Highest Rated Comments

dinkoplician33 karma

Why do you keep calling today's US led world order the "Bretton Woods system"? I tried using that term on Reddit and was rudely informed that I was a blazing idiot and no such system existed, it was terminated by Nixon when he took us off the gold standard. What's a better term for this that more people on Reddit would be able to relate to? I like to try to spread your ideas, but it's a real stumbling block when I share one of your speeches on Youtube. People hear that term and immediately turn off their brains. I otherwise really like your work and work to spread it far and wide.

dinkoplician22 karma

The CIA ran an espionage operation against a coequal branch of government, when Brennan was CIA Director. Brennan subsequently stated falsehoods under oath about the CIA having done so. President Obama, in the the wake of these facts becoming public knowledge, issued a ringing endorsement of Brennan.

What's your opinion on this scandal?

If you are trying to imply that it is a matter of opinion whether the CIA, when Brennan was Director, spied on the Senate Intelligence Committee, and that Brennan subsequently put forth false statements under oath about the matter, and that President Obama, after these facts became known, issued an endorsement of Brennan, then you would be a liar via use of implication.

If hacking into the data files of an institution is not an attack on that institution, then "attack" has lost its definition. Furthermore, the DOJ regularly prosecutes, convicts, and imprisons common citizens under 18 USC 1028, for false statements which are far more innocuous than what the CIA employees engaged in with this matter. This was purely an instance of the Executive Branch shielding its own members, in response to behavior that the Executive Branch frequently seeks prison terms for, for citizens who are not part of the Executive Branch.

dinkoplician20 karma

What did journalists think about the Moslem Brotherhood era of rule? They were overthrown before they had much time to rule, but Egypt was down to three weeks of food at the time. Context:

Last year I arrived early for a lunch address by Gen. Michael Hayden, who ran the National Security Agency and later the Central Intelligence Agency in the George W. Bush administration. Hayden was already there, and glad to chat. The conversation turned to Egypt, and I asked Hayden why the Republican mainstream had embraced the Muslim Brotherhood rather than the military government of President al-Sisi, an American-trained soldier who espoused a reformed Islam that would repudiate terrorism. "We were sorry that [Muslim Brotherhood leader Mohamed] Morsi was overthrown" in July 2013, Hayden explained. "We wanted to see what would happen when the Muslim Brotherhood had to take responsibility for picking up the garbage."

"General," I remonstrated, "when Morsi was overthrown, Egypt had three weeks of wheat supplies on hand. The country was on the brink of starvation!"

"I guess that experiment would have been tough on the ordinary Egyptian," Hayden replied, without a hint of irony.

dinkoplician16 karma

A better question: Mr. Zeihan, which (free or paid) news sources do you read to keep up with events on a daily basis?

dinkoplician5 karma

Because the Left does not argue. It discredits the speaker. Every time, it's never trying to refute the argument. Every time, it's the same old game of "I discredit the speaker, therefore your entire worldview is invalid!"

Johnathan Haidt talks about this here, "they're trained carefully basically how to discredit your opponent. They learn to slur, they do not learn to argue."