small apartment not allowed to go out surrounded by police. then he was put in a prison that said designated for serious offenders. terrorist treat again extremely harsh treatment. the un reports her and her plausibly in my view, describes it as a torture, rubber, tor and torture. and then that's an accurate designation. so he's being charged in the united states. lizzy espionage act, sonata goes back to 1917 quarter of the harshest repression in american history. wilson administration bitter attacks on any one who questioned the nobility of

a participation in the 1st world war. a major attacks on labor, on decisions on intellectual opinion. it is part of the repression as an enormous impact on american society, listed until the prison legacy. israel been used for essentially the purpose for over and over the most extreme was actually barack obama, or the current case is a sage, is being charged under the espionage at the act should not be on the books in any democratic society, but to the main crime is his exposure of materials that state once suppressed. you've been attacked her most of your life. i circled

maids, dream media, but do you think it's getting worse now? you might have to remind some people about what you and at the home and said in manufacturing consent to differentiate propaganda from se style in a soviet times. because i actually there's a viral video of a, b, b, c reporter, andrew marr. i think his name is and he says to you, what are you talking about? no one tells me what to say, and you will, you might remember what you say to him back. you have to change the propaganda model with julian assange in jail with the banning of art literature, music, sports press in the, in the nato nation landscape. whereas before it was done in a slightly more well as you describe it a more structured and more complex way, i think actually in many who is better now than it was before. one reason is that many journalists have simply lived through the

liberating effect of the activism of the 19 sixty's, which shattered many barriers and its esther mass, which continues. this is part of their formation, tends to make them more free and open. you look back to the say, 1960 is the idea of questioning authority. barely a rose a take the vietnam war, the worst crimes since the 2nd world war took years to try to organize any opposition to it. i happened to live in boston, which is the most liberal city in the country. we couldn't have public demonstrations against the war because they would be well lately, broken up tried to have meetings and churches, the churches were attacked. it was years before you could finally get some kind of

protest against this horrendous atrocity which by the time protest, right, really developed, almost destroyed 3 countries. but there's been a change surely the war currently raging in europe. if you look at bernie sanders, advisor, matt dust, diplomatic summit settlement would mean ukraine surrender every single person in the biden. in the d n. c, the democrats voted to supply weapons to ukraine. the senate approved a resolution to support finland and sweden, in nato. i only ran to paul and john harvey 2 who g o p senators voted against you have the entire when all 6 of the so called score the democrats all intent and there are no demonstrations to stop or the profits of raphael general dynamics.

boeing, lockheed martin, and northrop grumman. another difference between the 1st we should discuss the suppose isn't there justification, but what different today from the 19 say 50 years ago is that there is debate and discussion it so overwhelmingly an aside of state power and official doctrine. but it exists, you go back to the 19th sixty's, it barely even existed. there was no up in the case of the vietnam war, for example. there was essentially no opposition to it for a long time. finally, broker. and we should be, we should recognize that the civilizing effect of the activism,

mostly young people in those years. and since has had an impact, there is no a range of debate discussion. people like me of course, can't get into the mainstream media, but we never could. that was impossible. and now at least there's alternative wish for voices. well actually, or, well, actually your name has been mentioned in mainstream media and it's been defamed. and i don't know whether you want to take legal action. you're a trenchant critic of vladimir putin. and yet, if i look on the internet, that big publications calling you a put an apologist when you've spent every week since february the 24th. and we have moved to as the russian c at protect, the people have done best you've spent criticising for that. we have period. why do they call you a putin of ologist?

because say, if you deviate from official doctrine, you're condemned as an apologist for the enemy of the state. you talked in the 1960 isabel trying to bring the her in this war in vietnam to an end. you were called and apologised for jim in ok, that says standard technique of vilification. you know, order answer arguments, you throw most people that's normal and expected. but to day, if you look at mainstream establishment journals, foreign affairs, major journal, you actually find arranges critical commentary actually not all the different from things i say, well go back years,

you didn't as it just marching in a parade furshly no descent. but of course, in say, britain, they've banned c g t and the chinese channel from broadcasting r t. famously. why is it that you think russia thinks it's fine? i think so gay lover of this week giving a press conference allowing western reporters accreditation. whereas in the united states, they obviously don't ban media in the u. s. because of the 1st amendment. certainly in europe, obviously there's mass binding of journalists and journalism. what's behind it vat? and that surely does depart some what from manufacturing consent where they didn't want to ban anything. they just knew that the lower selling outlets would fail to engage the populace in, in dissident opinion. well, i see, 1st of all, it's quite know if you look through the see it in

take a more recent event, the iraq or not that far back. anyone who dares to see that iraq, or was the major crime of the century, which it certainly was, is bitterly denounced and condemned. if you look at discussion in the mainstream, you'll be hard put to find anyone who does, who can reach the mainstream, who will say the elementary truth and indisputable truth, that the iraq war was an example of what the nuremberg tribunal called the supreme international crime. aggression which differs from other war crimes only in the it includes all the evil

that follows. so find somebody who says, president bush don rumsfeld, dick cheney, we're guilty of the crimes for which people were aimed at nuremberg instead. would you hes celebration of george bush? the great criminal who invaded iraq and afghanistan and destroyed them. celebration of him as a lovely person scolded, goofy graham placement, his grandchildren, painted pictures just a delightful person. well, that iraq were. it's for quite striking that anyone who dares to compare the iraq war with the russian invasion of ukraine is viciously denounced. harvard university even had a, a debate in which the debate was whether the wreck or can be considered

a humanitarian intervention. a debate. suppose that moscow university had a debate on whether the russian invasion can be called a humanitarian intervention. can you imagine the reaction in the west? what's the reaction in the was to what happened at or a close look at the openness of american society. the reason willing to question whether this military intervention was a humanitarian intervention. oh, well, that manufacturer consent. let me give in explicit example. recently there were couple articles in the mainstream press saying there's no some skepticism arising about whither russia was really responsible for the sabotage of the nurturing pro,

pipe lunch. professor chomsky i'll stop you there more from one of the world's greatest and most cited public intellectuals after this break. ah ah. a b waivers which have formed over tens of thousands of years can give us important information into our climate and how it has changed over time. what a scary is our glaciers are melting, added the alarming rate to learn more. we came here to help help us to speak to victor pop up and he has a gracie ologist who is devoted his entire life to the topic. it is

a fascinating at times dangerous and very important job. a plan through water is thrown in the well not able national board about scheduling. this comes with the last dance have to deal with. i feel as we've gone from the hours from them to lower the bt. do training a gift away in the pals teacher skills on the edge on the brown asia. so was to let them know that it gives him a little bulk them in the crucial chest middle school. i was meaning this wookey bone is not as good p t d still not what you could eat with the leukemia. well they need to work with up sheet. any video picks that will be good to go with. no, go see she'll be missed if they need to. the middle sophomore and you can you bus

15 the duties of federal circle? miss nancy? this maria bill, but it just tossed up even though so glad you need to locate those my database. just to look me, it doesn't help with me. she go, she returned with saying, you'll have to learn this maritza to handle. most of you mom will shuttle specially to live with lisa. there's openings and you took a plane piecemeal. mm. ah, welcome back to going on the ground. i'm still here with professor no m chomsky, american dissident and co author of the pioneering book manufacturing consent, the political economy of the mass media. maybe they call you a putin apologise, because you expressed doubt about

a terror attack. that was one of the worst. as if climate destroying gera tax given the amount of fossil fuels released that alone. this is what the sabotage means for energy resources for germany. you think that the mainstream media that said this must be the russians, could have got it wrong. i mean, the least likely it is, the state responsible for the service is russia. it's the pipeline that was sabotaged, destroyed is largely owned by a russian company. what possible purpose would russia his head in destroying it's and sabotaging its own major capital investment, which it counts on for supplying your if russia, one of the supporters stop the supply of grass is all it could do is turn off of

didn't have to destroy it mean, it's main investment, so the least likely state that can be charged is russian. so of course, the western media immediately rushed on race to say, will russia is responsible? now they're raising some skepticism. that's called manufacturers consent. said to framework and debate within it. but it's the framework that is insane. who's the likely culprit in the north stream service? who had the motive and the capability? well, just one state, united states obviously had the motive, in fact, was quite frank and open about saying that those are put not only opposing the pipelines but saying that they'll be destroyed. the motive was not secret, was perfectly public,

obviously had the capability to just add large naval movers in the region right before the 7 major ship some equipment. so they had the capability and the mode is clearly nobody else anything like that. the russians are the least likely culprit. so manufacturing consensus, let's have a lively debate to show open and free we are. but within the framework that excludes by assumption, by the possibility the united states might have been involved will only discuss debate whether the least likely cobra is involved. well, that's effective propaganda. you don't just lie. that's refutable would you do is set up the framework of discussion which excludes totally excludes the of

this and most likely answer then debate are there things are in the case of iraq. you have a debate that harvard over whether the iraq invasion was a humanitarian invasion. you don't have a debate over whether it was the a crime, a kind of crime for which not a worker littles were hang number. you don't want to open a question for discussion to discuss something ridiculous. was it a humanitarian intervention? when you carry out a shark attack against iraq, smash up the country, kill hundreds of thousands of people. have all kinds of torture and other trust in each infected. one of the worst crimes in the iraq war was the battle solution, especially the 2nd battle solution. devastating destructive murders attack by the moraine began was taking over the general hospital to war,

crime in itself then destroying much of the city killing. nobody knows how many people, because we are an investigator on crimes. how is that? remember the united states? well, tell you the u. s. navy is now commissioning a new vessel in honor of the marines who fought and fluted. it's called a. that's the way we deal with. one of the worst crimes doesn't get reported. of course, i should say, the biden administration officially denies involvement in the terror attack on the north stream. as does the british administration of the allegations. the royal navy was involved in it. and i mentioned that you're a critic of a valuable putin given that angular merkle says that the minsk process was actually a delaying tactic to arm ukraine. what would you have done differently

knowing that sab, politically, within russia, vladimir putin was under pressure, given the thousands of people of the don bass being killed with nato weapons in easton ukraine. and given that the minced process was, went on for a number of years, it was adopted by the security council. what are you supposed to do after being told repeatedly that the americans weren't going to go into your grain? you again, wasn't gonna join nato and actually it was and obviously we have the details of the qu, you and if you had one further negotiations, you would have called for intermediaries with the french. that's not quite the story on the limb or kill. now says that it was a delay effort. there isn't a particle evidence in the record to support

a claim. ah, nothing. at the time. germany and french took it very seriously, were pressing for the mama chrome she up until couple of days before the invasion. heard a long interchange with couldn't you can read the transcript published in the french press o for in various ways to reinstitute something like the minsk agreement and prevent the invasion. couldn't reject it at the end. the last conversation 4 days before the invasion is simply rejected. the discussions with contempt. so sorry i have to go ice skating or something like that. well, there were opportunities. there was plenty of provocation. you're quite right, lots of provocation, but provocation doesn't justify aggression. aggression is

a major crime. if you're, if you provoke me to attack you and, and i attack you, i'm guilty. even if i was provoked. and for the people that defend that burden's decision as a mark of a new world order to avenge iraq. just one of the wars in reason is that your government has been involved in as the global south come together. new currency is being talked about, new ways of talking about energy, perhaps even helping the climate better than any cop summit under the aegis of the united states. you don't buy that, you can't believe in a global south with that china or india, lula, your friend. and, and brazil, and russia altogether and the debt death of europe in effect. well,

i think the major shifts in world are in the invasion of ukraine, and the reaction to accelerate it is one effect of the invasion of ukraine was to give the united states extraordinary gift, couldn't gave the united states and gifted it greatly relishes. it drove europe into the pocket of the united states. there's been a debate all through the cold war back to the 1940s as to whether europe should move in an independent direction be what we're sometimes called a 3rd 3rd force in international affairs which pressed most vigorously, but chose the goal, deliberate us politic gestures for calm and others,

united states instead and demanded what's called the atlanta sister based on nato, which the united states runs, of course, in which europe would be subordinate to the united states. this became a major issue with the collapse of the soviet union. mikhail gorbachev proposed a common european home from lisbon de la, reversed no military alliances, no victors, no defeated, common efforts to move forward towards a moralist, social democratic eurasia. united states was strongly opposed, insisted on the atlanta system, or put in as in say, oh for the united states. it's highest wish, provided europe at least temporarily,

is to, within, has abandoned search for independence. shanisha joining subordinating itself to the states to which it seemed to which some would say they were already bases at ramstein in britain, an aircraft carrier for the united states for so so long we're running a little bit shorter time professor chomsky i want to get to something really disturbing in what you've been writing recently. i thought you said and coming from the pioneer of generative grammar, i'm saying that psych loosely connected, you said that humanity can have a dedication to self destruction. what i mean, given that megan markel, of all people now claim, says she, she reads your work, and i know you send a message to her through the airways, as it were saying that you were pleased that prince harry's wife. read your work. what do you mean by a pathological, perhaps dedication to self destruction given?

we are talking obviously about some things that involve armageddon. and i know the bulletin of atomic scientists will be resetting the the clock next tuesday about how close, how long we have to live. well, the bulletin said, the doomsday clerk. in 1947, shortly after the bombing, the hands are set certain distance from midnight, midnight means termination of human species. the 1st sitting was 7 minutes to midnight. it's oscillated over the years during the trumpet, ministration. they abandoned minute move to seconds. now sadder chickens to midnight. january 24th, it will be said again, i presume. the 2nd it will be set closer to midnight. certainly should be

a main concerns or increasing threat of nuclear war. the very severe and growing threat of a destruction of the climate which is rapidly increasing, states are not doing what they know they must do to solve discourages. the 3rd is the deterioration of an arena of rational, serious debate and deliberation with the collapse of democratic forces around the world. sounds at 1st as if that doesn't belong with the 1st 2. but it does, because that's the only hope for dealing with the 1st 2 or 3 has gotten considerably worse during the past year. and unless there is a sharp reversal will simply be heading for a precipice falling over irreversible and not in the long distant future.

present i'm chomsky thank you and that's it for the show. we'll be back next week with another brand new episode. but until then you can still keep in touch by all our social media. if it's not censored in your country, but you can always add to our channel going on the grantee on rumble dot com to watch new and old episodes. going on the grounds. see very soon ah ah ah

ah ah need to come to the russian state. total narrative. i've stayed as i'm phoning most landscape div jimenez. english house not meet within the 55 with we will van in the european union. the kremlin. ca yep. machine. the state on russia for date and school r t spoke neck, given our video agency, roughly all band on youtube and pinterest and

with ah, headlines at this hour. the u. s. a treasury 2nd 3 years is a little bit ap good towards a push back against russia and china rising influence on the continent. this flight, her officially the all of our a accuses us fall on giant applies of how we attempted to quote, bully is government and to providing legal protection for the company. in case of any side effects from the curb. in fact a desk worker.