Wild moment on Bloomberg: Columbia Professor Blames Biden for Blowing Up Pipeline
Yesterday on Bloomberg TV:
8 thoughts on “Wild moment on Bloomberg: Columbia Professor Blames Biden for Blowing Up Pipeline”
Where’s the lie?
Jeff Sachs has done that rare thing: intellectually grow in his “third act.” See also, e.g., this remarkable discussion he had on his podcast a few months ago with Keisha N. Blain on the life of Fannie Lou Hamer. This old dog has been reading Black history lol. It goes to show that even people who made their careers in part by plundering Russia and eastern Europe, as Sachs did, can eventually escape the gravitational pull of the empire and think for themselves without succumbing to another empire. There’s hope, but of course not if we blow ourselves up..
This reminds me of the Syrian WMD attacks and so many other stories just like it. Our propagandist in the West love to put together fanciful stories about our adversaries. I would say they put on circumstantial cases but honestly they don’t even go that far because they stop with “means and opportunity” and ignore motivation. Short of a smoking gun all you have is logic and they throw it out the window every time. What logical motivation does Russia have or Assad? They had zero, in fact it was the opposite, they had every reason to fear something like this happening.
The US has the means, motive and opportunity and while Russia has the means and opportunity, they didn’t have the motive. And honestly, I’m not sure they had the opportunity to do it in a way that wouldn’t have been detected. The same thing goes for Assad in Syria. He had the means but not the motive and probably didn’t have the opportunity to do it in a way that wouldn’t be detected.
Our Western Propagandists love to put on half baked circumstantial cases against our adversaries, despite the fact that a circumstantial case fits the US far better. I suppose this is why you will never see them put on an actual debate that discusses these type of events where they are forced to make their case. The Case fits the US and they know it does, which is why they Scoff at and deride or simply ignore the opposition, rather than debate them.
Where’s the lie?
Jeff Sachs has done that rare thing: intellectually grow in his “third act.” See also, e.g., this remarkable discussion he had on his podcast a few months ago with Keisha N. Blain on the life of Fannie Lou Hamer. This old dog has been reading Black history lol. It goes to show that even people who made their careers in part by plundering Russia and eastern Europe, as Sachs did, can eventually escape the gravitational pull of the empire and think for themselves without succumbing to another empire. There’s hope, but of course not if we blow ourselves up..
https://sdgacademylibrary.mediaspace.kaltura.com/media/Conversation+with+Keisha+N.+BlainA+Until+I+Am+Free/1_v9if5taz/199826673
Interesting how everyone is blamed except Israel, which is building a new pipeline from the east med to europe.
It is? Wow! Just checked. It is. Or was. Maybe.https://greekreporter.com/2022/01/13/us-eastmed-pipeline-gas/
Dr. Sachs is a treasure.
I guess we will never see him on the news again
This reminds me of the Syrian WMD attacks and so many other stories just like it. Our propagandist in the West love to put together fanciful stories about our adversaries. I would say they put on circumstantial cases but honestly they don’t even go that far because they stop with “means and opportunity” and ignore motivation. Short of a smoking gun all you have is logic and they throw it out the window every time. What logical motivation does Russia have or Assad? They had zero, in fact it was the opposite, they had every reason to fear something like this happening.
The US has the means, motive and opportunity and while Russia has the means and opportunity, they didn’t have the motive. And honestly, I’m not sure they had the opportunity to do it in a way that wouldn’t have been detected. The same thing goes for Assad in Syria. He had the means but not the motive and probably didn’t have the opportunity to do it in a way that wouldn’t be detected.
Our Western Propagandists love to put on half baked circumstantial cases against our adversaries, despite the fact that a circumstantial case fits the US far better. I suppose this is why you will never see them put on an actual debate that discusses these type of events where they are forced to make their case. The Case fits the US and they know it does, which is why they Scoff at and deride or simply ignore the opposition, rather than debate them.