cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/32524524
Generated Summary below:
Video Description:
Our interview with the president of Iran.
Generated Summary:
Main Topic:
The video announces an upcoming interview with the President of Iran, Mosoud Pezeshkian, and explains the reasons behind conducting the interview.
Key Points:
- The interview is with Mosoud Pezeshkian, the President of Iran.
- The interview aims to provide American citizens with accurate information and a different perspective.
- The interviewer acknowledges the historical animosity and potential conflict between the US and Iran.
- The goal is to understand the Iranian perspective, especially given the possibility of future conflict.
- The interviewer hopes the interview will help Americans form their own informed opinions.
- The interview is confirmed and will be released soon.
Highlights:
- The video emphasizes the importance of hearing directly from the Iranian President to gain a better understanding of Iran's views.
- It acknowledges the sensitive nature of interviewing a leader from a country with a strained relationship with the US.
- The interviewer expresses a desire to provide viewers with information that is often unavailable through mainstream media.
About Tucker Carlson Network:
We’re building an alternative to legacy media
What is TCN?
Tucker Carlson Network is the new streaming platform that is home to exclusive all-new content from Tucker Carlson. We will regularly be releasing new video content that tells the stories that matter and helps you make sense of the world around you. Why We Founded TCN
News coverage in the West has become a tool of repression and control. Reporters no longer reveal essential information to the public; they work to hide it. Journalists act as censors on behalf of entrenched power. They have contempt for the public. They hate the truth.
Democracy can’t function in a society like this. Voters can’t know what they’re voting for. People do understand they’re being manipulated, and they resent it. The population becomes angry and paranoid. Things fall apart.
There’s only one solution to a propaganda spiral like the one we’re living through, and it’s telling the truth about the things that matter — clearly and without fear. That’s our job. We plan to do it every day, no matter what.
We are the sworn enemies of lying, pomposity, smugness, and groupthink. We believe the corporate media is broken beyond repair, and the only way forward is to build something better.^[[1] https://tuckercarlson.com/about]
After all, who's to say? Some of us listen to Tucker Carlson, and some of us listen to Al Jazeera. They're all basically the same, amirite fellow leftist? And as we all know, including some RT.com and Tucker Carlson into that mixture is just what all of us like to do. They're both super independent. It's the first word that comes to mind, when I think of them.
I would say listen to and learn from as many sources as you can.
Some great United States journalists have worked with RT. Until it got censored, as many platforms are doing with the help of the oligarchy and their political lackeys. I have communities for some.
Western propaganda is well and all, but we must work harder to understand the bigger picture by also searching for non-Western propaganda and sources.
Independent journalists and commentators can be found on many platforms; I have made communities for a few.
It is true that corporately tied and backed sources and people are increasing as MSM influence decreases; they start funding people in naturally 'independent' areas.
We must always be critical of all governments and politicians.
We must work hard to seek out views that we do not agree with so as to not stay in our self-built echo chambers and our self-censorship.
“I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong.” – Frederick Douglass
“Don’t be in a hurry to condemn because he doesn’t do what you do or think as you think or as fast. There was a time when you didn’t know what you know today.” – Malcolm X
Completely agreed. That's why I am generally critical of all governments and politicians, and take particular pains to promote non-Western news sources.
Hey, do you have anything critical to say about Russia and Putin? Not just a broad statement of agreement that, of course, like all other governments we must be vigilant about them too, but a specific crime they're committing, and why it is bad. As a natural independent who feels so passionately about this issue, you'll be totally comfortable talking about that, right?
This includes the Ukraine government as well as the Russian government.
The status quo is only to criticize the Russian government and not the Ukrainian government.
If you want the status quo, then you can just read or watch any Western regime propaganda, and you will have your fill of Russophobia and pro-war views.
I mainly focus and share about the United States most of the time, since we are the ones that caused most of the wars going on right now, with our continued aggression and escalations.
We also fund and continue to cause a good number of genocides.
I focus on this because the status quo does not speak about this, or rarely they do.
Independent journalists and commentators are the dissidents willing to talk about these topics on many platforms, even when they get censored by our government (politicians, puppets of the oligarchy).
Lol I knew you couldn't do it
It is the status quo.
Why would I agree to it...
All is well.
Peace!
Vaccines and legal abortions are the status quo, too, but if I was talking with someone who got cagey when asked what they thought about vaccines and legal abortions, and gave generic answers while saying they really wanted to focus on the importance of underrepresented views like (whatever other topic they were talking about), that would pretty much tell me what I needed to know.
I say go ahead and criticize the Ukrainian and Russian governments and politicians, but that is not what you want to do.
You only want to continue the status quo of Russophobia and pushing pro-war talking points.
I will continue to push back on the status quo of mass murder and genocides my government continues to fund and support.
What's your feeling on Zoran Mandami? You posted a podcast recently that had some pretty interesting things to say about him.
He seems like AOC 2.0.
We already know and have tried these experiments with Bernie Sanders, AOC, the Justice Democrats, DSA, and many more.
You don't change the system from within; the system changes you.
I agree with some of his views, but I know where this goes, so I won't hold my breath.
It is good, though, that someone like him is getting the working class to move away from the status quo, even if it is a little bit.
Does this apply to Tucker Carlson?
He's not part of the system, so he can be a voice that's worth elevating and amplifying so he can bring change? Something along those lines?
If he got into politics, would it be the same "we already know," would you know how it goes and so on and stop supporting him?
Yes, he is similar to Joe Rogan in that regard.
They are not interested in being politicians.
They do go against the status quo on some issues, but they are closely aligned with certain views and people.
The tech bro oligarchy are some that Joe Rogan continuously interviews, so his push for the working class is limited by how far he is willing to go.
Again, Joe Rogan and Tucker Carlson are critical of the duopoly, but they only go so far.
Their dissenting views are more welcomed than the continued push of the Western regime's propaganda we see from the Main Stream Media (MSM) since the day we are born.
I think their views are important, though, since they both have sway with politics and the working class that others do not reach or try to reach.
“I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong.” – Frederick Douglass
This is so fascinating lol
How would you contrast Carlson's dissenting views with Mandami's?
Like what does Carlson think about Gaza, and what does Mandami? How do their views differ in that regard?
Do you know what show Carlson used to host and where, that was his big entrance into mainstream media, and why he got fired from it? There's a specific reason he got fired that is interesting. Also, there's another specific reason he just got fired from the mainstream media, but that one's a broader topic that gets into the difference between "a viewpoint" and the objective provable truth, which is pretty relevant to your whole shtick here. But, I'm asking about the first time he got fired, not the most recent one.
Isn't the fact that Carlson was extremely acceptable to the mainstream media, and they to him, apparently up until the point when he started costing them historic sums of money recently, relevant to your whole argument here? His whole thing used to be talking on the mainstream media in exchange for the MSM funding him to say a message they found to be acceptable.
Also what did Mandami used to do before he got into politics? Do you think he has sway with the working class?
Mandami is a liberal, with some 'progressive' views, and Carlson is a conservative, with some 'libertarian' views.
They both hold some populist views.
Mandami's views are similar to AOC's early pseudo-populist views that appealed to the working class, similar to Bernie Sanders.
Carlson is more like Dave Smith. They are both willing to listen and talk with others they don't agree with. They also talk and learn from Professor Jeffrey Sachs.
They are both critical of the genocide Israel, with the full support of the United States, is doing to the Palestinian people. Their views differ on specifics.
Yes, I know the shows Carlson was on and the reasons he was 'fired.' It has been a while, but I remember the basics.
I think Rachel Maddow and Tucker Carlson share similarities in some of the lawsuits they faced for their shows.
MSM and Tucker were at the hip until he started going against the status quo. Now with his new show, he is even more open about his dissident views that do not align with the oligarchy talking points.
Mamdani "worked as a foreclosure prevention and housing counselor, assisting lower-income non-white homeowners in Queens with eviction notices and efforts to remain in their homes."
He does have sway with the working class in New York. Similar to Bernie Sanders, AOC, and others and their districts.
FYI: I am more aligned with Sabby Sabs, RBN, and Jimmy Dore than Mamdani and Carlson.
Edit:
Which were?
When was Rachel Maddow proven in court to have lied on purpose about something super important and cost her parent company almost a billion dollars?
Or if not that, what similarities did you mean?
He was always going against "the status quo."
All of that was fine. The problem was when he cost them almost a billion dollars.
His rhetoric hasn't really changed, it's just gained a new and extremely explicit allegiance to Russia. That's pretty much the only difference between then and now (and he wasn't fired during any of the time when he was expressing it).
He was always anti-Israel, but I think that has more to do with the fact that they're Jewish than that he has any sympathy with the Palestinians. For example he keeps constantly anguishing about the plight of Christian Palestinians, even though their numbers are pretty much negligible.
Great points; I do not agree 100% with him or his views.
He is religious, so that explains his views on Christians and the mass murder and genocide of people, a bit, similar to Candace Owens.
Again, I am more aligned with Sabby Sabs, RBN, and Jimmy Dore.
I do agree with his Russia, Israel, Iran, and Palestine views, though.
The US is causing and funding these forever wars, and we must stop our aggression and lies.
You should check out Professor Jeffrey Sachs's explanations on the cause and history of these foreign forever wars.
Hey, that's really interesting. Why was he fired from Crossfire? When was Rachel Maddow proven in court to have lied on purpose about something super important and cost her parent company almost a billion dollars?
To my knowledge, Maddow and Carlson were labeled as entertainment due to lawsuits.
All is well, though.
Back to the big picture.
I am more interested in their dissident views on being against the forever wars and US foreign policy.
We must continue to always be critical of our government, politicians, and the fourth branch's propaganda.
We must continue to not be afraid to learn and listen to people that do not share our views or think like we want them to.
In this case I agree with their criticism of US foreign policy, where aggression and escalation are the only goals instead of dialogue and negotiation.
Was Maddow ever proven to have lied on purpose about anything for damages worth almost a billion dollars?
I actually don't think she was labeled as entertainment, since almost everything outside of Fox News doesn't try to make that claim that they are "entertainment" and not news, but that's besides the point.
Anyway, was Tucker Carlson ever proven to have lied on purpose about something pretty significant? I do feel like I remember something like that.
Do you think it's relevant to include in this whether we are learning and listening to people that are objectively lying to us? I feel like that's an important thing to include, but maybe you do not.
Okay so now it's "our" government and politicians only... bravo, that's probably a tactically smart revision to make lol.
I am not a shareholder, nor am I invested in the cost these corporations face, but it is a bit funny the back and forth with the US and lawsuits. I am more for fixing the systematic issues the working class faces by building up an independent (from the duopoly and oligarchy) working-class movement.
Correction on Rachel Maddow and Tucker Carlson defamation lawsuits:
We all have our preferred propaganda sources. Using our critical thinking skills will help us navigate through government and MSM propaganda. Listening and learning from dissenting sources or people that don't think like we do will help us avoid self-censorship and self-built echo chambers, which I think is healthier for our society.
I was talking about US foreign policy and the continued aggression and escalations, so that explains the wording of just including the US government and politicians.
You are correct, though. I mean, when I say we should always be highly critical of all governments and politicians, this includes the United States, Israel, Ukraine, the UK, NATO countries, and other Western regime allies.
Hey, that's super interesting, to hear what Glenn Greenwald has to say.
I was actually talking about the Dominion Voting lawsuit where they found for sure that Tucker Carlson had lied on purpose to his audience, on a matter of such importance that the whole "it's just entertainment" defense had no merit whatsoever and the network had to pay a bunch of damages to the people he made up lies about.
I'm not surprised that you express no opinion about whether it's important that someone is lying. You like to frame things within a landscape of "propaganda sources" and "viewpoints" where whether the viewpoint is based on anything that's actually true is irrelevant. I wonder why.
I'm glad you dropped the pretense of wanting to include in this any genocidal regimes which aren't aligned with The West. Again, a good tactical decision, I think.
I wanted to send $100 to Ukraine to help with their defense, just to help them be critical of the governments and politicians who are bombing, raping, and torturing their citizens and their children, but their web site for some reason isn't working to accept the money right now. I'll make a note to do it later, I'll see if I can indicate to them that it's in your honor. I'm glad you've been taking this time to educate me about critical thinking, this is really helpful.
Well, I thought I explained it in simple terms.
I mentioned that I do not agree 100% with Tucker Carlson, but I did point out where I do agree, which is criticism of US foreign policy and the constant push for more forever wars where the wealthy continue to increase their quarterly profits and take all the important natural resources in exchange for the mass murder of the working class.
I see the US government, politicians, and media as pushing propaganda at all times so as to benefit the oligarchy. We are born into this system on purpose, so it is difficult for people to notice or care if they do not question or learn dissenting views.
Great, you do you!
I hope all is well, and thanks for the small chat.
Peace!
Hey, that's super interesting. Not really looking at whether the dissenting views are lying is one of the most vital steps involved in critically evaluating those dissenting views, so I'm glad that you're really emphasizing that when you're bringing those dissenting views into play.
Being sympathetic to Fox News is also super important when you're trying to teach people not to consume propaganda they learned from the US media landscape. They're so underrepresented, it's almost a crime. Someone should do something about it.
Glad you approve! I'll send then $200.
The government (politicians) and institutions that profit and lobby (legal bribes) determine and spew out the talking points to label what is 'true,' 'fake news,' 'misinformation,' and much more when it goes against the status quo.
Look into the Iraq WMD talking points in the early 2000s and how MSM framed and spoke of what was happening.
Look at the military leaks; there are many. It shows a different picture than what we are told.
Glenn Greenwald worked with Edward Snowden on leaks and discussed what was found.
Again:
"We all have our preferred propaganda sources. Using our critical thinking skills will help us navigate through government and MSM propaganda. Listening and learning from dissenting sources or people that don’t think like we do will help us avoid self-censorship and self-built echo chambers, which I think is healthier for our society."
It is your money; you do you.