Cenk Cuts Off Peter Schiff ...
Cenk Uygur cuts off Peter Schiff's mic then kicks him off the show! ... Youtube
Dominant Social Theme: Peter Schiff is part of the one percent and not worth listening too.
Free-Market Analysis: Socialist-oriented commentator Cenk Uygur, whom we have written about in the past, got into an argument with libertarian financier Peter Schiff on Uygur's independent video program. It resulted in Uygur cutting off the interview. The interview was later posted on YouTube and you can see it for yourself below. The actual interview runs for the latter half of the presentation.
Peter Schiff is a stubborn person, and when somebody says something he considers factually incorrect he will go to great lengths to correct that person. In this case, Cenk Uygur made the point that taxes were too low in the US, especially for the rich, and Peter Schiff grew upset and began rebutting the point at length, even though Uygur wanted to move on to other issues. This was the proximate cause for the shut down.
But actually, the video reveals other issues that are very important in terms of the larger debate now taking place at the highest reaches of government and private industry. It is actually a class-related debate and somewhat new to America which, unlike Europe, has not been very class conscious in the past, in many ways.
In this video, we see Uygur making very specific points supporting the OWS movement that believes the 99 percent are getting exploited by the one percent – mostly Wall Street bankers. What Uygur wanted to suggest to Peter Schiff was that the "one percent" was responsible for the growing economic depression worldwide.
Uygur has very strong feelings about this and has even floated the idea of a constitutional amendment to change the way Americans elect their politicians. It is the idea of Uygur and others within the OWS movement that corporate "fat cats" control the government through their corporate contributions and thus line their pockets. (See Occupy Wall Street to Attack US Freedoms with Constitutional Convention?)
Peter Schiff also has strong feelings about this issue. He sees the problem basically within the context of government-enabled difficulties. It is government, he believes, that causes the problems that the market itself then responds to. You can see him making this argument in a debate with Princeton University's Cornel West, here: Peter Schiff 'Schools' Princeton University Professor Cornel West.
The question must be asked (and we have asked it many times) ... "What is motivating this sudden outburst of class warfare in the US?" The last time this sort of rhetoric was popular was in the 1930s. It is not a deeply ingrained part of American culture, and we think there are other, more nefarious reasons why this sort of dominant social theme is suddenly available in the US and on mainstream media. We've written about it here:
The problem with the Uygur's points, in our view, is that they are simply not true. The problems of the world are not caused by greedy corporations and their top men. In a free market such abuses of power would not be tolerated. People would simply cease to patronize these companies.
Uygur's response to this is that the corporations are "buying" the government. Peter Schiff responds that it is government itself that creates the problems that eventually depress the economy and support the greed of the "one percent."
In truth, Uygur seems to us to be pursuing a class-warfare agenda of some sort for some reason. Peter Schiff is simply constrained from telling the full truth because of his position in the business community.
What's REALLY going on, in our view, is that there is an Anglosphere power elite that controls central banks around the world and wants to build one-world government. It uses the money-from-nothing of central banks to create conditions that will support this goal.
First, the elites needed to create a depression, which is well underway and was the result of excessive central bank money-printing. Second, the elites create the social conditions for a dramatic uprising of impoverished people that will wreck the current system and the fortunes of most of the so-called one percent.
The top elites (maybe 1,000 people?) don't care about their corporate enablers and associates. They are fodder to be sacrificed, apparently. This is most of the "one percent." Uygur's analysis simply doesn't travel far enough up the proverbial food chain.
The third element of the current globalist transformation is war. That seems to be on its way as well. None of this is new or groundbreaking. The template was created last century. First came boom, then bust, then depression and populism, then war – and finally the beginnings of a new world order.
The BIS, UN, EU, IMF, World Bank, etc. were all the result of this manipulative, elite paradigm. Now it would seem to be happening again. And the building blocks of global governance that were put into place back in the 20th century are to be further activated.
Apparently, the idea is to use the UN as the global parliament, the IMF will be a global central bank, NATO will serve as a global army, Interpol as a global/civil police force and the International Criminal Court as a provider of global justice.
All the ingredients of global governance have been thus carefully cultivated and put into place. Now what is necessary is to provide the water and fertilizer. The dominant social theme of populism has been rolled out to ensure a maximum amount of chaos.
Uygur and OWS are for some reason designated instruments of this populism. OWS has been shown via Adbusters magazine to receive funding from George Soros, who is in turn carrying the water of the top elites apparently, when it comes to fomenting a populist rebellion.
A growing populist uprising, combined with a big regional or low-key world war will allow the Anglosphere power elite to realize their dream of a New World Order. That's the goal, in our view. The rest can be seen as mere shadows on Plato's cave wall.
In fact, both Schiff and Uygar likely KNOW the real truth about what's going on. That's what makes this interview interesting. Uygur, in our view, has a very specific agenda, and when it's being frustrated he shuts Schiff down. Schiff would like to tell the truth – the full truth – but cannot. Even so, he makes the better points. You can see the video here.
(Video from MOXNEWSdOtCOM's YouTube user channel.)
Posted by Strangelove2 on 01/04/12 03:32 AM
All the other gibberish in the comments on this article are just that-the usual gibberish. Your comment finally got it right. Some folks just love to find conspiracy in every scan line of a video feed. thanks for making the simple and most direct observation!
Posted by Ramura on 01/01/12 02:06 PM
Joe -- I think you're on to something here. I believe the reason that most people can't wrap their head around the idea the some elite group is actually CONSPIRING to achieve total domination is that THAT thought is TOO big. To begin to even entertain it would mean that they would need to be willing to explore that possibly everything they think they know is wrong. And it IS! But that is a big shock that takes most people years, if not decades, to process and integrate. It may actually be cruel to try to make them see what they are not yet ready to see. Kind of like handing a baby a book and getting upset with them when they don't just READ it!
Back to your question: "It there some hidden pleasure to their game that people like me cannot know?," I would like to refer you to the work of Joseph P. Farrell, PhD (Oxford/Patristics). Farrell is a world-class researcher and author of about 14 books now that trace the origin of the bullion-banksters and their methods, as well as a more exotic working theory -- that there was an ancient high-tech (human, until proven otherwise) civilization that basically destroyed itself and the surviving elite encoded what they could of their high physics in mystery/alchemical symbology, to be retrieved at a future time when science and civilization could pick it up again. We are now within reach with that science.
Farrell has been carefully laying the groundwork for several years now for getting to the BEEF of his theory arc -- that of a "breakaway" civilization: one that has achieved such an advantage in technology and ability to manipulate the masses that it essentially is NOT part of what the rest of us believe to be the ONLY "broad civilization."
Richard Dolan has also explored this same concept of a "breakaway" civilization quite excellently in his several volumes exploring "UFOs and the National Security State," covering at least the years 1941-1991.
But, in many ways, Farrell's hypothesis is much more chilling. His exploration into the UFO phenomena led him directly to Nazi science from WWII and he has yet to see anything that cannot be explained by the idea that the Nazi's never surrendered, and DID survive... AND appeared to be continuing their research in "pockets" around the globe, but now as a stateless enemy. Sound familiar? Terrorists without a state?
Farrell has written one whole book about "what if" what was found at Roswell had the signature of Nazi's and not ETs! In 1947 in the middle of the US desert? That would scare the bejeezus out of people, who are just settling down from the heights of wartime madness. Better that they should think it was little green men from Mars! And so, he postulates that the entire UFO phenomena has been a PSYOP on the American people (and that of the world) in order to keep the BIGGEST secret... .that the Nazi's are still out there and they are still dangerous. They are Nazi's, after all!
Farrell's newest book, "Saucers, Swastikas and Psyops" is on pre-order at amazon for 2/3/12 delivery. I understand you should be able to get it from the publisher (Adventures Unlimited) more quickly. I can hardly wait to get my copy.
If you, or any reader, really wants to know just WHY these controlling elite are so seemingly unconcerned with what the rest of us would consider basic humanity and good stewardship, and you have not yet been able to accept the reason as being hostile off-or-intra-worlders (dimensional or otherwise), then check Farrell out. His website is Click to view link
Re ANGLOSPHERE: Farrell made one interesting comment on an interview I heard recently from about last August. He said that, from his reading of it all, that the Anglosphere DID appear to be the same entity until about the 60's and then it seemed to split. He wonders out loud if perhaps there IS a Nazi faction that may have been once aligned but is no longer controllable by the Anglo-elites, and that THIS may be the fight of the elephants that we at foot level are trying to read the battle from the level of the dust under their feet.
If nothing else, his arguments are always well-researched and sound, and very thought-provoking, whether you agree with his working theory or not.
And it DOES answer your question very well. Yes, there IS an agenda that people like us are not meant to know. We were born into it and cannot see it because it is all around us, like the Matrix. Their social-engineering and mind-control tactics were as sophisticated as their weapons program and their genetics, which didn't end, either, for more chilling aspects to the situation.
In fact, Farrell sees a breakaway civilization WITHIN a breakaway civilization, as the Nazi attitude of racial superiority had already self-defined them as breaking away from the rest of humanity. Add anti-gravitical physics to the mix, making nuclear weapons look like pop-guns, and you have the makings for a story so big it really IS difficult to fathom.
But fathom we must. Because it seems to be upon us now with a vengeance. And we had better know whom we are up against. And please don't think Farrell is so simplistic as to paint it all with one big brush called "THE ENEMY!" He also explores how THAT breakaway civilization (Nazi) would, by its very existence, call forth at least an American version and a Russian version ("secret government") within their own space/intelligence/military complexes in order to fight the Nazi/4th Reich as to make this all a very, very complex tale, still unfolding and perhaps reaching its endgame.
AND, it goes without saying, it explains just where ALL that money has been going! Into secret space programs to ensure that whatever faction wins will have complete dominance over THIS planet, in order to enable control over the exploration of space. The stakes are high and expensive. There really IS a limit beyond which someone can personally spend wealth, and beyond that it gets into other agendas designed to protect (literally!) that wealth and privilege.
Check them BOTH (Farrell and Dolan) out! :)
S in SF ^i^
Posted by flying_pig on 12/23/11 02:44 PM
American Balls are made in China today. Not as good as they used to be.
Posted by terry on 12/23/11 12:25 PM
What was Uygur's research results after this interview?
Posted by Joe on 12/23/11 07:10 AM
Looking at the bankers, let us imagine that their game plan is inter-generational. Do they really pass on their plan to their offspring completely? Do the offspring accept it all? What is the end objective, is it just survival and dominance, and if so to what end, most people would be content with a few millions why have trillions when it will all be left behind un-utilised upon death? It there some hidden pleasure to their game that people like me cannot know? Is it not more pleasure to create a broad civilization enjoyed by all, or is this what the bankers think they are creating? From where I am sitting they appear mad driven by a type of intoxicating greed that knows no limits.
Posted by amanfromMars on 12/23/11 12:35 AM
"It is very simple. In an unfree market, Uygur's solution is make the environment even less free, to solve the problems that a lack of freedom has created. The solution is more freedom, not less. If the solution to market dysfunction was less freedom, then the USSR would still be around and China would never have loosened its economy. North Vietnam would be a world power and the Eastern block would still belong to the Soviet Union." ….. Reply from The Daily Bell
Can we then conclude and both agree that right and proper leadership is that which has been missing since forever, and is still missing in spades, DB?
And that is an intelligence deficit in the markets and/or in those playing in the markets and/or in those who would be trying to lead the markets and by their association with everything, everything.
The silver lining to that particular and peculiar cloud though is, that that deficit and eminently exploitable systemic zeroday vulnerability presents a golden opportunity to both prime timely sublime intelligence suppliers and sub-prime market purveyors and surveyors/active dealer players and hedging future derivative gamblers.
Posted by amanfromMars on 12/22/11 10:59 PM
"The problem with the Uygur's points, in our view, is that they are simply not true. The problems of the world are not caused by greedy corporations and their top men. In a free market such abuses of power would not be tolerated. People would simply cease to patronize these companies." …… DB Staff Report
Are you then telling us all here, those of us who enjoy visiting this DB space, that the markets are free? Are you really serious in that contention, DB? Is that what you expect us all to believe and accept is gospel so that greedy corporations and their top men are not recognised as being the root cause of the world's problems?
Are not all markets rigged to create an unfair advantages and fragmented divisions in the competitive market place to give the notion of choice from struggling suppliers rather a bitching conglomeration supplying everything with the free notion of choice from struggling suppliers?
Certainly the latter is the way to go for universal unilateral control of everything, it is just that presently is the necessary future advanced intelligence to run it better without the need for conflict and destruction, missing in those sat around the board room table. However, it is always easy enough to buy in whatever is needed, for such problems are no more difficult than that to solve.
Does this reflect that reality and the dilemma ….. http://youtu.be/BqEcLlp_Big
And how could you not enjoy, right at the beginning of that encounter with a strange kind , setting the whole tone for the forthcoming rant and revelation ….
Good Morning, Mr Beale, they tell me you are a mad man.
How are you now?
Mad as a hatter
Who isn't ……. I'm gonna take you into our conference room, …… :-)
Hiding invisible in full sight, the naked fabulous truth? Whenever you know it to be so, can you easily handle its fare and thus can both either make or break the system, which is not a question and not a question which needs to be asked of round tablers and bored members.
* An Americanism of desultorily? Merriam Webster was also confused with my attempted spellings of the sound
Reply from The Daily Bell
It is very simple. In an unfree market, Uygur's solution is make the environment even less free, to solve the problems that a lack of freedom has created. The solution is more freedom, not less. If the solution to market dysfunction was less freedom, then the USSR would still be around and China would never have loosened its economy. North Vietnam would be a world power and the Eastern block would still belong to the Soviet Union.
Posted by Chasvoice on 12/22/11 10:05 PM
Paul R. Krugman of the NY Times and His Ties to the Unsound Money Counterfeiting Ring
Click to view link
Posted by rainmaker9 on 12/22/11 07:23 PM
I agree with DB on the majority of this article. My question is "What about the BRICs? What about the others that aren't BRICs but may still bristle to western colonialism?"
Posted by herrfaust on 12/22/11 05:58 PM
Schiff needs to sort his debating style - short sharp bullet points, not long drawn out ramblings. Also he got pulled up on the tax rate at OWS; he should have developed a canned response by now.
Was very amusing how obvious Uygur's agenda is though :)
Posted by Hognutz on 12/22/11 04:29 PM
Hell I like the way you think!
#2 - Yep , I would say so.
The movie will star Tom Hanks and Lady Gaga... .
Posted by fbobhand on 12/22/11 02:57 PM
I have now watched three videos with Peter Schiff arguing with people from the "Left"... first with Peter at Occupy Wall Street, then with Cornel West, and now with Cenk Uygur.
I'm a libertarian, and from my point of view, all were a disaster. Trying to argue with the guy who controls the on/off switch is useless. He always has tha last word. Anyone who watched Larry King on CNN knows that such people invite "the opposition" only to air their own views and put down all others. No other result is acceptable.
I'm an admirer of Peter Schiff's writings on the economy and other libertarian issues. But those videos did more to demean the libertarian point of view than to make valid points. I cannot imagine anyone who is on the fence politically suddenly making the leap to the libertarian, free-market point of view as a result of those videos.
In the current video, here are two guys arguing; one says the government is at fault, the other says the banking corporations are at fault. Each assumes the other is excluding one or the other entities from blame. How absurd!! These videos are not about arriving at the truth; they are about personal ego-trips.
Posted by Thomas Molitor on 12/22/11 02:52 PM
The reason the exchange ignited is Uygur's complete lack of knowledge of Austrian economics - a school of thought out of which Schiff uses exclusively as his framework for analysis. Most likely, the two of them agree on more things than either would admit in the heat of an argument such as we see on this video. Yes, I agree, Uygur isn't going far enough up the food chain to have a firm understanding of the causes at the root of the symptoms he spent the whole interview shouting about.
Posted by Bobby7 on 12/22/11 02:03 PM
When is the Revolution starting?
Or has America lost its Balls?
Maybe they are waiting for Hollywood to make a Movie,
"How We Regained Our Freedom From The FED"?