think about, if you criticize the german government policy or the u. k. government policy, whether it's me, you or some alternative media outlet that goes into a national security column. and it's to be dealt with or seen as a threat. and they're going to legislate against this in the u. k with the online arms legislation in to, to elevate trusted sources and to basically delete or remove what they call misinformation or dangerous to democracy in anything that damages confidence, in government, or the consensus and government is the worst offender for destroying confidence in

itself. as is the mainstream media in confidence in media, it's their fake news as you pointed, that is caused the public to just abandon them in drugs. so this is just a strange epoch we find ourselves. well it's, it's a tragic one because it's a sunset on civilization and folks, if you're gonna rely upon the week of media, you know, just out the lights, it's over. okay, that's all the time. i want to thank my guests and we did president limits? want to thank our viewers for watching us here. are you see an ex family member? ah, ah ah

ah, ah ah, this is alex. he had lining right now facebook, whatsapp, and instagram suffer one of the largest outages in internet history, sending boss mog zak, a bugs 14 tumbling by $7000000000.00 when in just a few hours. also ahead, denmark's energy agency gets the green light about brushes, no string to gas pipeline. as europe grapples with soaring fuel prices, i say the situation is stabilizing. no one's going to pretend his completely back to normal. i wish it was, but he says it's getting it that way. what british officials down play their own ongoing fuel crisis. they've now deployed military forces across the country as

petrol stations remain dry.