Has anyone gone through his stuff and compared to what actually happened?
If he has proven correct, then what is he predicting for the rest of this year? Or in 2040? Or is he more like a tarot reader/psychic that can't be proven one way or another?
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (20)
sorted by:
You know what's funny? I recently came to the conclusion that James Corbett is himself disinfo. I've listened to every one of his audio podcasts and I never, ever noticed until they "activated" him after the Ukraine War started.
His "gag", if you will, is that he thoroughly documents his work. So years and years were spent building up the impression that this guy has a detailed command of all the material and is a disciplined scholar. Which is true, at least until such time and in such way as it needs not to be.
So I heard his Ukraine show and thought, "Good Lord, are the NYT, WaPo and Rachel Maddow his only sources of information on this?" I was quite shocked, and I've actually waited for a "correction" since that time but it's never come.
You can see the technique, though, in the notes for this show:
"If the bad side is so bad we'll never convince you they're good, then we're going to convince you the good side is in on it with the bad side". This is the same technique you see with the Democrats: "Yes, the Democrats are horrible... just like every single Republican and especially Trump. Right, my friends?"
Corbett actually gets outed right away in the comments:
Can any (supposedly) outstanding researcher like Corbett possibly have simply never heard that, or have failed to address it completely? No way, no way at all. That's the tell, where the disciplined scholar needs to miss something.
Well sure, agree to disagree. But you should pause to recognize that it falls right into the pattern. Whenever I find myself in agreement with a lot of "smart" people, I freeze and my eyes begin to dart all around.
Oh yeah, even beyond that. It's not just that they don't see the illusion, they have no concept that there might be any problem at all with their "reality". If you press them on it, they'll vehemently deny it.
And if you suggest that to any extent things are not as they seem, I always think it sounds to them like you just told them to go research how two and two are not actually four. Hey, I'd have the same reaction if that's what heard.
If you or anyone reading this is at all curious about how fake the "news" is and the way the world really works, this appears to be a completely fake person: Dmitry Utkin
About the only lead we need is this one sentence:
Of course he hasn't. He's just a boogeyman created in Langley and has no physical manifestion to appear after, during or before 2016. That footnote [18] reads in the wiki as this:
Doesn't actually exist? What is that supposed to mean? I guess it was supposed to blackwash and minimize Wagner back before they did all that damage to the war effort in Ukraine.
But good old reliable Foreign Policy magazine retconned the title of the article, and it's now:
Oh, okay, murky nature. So they're admitting they don't know much about the group? Maybe it's not so much not knowing, it's not having decided what lies it's convenient to tell everyone.
Anyway, let's close with a good laugh. I mean, a good laugh at anyone who believes in Dmitry Utkin, or Krampus, or Belsnickel.
Take a look at this lame pic of "Dmitry" in what FP assures us was the "last time he was seen". Then compare it to this scary-looking fellow. There's also his "passport photo" in his wiki, which looks to have been issued in the 1950's, and one other tiny group photo not even worth linking.
We've all seen way better photos of Sasquatch.