Yemen. Strategically Correct -The Whole Story

[lyonspotter]

Run time: 10:06 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aPMdRhKmc4Y   Posted on YouTube: January 08, 2010 By YouTube Member: Views on YouTube: 0   Posted on DU: January 09, 2010 By DU Member: lyonspotter Views on DU: 2946

 

[mattvermont]

1. who wrote her dialogue?

[lyonspotter]

2. Does your question imply that a woman can't write for herself? NT

[donheld]

3. I don't think that's what they meant at all.

MattVermont, I think just want's to know where she got this. Maybe she did it herself, but he and I both would like more information on her. I know many many women who can write extremely well.

[lyonspotter]

4. She cited her references and influences in links in the sidebar...

For my part, I assume good faith on her part, and that she wrote the content of the video herself.

[mattvermont]

19. actually, all I meant was

That she is reading it as if she never read it before. I believe about all she is saying, and would only wish
it were delivered more genuinely. I was making no such comment as to a woman's ability to write, as that is ridiculous.

[notadmblnd]

20. Don't you just love how some people here see things in your posts that aren't there?

I've noticed it happening often here lately. I too thought she was reading and didn't think anything you said was sexist. At least the person that commented asked civilly. Many times they don't.

[lyonspotter]

21. If I may...

...the original question asked: "Who wrote her dialogue?"

Implicit in the question is that the woman in the video did not write it, or at the very least may not have written it. The question is sliding toward the uncharitable side of the spectrum, IMHO. It does not assume she wrote it, which would be a whole lot more charitable, or respectful.

Hence I asked for clarification of the initial terse question.

[notadmblnd]

22. I guess if you want to see a boogey man there, you will see a boogey man there

I'm female, I didn't see it. It looked like she was reading and that she was unfamiliar with it at times. Certainly you would agree that an author is generally familiar with what they write? The poster asked who wrote it (I didn't go to you tube to view the video and didn't see her citations, maybe the other poster didn't either?)

I think the proper reply to that statement would be to either provide the authors name or simply say she was the writer if that is the case. I saw no reason to read anything else into the posters statement.

Perhaps I'm just overly sensitive to the atmosphere here lately? It seems that many angry people come here for the explicit reason of lashing out, and that they are just looking to be mean and ugly to each other.

[lyonspotter]

23. As to your first point...

...people who read their own writings sometimes are unfamiliar with the concepts of the writings, or are at least not perfectly versed in them (I.e., haven't perfectly memorized the flow of the content). Reading from a script, as we can see in the below example, is not always a perfect affair. From what I understand, Obama writes his speeches...

See Obama stumble over his words here at 4:45-5:00: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7thN6XBOjts

These are precisely the same words that he spoke at the Nobel Peace Prize acceptance speech, where he did not botch the words here (at 2:24-2:35): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rMaTIEKIuRI

Second time's a charm, I guess.

As to your second point...

I agree, and I bemoan speaking impolitely to others here on DU. It has been happening a lot lately...you are right. I don't see a boogey man necessarily in what the poster said, but the question struck me as odd. Why only ask who wrote the prose instead of doing what is far more important: making a comment about the content of it...

[TheBaByG]

27. Well, as I explained

earlier in this forum; I was only reading in the beginning;
If you saw the vid you would know, because the vid breaks up, with white typing on black BG, saying; Link to article in the sidebar.
After 2:29 I am just talking out of my head, not reading anything, hence why I actually stop and think sometimes, to make sure
I dont mess up my english and to make sure I dont speak to fast, which is my biggest problem while talking.

Normally on YT people never say; Im the writer, lol, its more csual than that; Hence; why I can make a video, without making it perfect, as it is; Casual. I
am talking to my friends, from my head. Except from when I read in the beginning, which is whhy I say; "I am gonna have to break this up alittle and read"

[lyonspotter]

30. Thank you for that clarification...

...glad I helped promote the video. I really resonated with what you said.

[notadmblnd]

31. Did you really mean to post to me?

I was explaining to someone who thought another poster was being sexist in his reply about wondering who wrote the piece. I explained that I saw nothing sexist in regards to his remark. It didn't matter to me who wrote the piece, it was a good piece and thank you for posting it on YT for us.

[TheBaByG]

24. Actually, I didn't write anything, I was talking out of my head

Except from the part, where I say that I am reading, which ofcourse, like always, I have linked in the sidebar, so people can read the article on their own.
The reading takes place from 0:34 - 2:29 WHERE the video breaks and says "Article in the sidebar"

[Andronex]

5. Silly Norwegian...

She obviously doesn't understand the dangers of crotch bombers invading our beloved America, luckily our politicians and media here keep us better informed.

[TheBaByG]

25. Hahaha

I know your being sarcastic, and I enjoyed that comment tremendously!!

[Goldstein1984]

6. I liked the video

I believe she wrote her own dialog and did a good job of presenting her ideas.

It's nice to hear someone in Norway expressing the same basic concerns and suspicions as so many of us.

Why is 5% of the world's population doing 50% of the world's military spending?

Why are we now fighting for "vital national interests" instead of defense?

Who benefits from a perpetual state of war?

When government spokespersons, or "un-named sources" tell us why the government is doing something, why do we always suspect something more is going on simply because in the past there's usually been something more going on?

How to we fix it so that when we say "the government" we're talking about We the People?

Why, every time we see a sign that says "U.S. Government Property," the sign also so "No Trespassing" and is hanging on a fence with barbed wire at the top?

Why are we in Latin America, Southeast Asia, Central Asia, and Africa?

ANSWER: The U.S. does half the military spending on the planet because it isn't defense spending, it's protecting vital national interests, which is making the world safe for U.S. business. We're in a perpetual state of war because we're in perpetual state of empire building, and we don't trust the government because that won't admit this fact. We the People no longer control the government, so we think of the government as "other" than ourselves and we expect to see that we are not welcome on U.S. government property. We're spreading our military all over the planet because that's where the rich folk want to make money and, like General Smedley Butler said, "War is a racket." Old people start them, and young people die in them.

[lyonspotter]

16. !!!!!! Thanks Goldstein1984 for saying it LIKE IT IS. My applause. NT

[TheBaByG]

26. Thank you so much for that =)

[zoff]

7. Gulf of Aden chokepoint is very well known in the oil industry.

Makes one wonder if oil is truly in short supply given the amount of money spent on protection and distribution.

[Name removed]

8. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[greiner3]

9. My two cents take on this would be;

That she is a Poli-Sci major, or some sort, and did her thesis paper on the topic. Would this make a better movie than 'The Pelican Brief?'

[TheBaByG]

28. HAhaha

ROFL =)
Neeh, I didn't major in anything... yet.
But funny comment!! *Big smile*

[Douglas Carpenter]

10. she makes a bit too much of a conspiracy theory out of the whole thing - but I think she is

essentially on very much the right track

[Ticonderoga]

11. Her message might be on the mark

but her delivery is horrendous. I made it to the 2:30 mark and just couldn't take it anymore.

[A Physicist]

12. Glennina Beck

She quotes a lot of well known facts, then without using the label “neocons” basically lays out the plan of oil control (e.g., PNAC from their paper “Rebuilding America's Defenses: Strategies, Forces, and Resources For a New Century”) attributed to the neocons. The neocons were up to no good but they are not in power anymore (unless you think Obama is a secret neocon) and their ideas are largely discredited.

It is hard to know where to begin in critiquing her meandering claims, many of which actually make no geo-strategic sense but appear to reinforce liberal conspiracy theorys and might satisfy some emotional need for liberal truthiness.

To characterize the veracity of her claims I shall call her Glennina Beck or maybe Glennina Beckarina. And to her supporters, I’ll close my snark by paraphrasing Truman when he said of Fulgencio Batista the pre-Castro dictator of Cuba: “Batista’s a bastard, but he’s our bastard.”

Glennina Beckarina is a hot looking crazy ill-informed liberal conspiracy theorist but she’s our hot looking crazy ill-informed liberal conspiracy theorist.

[whatchamacallit]

13. Interesting post "A Physicist"

The word "liberal" being repeatedly used derogatorily, the misspelling of "theories", the faux debunking of a documented political movement... Are you sure you know where you are?

[A Physicist]

14. Misspelling the plural of theory, my bad.

How is “liberal” being used in a derogatory manner? It is being used as an accuracy label. If I was describing the birthers I would use the term “conservative” conspiracy theory.

“…the faux debunking of a documented political movement”, what faux? What political movement are you talking about?

[swilton]

15. Control of the oil

in the Middle East has been at the heart of US foreign policy since the end of World War I - hence the dividing up of the Ottoman Empire with British/French colonization. Volumes have been written about the US lust for national resources and centering its foreign policy on their control. Michael Klare's books (BLOOD AND OIL for example) deal with the worldwide state of petroleum reserves and how accessability is critical for US policy - it seems that the more we use the fossile fuels the more we are left to find the remnants in countries that are unstable or inhospitable to US interests. Notwithstanding the Israeli lobby, but I often wonder if we wouldn't throw Israel under the bus if it weren't their presence near so many oil rich nations in the Middle East.

The concept of the one world government is laid out in Brzezhinski's book - The Chess Game (or some such thing and forgive me if I misspelled Zbiggie, but you know who I mean). I saw presentations on the Brzezhinski book through websites on DU - really scarey stuff. According to him, the US will be the last nation-state empire, after that the world will be run by corporations. I see this as very plausible - many argue that the goal is a global aristocracy, the world is going to return to a state of quasi-feudalism where everyone will have to fend for themselves to secure food, resources and protection from climate change.

I found this presentation very plausible - it was by no means polished but I definitely have read the tea leaves that she was reading. I also think that this underpants bomber was too coincidental.

[swilton]

17. Zbigniew Brzezhinskiy

Was foreign policy advisor to the Obama campaign and his book THE GRAND CHESSBOARD spells out his theory of one world governance. This is discussed at length through this Michael Rupert series of lectures on youtube.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t-XIeb879SY&feature=related

[lyonspotter]

18. People are waking up... NT

[TheBaByG]

29. swilton

thank you for that!! =)
I dont very often polish my vids, it just takes too much time; I am a norwegian, I struggle with the language, and I get sooo nervous when I talk about... well, stuff people can end up hating you for.
So this vid was hell to make even tho I was mostly talking out of my head, it just... made me nervous. I havent talked about "a one world government" before, and the nerves came because so
many of my friends dont really care much for the NWO theories.

Thank you for the comment. Much love Carrie