are not allowed to do a rounded by police, but any was put in a prison designated for serious defenders. there's treat again stream the horse treatment, the u. n, or upwards or on to or pleasurably. in my view describes it is a torture rubber door and torture on that. so the night after designation. oh, he's being sure is united states a lindsey espionage act. so that's a goes back to 1917 quarter of the harshest repression in american history. the wilson administration, the bitter attacks on anyone who questioned the nobility of the participation of the 1st world war measure

a tax on labor additions on intellectual opinion. it is part of the repression that should and enormous impact on the american society list until the present latency is true. it's been used for essentially the purpose for over and over the most extreme was actually a rock obama of the card case is saying, just being charged on to the espionage, it could not be on the books in any democratic society, but to remain crime is, is exposure materials that the state once suppressed, you've been attacked uh most of your life pay a so called mainstream 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 setting manufacturing consent to differentiate propaganda from, say, styling is sylvia at times. because the actually is a viral video of a bbc reporter andrew moore. i think his name is and he says, do you, what are you talking about? no one tells me what to say, and you will, you might remember what you say to have back. do you have to change the propaganda model with julian assigned in jail with the banning of the literature, music, sports press in the, in the native nation landscape. whereas before, it was done in a slightly more well as you describe the most structured and more complex way i think actually in many ways better know that it was before. one reason is that many journalists have simply live through the

liberator. in effect of the activism of the 19 sixty's, which shattered many barriers. this after math, which continues, this is part of their formation, tends to make them more free and open. you look back to the say, 196. these are the ideas questioning as already barely a roach take the vietnam or the worst crime since the 2nd world war 2 years to try to organize any opposition to it. i happen to live in boston, which is the most liberal city in the country. we couldn't have totally demonstrations against the war because they would be violently broken up. uh, tried to have meetings in churches of churches where it was years before you could

finally get some kind of protest against this or in this atrocity which by the time protest, right. really develop to almost the through the 3 countries. but to me that there's been a change shown in the war currently raging in europe. of the, you know, you look at bernie sanders advise them at the us diplomatic summit settlement would mean ukraine surrender. every single person in the bite and the d. n. c. the democrats voted to supply weapons to ukraine. the senate approved a resolution to support finan in sweden, in nato. i only rand paul and john harvey to who would you be saying that just voted against a you have a the entire i mean, all 6 of the circled score, the democrats, all intent and they're all no demonstrations to stop the. the prophets of raphael

in general dynamics building, lockheed martin and also government another the difference between 1st what we should discuss is suppose, isn't there just to cation, but what different today from the 19 say 50 years ago is there is debate and discussion. if it's over well, mainly the other side of state power and official doctrine that it exist. you go back to the 1960 that barely even exist. there was no indication of it no more. for example, that was essentially no position to earth. and for a long time, finally broke out and we should be, we should recognize that the civilizing effect of the activism most of the young

people in those years instance has had an impact. there is no ranges to be discussion of people like may of course, can't get into the mainstream media, but we never could. that was impossible though at least there's alternative ways for voices as well. actually, or, well actually you your name as being mentioned in main stream media and it's being famed and i don't know whether you want to take legal action. you're a trenchant critic of lads who have boots in. and yet, if i look on the internet, the big publications calling you a put in an apologist when you've spent the every week since february, the 24th. and we moved to as the russian see it protect the people who've done best used events criticizing for that, do we have food? why do they call you a put in apologist?

because a, if you deviate from official doctrine, you're condemned, is a apologist for the enemy is the state you talked in? the 1960 is about is a trying to bring lives, are in this war in vietnam. do it in your cold and apologised for her g mail. okay, that says standard technique or vilification, you know, or answer arguments you through the people that's normally expected of but to today, if you look at the main stream establishment, gerald ford affairs, the major journal, you actually find a range of critical commentary. actually not all the different from things i say, well, a duplex years, you didn't as it just marching it up or it virtually notice it. but of

course, in se brittany, they banned c g t and the dry news channel from broadcasting r t. a famously. why is it that you think russia thinks it's fine? i think it's like a level of this week giving a press conference allowing west and reporters accreditation. whereas in the united states, they obviously don't ban media in the us because of the 1st amendment setting in europe. obviously, there's mass binding of journalists and journalism. what's behind that? and that truly does depart from what from manufacturing consent, where they didn't want to ban anything. they just knew that the low selling outlets would fail to engage the populace in, in decisions opinion is it, 1st of all that's going to uh,

you look through the say is take a more recent event, the erac or not that far back. anyone who dares to say that the record was the major crime of the century, which it certainly was, is bitterly denounced and condemned. if you look at the discussion in the main stream, it will be hard put to fund anyone who just couldn't reach the main street and who will say the elementary truths in this in disputable truth. the theoretical was an example of what the nuremberg tribunal called the supreme international crime. a new direction which differs from other work crimes only in the it includes all was the evil that

follows. so find somebody who says, prison bush rumsfeld, dick cheney were guilty of the crimes for which people were, i don't know, remembered and said what you have is celebration of george bush, the great criminal who is a to do rec, enough scanners to destroy the celebration of him as a lovely person in school, the goofy graham placement of his grandchildren paints pictures just a delightful person. well, that's erratic or it's for, it's quite striking that anyone who dares to compare your rank or was the russian ization of ukraine is viciously denounced. harvard university even had a debate in which the debate was whether the rank or can be considered

a humanitarian intervention. a debate? suppose that moscow university had a debate whether the russian invasion can be called a humanitarian intervention. can you imagine there were uh, well, let's manufacturer of consider the responsible for the sabotage of the north stream . pray play, plunge promises drunk scouts, stop you. the more from one of the world's greatest and most sites in public intellectuals after this break, or the

the welcome back to going on the ground. i'm still here with professor know i'm trying to escape american dissidents and co author of the

pioneering book, manufacturing consent. the political economy of the mass media. maybe they call you a page and a biologist because you expressed doubts about a terror attack. that was one of the worst. as if climate destroying gera tax given the amount of fossil fuels released. that's 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. it means the least likely the, the, the, for a, for state responsible for this other, this is rosure. it's the pipeline, the subdivision destroyed is largely old, but because we're all russian company, what possible purpose with rush, it is in destroying its instead of closing its own major capital investment,

which it counts on for supplying your refresher. one of the support is stopped. the supply of grass is all it could do is turn off of sales, didn't have to destroy it to main. it's main, the investment. so the least likely state of it can be charged is russian. so of course, the western media immediately rushed on race to say, will russia's responsible, know they're raising some skepticism. that's called manufacturer of consent set to framework and debate within it. but it's the framework, the motive and the capability. well, just one state, united states obviously had the motive, in fact, was quite frank. open about saying that those will put not only opposing the pipelines but saying that they'll be destroyed. the motive was not the secret,

was perfectly public, obviously has the capability to interested large naval movers in the region of right before the show that the major ship position equipment. so it took a bit literally in the mode is clearly and nobody else said anything like that, the russians in the least likely cobra. so manufacturing consensus, let's have a lively debate to show who opened for you, your but within the framework that excludes the assumption. but the possibility that the united states might have been involved with literally discuss debate, whether it's the least likely cobra. it isn't 12. well, that's effective propaganda. your own g as in boy, that's refutable. what do you do is set up the framework of discussion,

which excludes totally excludes the of this most likely answer. the debate or other things. during the case of the rec, you have a debate. this harvard over whether was the recommendation was a humanitarian invasion. you don't have a debate over whether it was the a crime to kind of crime for which not so your current levels right now. remember, you don't want to open the question for discussion to discuss something ridiculous . wasn't the humanitarian intervention. when you carry out a shocking or attack against the rug, smash up the country, kill hundreds of thousands of people, of all kinds of torture and other trusts. and each, if i have just one of the worst crimes in the iraq war, was the battle flew drew. especially the 2nd battle us lose you. devastating destructive immersion tech was

a marine issue began was taking over the general hospital war crime in itself. then destroying much in the city doing no, you know how many people because we ordered investigator on crimes. how is that? remember the united states? well, i'll tell you, the u. s. navy is no commissioning a new the so in honor of the marines who forwarded and flew to school the further would you and that's the way we deal with one of the worst crimes doesn't get reported. of course, i should say, the bible administration officially denies involvement. in the terror attacks on the north stream, as does the british administration of to allegations the royal navy was involved in it. and i mentioned that you were a critic of the page. and given that angela, michael says that the mintz process was actually a delaying tactic. to,

um, ukraine, what would you have done differently? knowing that the politically, within russia, vladimir putin was under pressure, given the thousands of people of the done bass being killed with nato, a weapons in, in eastern new grain. given that the means process was when john for a number of years, it was adopted by the security council. what do you suppose to do after being told repeatedly that the, the americans was going to go into your grand ukraine, wasn't going to join nato and actually it was and they'll use the, we have the, the details of the crew. you, if you would, one further negotiations you would have called for intermediaries with the french to this includes the story on the american bill now says that it was a delay for the original part of the evidence in the river. this report to claim

the nothing at the time germany in france took it very seriously, were pressing for a modem of cream actually up and to couple of days before the innovation, federal loan interchange with coding. you can read the transcript published as the french chris offering various ways to reinstitute something likely minsk agreement then prevent the invasion of purging rejected it at the end. the last conversation 4 days before the invasion, he simply rejected the discussions with contempt to, i'm sorry, i have to go ice skating or something like that. well, there were opportunities that was put in for a vacation. you're quite right. lots of publication. publication doesn't justify

aggression. aggression is a major crime. here, if you provoke me to attack you and then i attack you, i'm guilty even if i was approved. and for the people, the defend persians decision as a, a mock of a new world order to avenge iraq. just one of the was in reason is that your government as being involved in, as the global south come together, new currency is being talked about, new ways of talking about energy. perhaps even helping the climb. it's better than any comp, somebody's under the aegis of the united states. you don't buy that. you can believe in a global south with china or india, lula, your friend. and i'm brazil and russia altogether. and the depth depth of your up in effect, as well as

a 0 or major shift in world or in the invasion of ukraine as a reaction to it is accelerated. this one effect of the invasion of ukraine was the, gives the united states that extraordinary gift put in caves in the united states and gifted it greatly real issues. it drove europe into the pocket of the united states. there's many debates, all through the cold war, back to the 19 forward age as to whether you or should move in an independent direction be what was sometimes called the 3rd 3rd force in international affairs, most vigorously, but chose to go deliberate. are supposed to take gestures of

calm and others, united states and stood and demanded would scroll. the latest version based on nato, which the united states rose, of course, in which europe would be subordinate to the united states. this became a major issue with the collapse of the soviet union, garbage of proposed to common european home from lisbon to start the military alliances. the victors defeated common efforts to move forward towards a more or less social democratic erasure. united states were strongly opposed, says that on the atlanta should report in this is inside. oh, for the united states. it's highest wish for europe, at least temporarily,

is within has a band and search for independence finish joining the subordinating itself to the states to it's the same to which some would say they were already base is a gram stain in britain. yeah, that craft gary over the united states for so so long. we're running a little bit $200.00 time professor jones. i want to get to something really disturbing. and what you've been writing recently, i've told you said and coming from this pioneer of generative grammar, i'm saying that it's like loosely connected. you said that humanity kind of have a dedication to self destruction. what i mean, given the megan mako level people now claim says she, she reads your work, and i know you send a message to through the va waves as it was saying that you are pleased to prince harry's wife. read your what. what do you mean by a pathological,

perhaps dedication to self destruction given? we are talking obviously about them at things that involve, i'm a gathering and i know the bulletin. if it's all mac scientists will be resetting the the clock next tuesday about how close, how long we have to live of the said the doomsday cluck in 1947, shortly after the bombing, the hands are set a certain distance from midnight midnight bins termination mostly human species, the 1st sitting was 7 minutes to midnight. it's us later over the years during the trump administration, they abandon minutes move to seconds. so center, 100 seconds to midnight, january 24th, it will be said again, i presume. the 2nd it will be said closer to midnight circle should be

the main concerns or increasing threat of nuclear war. the very severe and growing threats of the destruction of the climate which is rapidly increasing. states are not doing what they know they must do to solve this car issues. the 3rd is the deterioration of the arena of rational, serious debate and delivery sion with the collapse of democratic forces around the world. sounds at 1st is that doesn't belong with the 1st 2, but it does because that's only hope for dealing with the 1st 2 or 3 has gotten considerably worse during the past year. and unless there's a sharp reversal, we'll simply be heading for a pressure push,

pulling over irreversible and not a long distant future present on 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 with all social media or if it's not sensitive in your country, but you can always add to a channel going undergoing tv on romo dot com to watch new and old episodes going underground. so you guys have the

1937 militaristic. japan started a full scale invasion of china. the invading army was rapidly advancing towards the capital of the republic of china. the dies, the city of not seeing, leaving behind the burned down villages and thousands of the dead. on december 13th, the japanese occupied time, z and staged out real massacre. for 6 weeks, the invaders exterminated the civilian population. they carried out mass executions, rates, women, and were engaged, been merciless robbery,

ruthless competition of 2 officers of the imperial army. so so yaki, my guide and to yoshi, no to gain particular notoriety. they competed with each other as though who would be the fastest to kill $100.00 chinese with a sword. this monstrous competition was widely reported in the japanese press. to the nuns, inc massacre claims the lives of about 300000 people and became one of the largest crimes against humanity in the world history. after world war 2, manufactures advance of the address of the phase trial. however, the commander of the japanese army, in the non seeing operation, freeze yasu eco, a socket, was able to escape the responsibility due to the interference of the american administration. the so what we've got to do

is identify the threats that we have. it's crazy from foundation, let it be an arms race is on all sides. very dramatic. the only personally, i'm going to resist. i don't see how that strategy will be successful, very unclear to get a time time to sit down and talk the multiple strikes are upholstered in cities across ukraine, overnights, including the capital t of also ahead the western side of the city that into creating an opportunity by the way, the ministry, based on the west side of the city, you paid your troops retreated from here under the attack dog to have private military companies. so this advanced in thomasville bach modes with just a little over 2 squared columbus is of the city. let's take off the reports from

the from lines to camp denies the requests to give us control of russian made s 400 defense systems. same they are critical for the countries national security and .