Joseph Anderson, Berkeley, CA April 27, 2012, 02:16
(Problems with posting: please excuse any duplicates below)

Hi Julian,

I appreciate all your work with/heading Wikileaks, and I’m looking forward to appreciating your initiative with "The World Tomorrow" and RT.

But, I’m in substantial agreement with Camilo (his caveats/qualitifications), today, April 26, 2012, 2 hours before my comment post here -- although I’m not sure, and Camilo did not articulate, why he was dissastisfied with the 1st edition of your RT "World Tomorrow" show (perhaps Camilo is pro-Zionist). I thought your first RT WT was journalistic brilliance, and in the true spirit of iconoclastic journalistic daring, to have someone like Hassan Nasrallah on for an interview for the enitre program. Nasrallah is, of course, someone the Western imperialists’ adamantly pro-Zionist mainstream media like to talk and propagandize *about*, but never let him speak for *himself* (because, of course, Nasrallah is too articulate and rational in his anti-Zionist/anti-Jewish-suprecacist/ anti-Jewish settler-colonialism in his morally correct support of the native Palestinian people).

I’m most in support of what Camilo said that sums up and is the core of the problem with your 2nd edition: "I don’t believe that Horowitz is representative of anyone serious..."

Horowitz is, of course, just a former "left-winger" turned right-wing verbal flame-thrower. SO, I GUESS THAT ATTRIBUTES TO HOROWITZ A CERTAIN *SENSATIONALISM*. But, that’s the very type of person that the *mainstream* media (especially, nighttime American cable TV) invites on to provide lots more *heat* -- in their boisterous verbal ’Saturday night’ style wrestling (the outrageously *fake* kind meant for popcorn entertainment) matches -- than serious light. Surely, Julian, you don’t want your show to descend into this low kind of more or less purely sensationalized level TV -- just like the mainstream American broadcast or, especially, cable TV -- where the only reason anyone tunes in is just to see how outrageous one or both party/-ies will be -- because more intellectually interested viewers (the kind that support you) will just stop tuning in to your show.

And I’m sure Horowitz was probably just as crazy and egotistical when he was on the left as he is on the right. So, who knows *why* he ever became a leftist in the first place. Maybe to get back at his parents; maybe his ego was attracted to whatever seemed to be "the political fashion of the times", as it were. Maybe he’s just a screwed up guy who’s commitment and thought processes are unstable whether he’s on the left or the right!

I mean, why would someone "on the left" turn against *ALLL* Black-American people, as a people, because a white woman (Betty Van Patter) who was in/with the Black Panthers was murdered?: that’s the very definition of a white racist that Horowitz has become (and which you asked him nothing about, critically). Horowitz alleges by one or a few Black Panther people, but where is his at least truly compelling *evidence* that makes any examined and historical sense -- certainly not his purely speculative racial prejudices -- since he has absotlutely *no* factual evidence, and *how* would *he* know, other than she was *white* and who he accuses was *Black* -- -- "she was white, they were Black, so they must have done it" -- and in addition to that his further ’reasoning’ is quite faulty. Julian, as an intellectual, as a political person, as a journalist, I believe/hope that you can do better than to accept Horowitz’s prejudicial reasoning: so, please don’t go there if you haven’t informed yourself of the facts and history (prepared yourself as a journalist for the interview on this topic).

E.g., Horowitz’s anti-Reparations ("*Welfare* is your Reparations", Horowitz said) for African Americans, the victims of 250 years of de facto slavery, who’s inferiority status was written into the U.S. Constitution, and another 100 years of racist white apartheid and even de jure slavery and peonage slavery for at least another 100 years in the United States -- a system of U.S. government legalized and protecte apartheid that didn’t end (*on paper*) until 1965! (See my San Francisco Chronicle commentary, "The Issue Is Racism", re Horowitz, as well as longer versions of my commentary, searching on my and his name, as well as my home city.) As one white-American, Berkeley, CA, *woman* said, given Horowitz’s curiously histerical, way over-the-top, decades long, *male* reaction (the reaction of someone who had something more emotionally for Van Patter than he is letting on) to Betty Van Patter’s murder, maybe *he* was somehow involved.

Now, speaking of Horowitz’s anti-Arab/anti-Middle Eastern racism: why didn’t you put Horowitz in intellectual, critical and moral check when he used all his arch-Zionist, anti-Arab/anti-Middle Eastern racist buzzwords like "the Islamofascists"? Furthermore, you could have didactically asked him if there were any "Judeofascists -- or, more legitimately querried, *"Ziofascists"*?: because no less than Albert Einstein, Hannah Arendt and other prominent Jews publicly and formally, in their 1948 published letter in the New York Times, called Menachim Begin -- a then future prime minister of Israel -- "a fascist" who should not even be allowed into the United States! This so, given Zionists’(later represented as the Jewish-supremacist settler-colonial state of Israel’s ideological (Zionist) oppression of the *native* people, the Palestinian people -- for the past 75 years -- turning the native people, who were once the vast majority of historic Palestine, into an oppressed people in their own land -- the Zionist using two arguments that are literally *far* worse than Medieval. ("God promised us the land *5,000* years ago!"; and "Our ancient religious ancestors were in historically temporary political control 2,000 years ago!": no nation or native people on earth -- least of all the U.S. -- would ever agree to such an utterly ridiculous, otherwise, utterly LAUGHABLE argument, were it not sustained through force of arms and Western imperialist support for Zionists/Israel.) Zionism is just another form of European colonialism -- this time Jewish instead of Christian -- and "Israel" (like "French Indochina" or "Rhodesia") is the European name given to that European colonial state. Maybe you should brush up on the history of Israel. Gandhi (in his statement on Palestine, called "The Jews of Palestine, 1938") called Zionism "a crime against humanity"! Or, you, and your other guest, can go read online the article, "20 Parallels of Zionism with Nazism".

In short, as Camilo said, "I don’t believe that Horowitz is representative of anyone serious" -- except a serious racist -- and you, Julian, can do much better than this or to descend into *PURE SENSATIONALISM* inviting such guests as Horowitz onto your show -- if you truly want it to be a politically and intellectually serious show.
tovarich April 27, 2012, 01:35
horowitz is not worth hearing out,talking in platitudes as he does. before i saw this debate,i thought he was someone intelligent,but no,he just barks like a sheep dog,& expects to be believed.Mr.Zisek,on the other hand,is coming up with salient points, but i sense he is having problems in expounding real concepts to a bought & sold generalisater like horowitz,whos job is ignore them & push the official lie.Good work though Mr.Assange,I am looking forwards to your future work.
Georg April 27, 2012, 00:15
Hello Camilo

I have not graduated but got the Message and I enjoined all two episodes

Thanks Julian and all of your supporters.

Camilo April 26, 2012, 22:48
Hello Julian,

I highly value and appreciate your program, but I believe you have to offer a more prepared format and intervene in a more decisive way. I also think that it makes little sense to invite a completely disoriented and extremist guy together with someone of the stature of Slavoj Zizek. I don’t think you can sustain Horowitz’s statements from any reasonable position. Maybe you could put him up against someone like Alex Jones, but not an intellectual like Zizek.

There are several serious intellectuals that you could invite to a good and enriching debate with Zizek (Peter Sloterdijk could be a suggestion), and I’m certain that you can figure out a more controlled format that both orients and moderates the specific points or themes of discussion. I believe you have to remain outside of the discussion and not introduce a third position, that just diffuses things even further. I also think you have to differentiate the interview and debate format in a clearer way.

I am the kind of supporter that posts your program on Facebook, but I think you have to rethink the format along the way, and you have to introduce the best changes possible within your means (I’m not missing a TV studio and seeing you wearing a suit with your questions on a paper) in order to potentiate the contents that each invited can really contribute.

The discussion between Zizek and Horowitz doesn’t reach beyond a couple of half drunk extremists that sit in a bar and end up in a fistfight and spending a night in jail. I am a graduate in Philosophy, and I have read Zizek extensively, and I have to say I’m disappointed of the final outcome of this 2nd edition. I don’t believe that Horowitz is representative of anyone serious, and there are several counterparts that could offer a more consistent view of rightwing Zionism and pro Israeli positions as well as have real political weight.

I would appreciate a show that dealt with the matters exposed by Wikileaks and the consequences of the work of Wikileaks. I believe you have a huge amount of material that could turn into a more important contribution than too short interviews.

Beyond my dissatisfaction with the two first editions, I very much appreciate your initiative.



Luutzen (NL) April 26, 2012, 22:15
Succinctness shows the master.(not scolding)

I like Julian’s line: The goal is justice; the means is transparency.

The best society form is a true free market system, which is guided by consumer preferences and means bottom - up control of investments. Anti-trust laws must ensure small enterprise sizes.

Not corporatism as is US and Russia!
Jim Evans in Worcester April 26, 2012, 20:54
Look folks....there`s a simple truth about ALL politics and economics and about all societies in general... EVERYTHING about society is almost certainly happening (as it is) because (in some way or another) it serves the purposes of whoever has most REAL POWER over that society....even though they may not live in that society.

BOTH left and right (and centre) of so called democratic politics in the USA and Europe are ZIONISTS or supporters of the Zionist movement and Israel.

It`s exactly the same with the Media ..and with every aspect of our economies and markets and even our military and secret services...but WHY?

Because everyone who is in any way ambitious or even just wants to survive and have any sort of prosperity and security KNOWS that there are severe penalties awaiting anyone who even dreams of upsetting the Zionists or their partners in organised crime and social manipulation in power centres like New York and London and the Vatican.

This is NOTHING LIKE a democratic or free world ....and it`s not about to turn into a communist one either.

If anything it`s a rather chaotic mixture of anarchy and authoritarianism of the sort you find juxtaposed in some failed states in Africa.

The idea that ordinary people can vote themselves a better or different world is almost certainly a FANTASY....because our only power base in the past was our ability to withdraw our labour.....and the powerful have used immigration and the transfer of industry to foreign slave economies and "market forces" financial fraud to ROB us of that final vestige of power!!

Usaulow April 26, 2012, 20:08
I was going to post something but your censors have verily destroyed a large amount of respect I have for you, Mr. Assaunge.
Jim Evans in Worcester April 26, 2012, 17:30
What do we really KNOW for a blatant FACT about our American politics and GLOBAL politics/economics...?

If we ignore the PR and hyperbole and the obvious fraud about us having a democratic "choice" of different political manifestos for "change".....

we KNOW that Zionist organised criminals got Glass-Stegal repealed and they caused 1929/2008....

.and that the most significant appointment in "Obama`s" White House was Rahm Emanuel...

. and that the only views Obama and the CIA and FBI and quite probably the IMF and the "markets" MUST obey are those of folk like Rothschild and Netanyahu rather than the poor deluded saps who voted Democrat.

UNTIL that REALLY changes this sort of Horowitz/Zizek "debate" is pure meaningless window dressing.
Jim Evans in Worcester April 26, 2012, 17:10
Donald and Theo...what if you are both missing a more fundamental point here in an attempt to shape the issues to suit yourselves and your favourite ideas....I ask because I catch myself doing it and strive to challenge my preconceptions rather than indulge in that very common habit of only seeing and believing what SUITS ME?

My pure guess is that there are most political theories are unlikely EVER to be relevant to what actually happens until it SUIT POWERFUL people that they happen.

We all know that a Capitalist Oligarchy (and their beloved Israel and the USA) are orchestrating what actually happens in our societies..... but notice how our entire political discourse and our political parties and what we read and hear on the media and our election manifestos IGNORE this underlying dynamic entirely.

I sense that many of my fellow British sincerely believe that our "democracy" actually works and that there is some point in joining a political party.....but I no longer do believe that.. fact I suspect that British politics is really about excusing and justifying and taking responsibility for events and behaviour that no politician is really responsible for in the first place...

...because they never had the POWER to introduce most of the policies they talk about....far less make them succeed if that displeases the Oligarchy or conflicts with American/Israeli wishes.

Will the ideas promoted by the Zionist Ron Paul or Horowitz or his fellow Zionist Zizek....OR ASSANGE...EVER get introduced...NO WAY..unless it suits Rothschild and Soros and the Bilderberger Crew....this "debate" is bread and in intellectual form of distraction theft !!
Donald April 26, 2012, 16:09
And btw, I do not think you have even understood my comment. There is much you need to learn mate. I am not the "individual" here, you are. And that’s the point.