The point that you make is in some ways valid, but what Jonathan Pie is doing is something we never do enough: recognising our own failures. Don't try to justify yourself, or the group/country/region/political alliance/etc. you're part of. Recognise the hand you might have in a problem.
Yes, I am not slating Pie willy-nilly. I saw him at Shindig festival last month and he was hilarious. I am just pointing out that we should be careful seeing his outrage as a guide for policy, even though he presents as a voice of truth. In this case, he is feeding into the Russophobic chorus, which is a very important issue.
@@ambergris5705 Yeh I think you’re right there is some distinction. However, I’m literally reading the news now and the first story is about how Russians should be “monitored” like people of Japanese descent were in the West during the Second World War. Countless other examples
@@DrMatthewAlford the colonial system still is in place in money laundering. And even the law works well for that. Hire a patsy to register an shell company with a fake address and you can get away with anything.
While Russian/Tory investments are a bad thing, what Pie is doing here is justifying a more hostile policy towards Russia - without mitigation. Elsewhere he buys into the myth of Russian electoral interference.
@@DrMatthewAlford Russia needs more hostile policies? They are a state ruled by a small amount of power hungry criminals they ruin their country for the citizens and they wage unnecessary wars for country honour. Yeah they need more sanctions on them
@@DrMatthewAlford "Elsewhere he buys into the myth of Russian electoral interference." NO this is a known fact. A FACT. Not a thing open for debate. Did it make a huge difference as some hysterical people claim, probably not. But it is a FACT.
@@piccalillipit9211 I'm not sure what your problem is there then. Myths can have some basis in fact. The latest in-depth study calls it a "hoax": www.amazon.co.uk/Russiagate-Revisited-Aftermath-Oliver-Boyd-Barrett/dp/3031309391/ref=sr_1_7?qid=1688202923&refinements=p_27%3AOliver+Boyd-Barrett&s=books&sr=1-7&text=Oliver+Boyd-Barrett
@@DrMatthewAlfordI think the idea being pointed out by @piccalillipit9211 is just that obviously attempts in such interference show what sort of attitude Russia is taking towards the west and therefore what attitude the west should take vis-a-vis Russia.
We love Russian money. It pushes up property capital in London. Everyone gets rich, rich, rich. (Except the poor of course. It's the poor what gets the blame)
Did you bother to read MattAlford's commentary? He's not disagreeing with the essence of what Pie said. They both agree Putin is vile and should be stopped.
No. Don't know where you heard such nonsense. What possible reason would Ukraine have to send Russian FSB agents to London to poison a Russian FSB defector who was telling all the FSB secrets with polonium, which Ukraine doesn't produce (but which Russia DOES produce)? It makes zero sense.
I am moaning about tens of thousands of Ukrainians being killed and tens of thousands of Russians being killed in just 18 months - and I'm moaning about high electricity and food prices leaving people cold and hungry, and environmental devastation from some of the worst eco-crimes of all time (almost certainly our side's doing). And I'm moaning about the potential for this all to spiral into a world war where you and I will end our days wracked with pain due to great power rivalries that could and should have been closed down decades ago.
@@DrMatthewAlford - Yeah - Im not sure Jonathan Pie is going to cause all that. I feel you may be dramatically overstating his role in all this horror. I mean don't get me wrong - wipe the brick dust of Mariupol and Backmut off my car every day, I live 100 miles from Ukraine. I just don't see how Pie is in any way responsible. Putin does NOT believe the world should exist if Russia stops existing as a country. Let's be clear, if Russia breaks up he thinks its OK to nuke the world and kill everyone - this is no hyperbole, this is a much-stated position. Thats not Pie - thats Putin.
@@DrMatthewAlford Perhaps when Putin came to power & applied to join NATO, as he said at the time, "Russia is a part of Europe & has a lot more in common with Europe than anywhere else," maybe Russia should have been excepted. As Noam Chomsky has said on previous occasions, "NATO is a hostile alliance & has nothing to do with keeping the peace, it`s a racket for the military industrial complex."
I guess the kind of nuance offered in your description doesn't get you featured in the New York Times. Interestingly didn't Pie briefly work with Russia Today, for which he weighed up the likely stigmatising association with being given full editorial control over his work? I mention that not as criticism, but merely wondering how he settled on this simplistic and one-sided analysis despite having worked on the "dark side" of the media and supposedly remaining an outsider of MSM.
Yeh, he worked at RT very near the beginning and I think we was maybe less polished and more spiky politically. He left RT when his association with it was damaging his "brand", as he put it. He's an entertainer, essentially, and complications like nuclear brinkmanship and immoral US covert ops don't fit neatly between the red velvet curtains.
The point that you make is in some ways valid, but what Jonathan Pie is doing is something we never do enough: recognising our own failures. Don't try to justify yourself, or the group/country/region/political alliance/etc. you're part of. Recognise the hand you might have in a problem.
Yes, I am not slating Pie willy-nilly. I saw him at Shindig festival last month and he was hilarious. I am just pointing out that we should be careful seeing his outrage as a guide for policy, even though he presents as a voice of truth. In this case, he is feeding into the Russophobic chorus, which is a very important issue.
@@DrMatthewAlford I believe it's more of a Putinophobe chorus, though the line is too often blurry
@@ambergris5705 Yeh I think you’re right there is some distinction. However, I’m literally reading the news now and the first story is about how Russians should be “monitored” like people of Japanese descent were in the West during the Second World War. Countless other examples
Russians have earned every bit of that russophobia.
Except that Russians are actively trying to subvert governments and institutions in Europe.....see Moldova.
Wasn't that the real reason for brexit? Seem to remember the EU put in place certain money laundering legislation the UK desperately wanted to avoid.
Apparently a factor yeh though I never quite understood it. My friend TJ Coles discusses it in a book I helped on called Union Jackboot.
@@DrMatthewAlford the colonial system still is in place in money laundering. And even the law works well for that. Hire a patsy to register an shell company with a fake address and you can get away with anything.
the 11.15 video ''Brexit: Endgame - The $20 Trillion Secret, with Stephen Fry,'' ( by Pindex )
Absolutely. Jonathan nails it again.
So right mate. New priminster. You should be mate.. xxx
What kind of democracy? Any kind.
I don’t see the issue he called the uk gutless for not pushing back before.
While Russian/Tory investments are a bad thing, what Pie is doing here is justifying a more hostile policy towards Russia - without mitigation. Elsewhere he buys into the myth of Russian electoral interference.
@@DrMatthewAlford Russia needs more hostile policies? They are a state ruled by a small amount of power hungry criminals they ruin their country for the citizens and they wage unnecessary wars for country honour. Yeah they need more sanctions on them
@@DrMatthewAlford "Elsewhere he buys into the myth of Russian electoral interference." NO this is a known fact. A FACT. Not a thing open for debate.
Did it make a huge difference as some hysterical people claim, probably not. But it is a FACT.
@@piccalillipit9211 I'm not sure what your problem is there then. Myths can have some basis in fact. The latest in-depth study calls it a "hoax": www.amazon.co.uk/Russiagate-Revisited-Aftermath-Oliver-Boyd-Barrett/dp/3031309391/ref=sr_1_7?qid=1688202923&refinements=p_27%3AOliver+Boyd-Barrett&s=books&sr=1-7&text=Oliver+Boyd-Barrett
@@DrMatthewAlfordI think the idea being pointed out by @piccalillipit9211 is just that obviously attempts in such interference show what sort of attitude Russia is taking towards the west and therefore what attitude the west should take vis-a-vis Russia.
This is the worst of Pie
I used to put him in the same category of Carlin or Hicks but now I put him in the category of Carr or Kimmel
We love Russian money. It pushes up property capital in London. Everyone gets rich, rich, rich. (Except the poor of course. It's the poor what gets the blame)
I’m not sure what our democracy is ?
Jonathan is spot on. 'Bad take'? The propaganda has spread so very far !!
He’s right that there’s Russian oligarch money in London. If you disagree on any of my specific points then feel free to say
Did you bother to read MattAlford's commentary? He's not disagreeing with the essence of what Pie said. They both agree Putin is vile and should be stopped.
Judging by the comments, I think you should include your comments in the video itself.
That sounds like an editing job I don’t really know how to do but thanks!
Good comment, Alford.
He's drunk the Kool-Aid . Or his new crappy writer .
Jonathan Pie isn't a real person.
Hal And he became just little more unreal with this video.
Funny clown , ha ha ha 😅
I really hate his brand of 'comedy sneering'. Plus he is from the right and will always end up back there. He was only funny for about 30 seconds.
Wasn't the nuclear stuff that Poisoned that guy in London... traced back to the Ukraine 😮 🤔
Not sure! I think it was never proven forensically.
No. Don't know where you heard such nonsense. What possible reason would Ukraine have to send Russian FSB agents to London to poison a Russian FSB defector who was telling all the FSB secrets with polonium, which Ukraine doesn't produce (but which Russia DOES produce)? It makes zero sense.
No it went back to a BA flight to Moscow
Sounds to me like you are moaning about high electricity prices whilst tens of thousands of Ukrainians are being killed...
I am moaning about tens of thousands of Ukrainians being killed and tens of thousands of Russians being killed in just 18 months - and I'm moaning about high electricity and food prices leaving people cold and hungry, and environmental devastation from some of the worst eco-crimes of all time (almost certainly our side's doing). And I'm moaning about the potential for this all to spiral into a world war where you and I will end our days wracked with pain due to great power rivalries that could and should have been closed down decades ago.
@@DrMatthewAlford - Yeah - Im not sure Jonathan Pie is going to cause all that. I feel you may be dramatically overstating his role in all this horror.
I mean don't get me wrong - wipe the brick dust of Mariupol and Backmut off my car every day, I live 100 miles from Ukraine. I just don't see how Pie is in any way responsible.
Putin does NOT believe the world should exist if Russia stops existing as a country. Let's be clear, if Russia breaks up he thinks its OK to nuke the world and kill everyone - this is no hyperbole, this is a much-stated position.
Thats not Pie - thats Putin.
@@piccalillipit9211 I'm not overstating Pie's role, I'm just saying he has a bad take.
@@DrMatthewAlford OK - I dont see it - but fair enough
@@DrMatthewAlford Perhaps when Putin came to power & applied to join NATO, as he said at the time, "Russia is a part of Europe & has a lot more in common with Europe than anywhere else," maybe Russia should have been excepted. As Noam Chomsky has said on previous occasions, "NATO is a hostile alliance & has nothing to do with keeping the peace, it`s a racket for the military industrial complex."
Jonathan russofobia is beneath you.
Putin!! 💪 western leaders 🥰🥰
He’s right though-
I guess the kind of nuance offered in your description doesn't get you featured in the New York Times. Interestingly didn't Pie briefly work with Russia Today, for which he weighed up the likely stigmatising association with being given full editorial control over his work? I mention that not as criticism, but merely wondering how he settled on this simplistic and one-sided analysis despite having worked on the "dark side" of the media and supposedly remaining an outsider of MSM.
Yeh, he worked at RT very near the beginning and I think we was maybe less polished and more spiky politically. He left RT when his association with it was damaging his "brand", as he put it. He's an entertainer, essentially, and complications like nuclear brinkmanship and immoral US covert ops don't fit neatly between the red velvet curtains.
Its an act for christ sakes. It is a made up character who uses politicians crap they espouse for a script.