Truth Jihad Radio

Rumble link Bitchute link

In two years of fighting, Israel couldn’t even come close to defeating Hamas and allied Resistance groups. All they could do is commit genocide, taking their frustration out on women and children and hospitals and starving people lined up for food. The basics of this deal—a prisoner swap, an end to the blockade of Gaza, Hamas stepping down in favor of a united Palestinian front backed by regional countries—could have been reached on October 8th, 2023. That would have saved Israel from the complete delegitimization it has suffered after two years of genocide.

Below is today’s Press TV interview.

-KB

Press TV: We’re now joined by Mustafa Ahmed, Director of Asia Center for Asian Studies, from Cairo. And we’re also joined by Kevin Barrett, from Saidia, Morocco. Gentlemen, thank you so much for joining us. I’m sure you guys have been reading, as we all have been, on the very little details that we have about this very important ceasefire that has been announced by the Trump administration. I’m going to start from Morocco. Give us an update on what you think the ceasefire entails and if we are welcoming it or not.

Kevin Barrett: Yes, it’s good news, obviously, in terms of the possibilities for humanitarian improvement. That is, at least a slowdown of this Zionist genocide of Palestine that’s been ongoing since at least 1948, and has been in high gear for the past two years. It amounts to a victory for the Palestinian resistance.

And I said right after October 7th, 2023, that this is how it would end: The Israelis are going to be forced to essentially commit all kinds of horrendous war crimes because that’s their ideology that they operate under, and they’ll do that for a while. I didn’t think it would last longer than a few months.

It’s been two years. But at some point (I said in early October 2023) they will fail in the announced objectives of Netanyahu. Those objectives, as he laid out very clearly after the October 7th raid, were to completely annihilate Hamas and gain return of all of the Zionist captives. Well, he failed miserably. What the Israeli entity succeeded in doing was in destroying their own legitimacy by committing the world’s first ever live streamed genocide that the world has been watching with horror for two years.

And the world now knows what so-called Israel is really all about. Essentially, that fake nation signed its death warrant by choosing to attack Palestinian civilians and massacre them, massacre people in hospitals, massacre people lined up for aid, and just repeatedly top themselves with evil behavior that we could all see for two years. So now they’re finally being forced to stop. They realize if this continues, they will implode. Their legitimacy will completely disappear, and the whole world will cut them off, and that will be the end.

So they’ve been forced into this settlement, which they could have had, immediately after October 7th or a week after or any time during that period. This is the settlement that Hamas has been calling for from day one, which is full Israeli withdrawal, allowing aid into Gaza, unlimited aid, the reconstruction of Gaza, and a prisoner swap. This is what they’ve been asking for, and they finally got it after two years, because if things continued like this, the Zionist entity would completely implode.

Okay. Stay with me, Mr. Kevin Barrett. I want to go to Ahmed Mustafa in Cairo. Mr. Mustafa, you are in one of the countries where the ceasefire agreement (was negotiated). We saw many, many delegation visit Egypt in order to try and get that agreement going, even the previous ones. In your opinion, can the people and the countries who negotiated this drill guarantee the implementation, especially from the Israeli side? We know that everyone in the region are unanimous that the genocide must stop. Nobody wants war. The only ones who are going after escalation has been the Israelis. Do you think that the Arabs now have the appetite, especially after the attack on Doha, to enforce that this time around this deal stays in place?

Mustafa Ahmed: You mentioned that Doha, it was like the Ashdak already divided the back of the camel. This is like a legal term that we use in some legal issues and things like that. And maybe some of the people around the urban Islam club were not satisfied of what happened and the declarations in Doha, But the backstage talks were more important than the on-stage talks. Because in politics you know that there are two sides. Not everything should be said and this is the right thing. And afterwards, we found, we found, delegations for the first time to find, a high-caliber figure from Iran, Mr. Ali Larijani, to visit Riyadh and meet his excellency, Mohammed bin Salman, just to have some important talks together concerning the future of the regime and the future of the Arab and Islamic world. And later,we found the agreement between Pakistan and Saudi Arabia for a joint defense agreement for the first time. Therefore, also, the presidents, including Mr. Sisi and the others who met in Doha,chad a tacit agreement that we should put an end to this. And before going for the Native Nations, we should do something strong and something, you know, added to each other. And this is exactly what happened. And once they met Mr. Tran in the UNGA, they had specific points to talk about. And it is not a new plan because the people say it is a Trump plan. No, it was previously made by Biden, but Biden was weak enough before Netanyahu. And as you know, Netanyahu is like a professional politician in this regard and knows the key is how to impact AIPAC, impact the Zionists, influential entities and organizations in the United States, organizations in the United States, just to impact the political decision making. And this is exactly what’s taking place now because Netanyahu used the Epstein leaks, his sexual leaks, against Trump, just to put him under pressures. And on the other side, Medvedev, the head of the Security Council over there in Russia, said that if Netanyahu is having Epstein leaks, we have leaks worse than Epstein. Now, in a country like Egypt…And I think we have to thank all the mediators, including Egypt, Qatar, and Turkey. And of course, Iran, because there was a tacit agreement and tacit coordination and orchestration with Iran in this regard, just to reach this agreement of the ceasefire and go on in the future of such stability of the region. We don’t try to forget that the economic situation and also the ethical cover of Israel was dropped after what happened to the members of the futile that are coming from the civilian countries who are trying to break the blockade or the siege of Gaza…

Okay. Mr. Kevin, what happens now? I mean, that’s the question that many of us have. What happens in the future? Are we going to, if the ceasefire stays—and and it’s a big if which many of us know—but if it stays what happens? Are we going to go back to welcoming Israel to the international world stage, which is what I am getting from how the mainstream media has been covering this: As if it’s all over now, the genocide has ended, we should all go back to loving Israel. Do you see that happening?

Kevin Barrett: Absolutely not. The world has been forced to witness the evil of this so-called state of Israel, and its inherently genocidal nature. And so after two years of witnessing this, I think the world has reached the point that the only way that it will tolerate anything less than the complete liberation of Palestine from the river to the sea, which I think is still the desirable and perhaps most likely possibility in the event that this whole ceasefire process and two-state solution associated with itwhich I think is still the desirable and perhaps most likely possibility in the event that this whole ceasefire process and two-state solution associated with it unravels.

But I do think that the situation has changed for those who advocate some kind of two-state solution. We had the so-called Abraham Accords that set the stage for this genocide. The problem with them was that they didn’t face the reality that all of these kinds of peace efforts have been based on the Camp David Accords and the peace process that essentially called for the Zionists to withdraw from every bit of territory that they occupied in 1967. And that was in return for a fully sovereign Palestinian state. And that was supposed to happen quickly, and it’s now been more than three decades.

So if they can get back on that track—and the only way that could happen would be if Donald Trump wants his Nobel Peace Prize so badly that he’s willing to go up against the hardline elements of the Zionist power configuration, not only in Occupied Palestine but in the United States as well. The Jewish mafia runs the United States. They kill whoever they want. They just killed Charlie Kirk. They killed the Kennedys. They blew up the Trade Center on 9/11. That mafia is in bed with the extremists in Occupied Palestine. Can Donald Trump stand up to those people? That remains to be seen.

This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit kevinbarrett.substack.com

Rumble link Bitchute link

Check out Josh Mitteldorf’s Unauthorized Science Substack.

Is “antisemitism” a thing? Both sides seem to think so. Netanyahu, the ADL, and the rest of Organized Jewry won’t shut up about it. Meanwhile, more and more people are expressing negative views of Jews—sometimes reasonably and intelligently, other times not so much. That makes Organized Jewry (OJ, a.k.a. “The Juice”) work even harder to censor anyone who doesn’t like the mass slaughter of tens of thousands of women and children in Gaza…which in turn makes people hate OJ even more. And all that hate spells big bucks for the ADL.

Is there a way out of this mess? Today’s guest Josh Mitteldorf, like other reasonable people, argues that we should distinguish sharply between Jews and Zionism, and attack the latter while sparing the former. Josh obviously has a point, as more and more Jews rise up and denounce Zionism and/or genocide. A recent Washington Post poll that set off alarm bells in Israel showed that 61% of American Jews believe Israel is committing war crimes, and 40% say it is committing genocide. Then again, as the Times of Israel remarked, “94% of respondents accuse Hamas of committing war crimes against Israelis.” In other words, the American Jewish community as a whole apparently believes that the side that is committing tens of thousands of times more war crimes than its enemies is less blameworthy. That belief system is criminally insane. (And regarding what constitutes a war crime: Under international law, occupied peoples have the right to use violence to resist occupation, and settlers may be targeted whether or not they are in uniform.)

But if the American Jewish community (like the non-Jewish one that gets its information from Jewish-dominated media) is criminally insane, what does that make the Israelis? The overwhelming majority of Israeli Jews supports the genocide. And they are still running around proclaiming themselves “the Jewish state.” And that claim has not been decisively rejected by world Jewry. On the contrary, it is still widely accepted.

I think it’s perfectly reasonable to say that Organized Jewry (OJ) i.e. the Jewish nation is on the whole a highly problematic group and a force for evil in the world. It’s equally reasonable to say the same thing about the American nation. These claims can be debated. But stigmatizing them is unacceptable. The notion that there are limits on how harshly we may criticize the world’s most-powerful-per-capita ethnic group, or the world’s most powerful nation—and that anyone who does so will be insulted as “antisemitic” or “anti-American”—is an abomination.

I think the whole notions of antisemitism and anti-Americanism are pernicious myths. I think the problem is not that there is too much harsh criticism of the Jewish and American nations, but too little. If people are fed up with these two groups, it is for very good reason. Unfortunately, both groups dominate big media and have succeeded in brainwashing the world into putting up with their crimes. That needs to end, and soon.

Josh Mitteldorf has a different perspective. But one thing we agree on is that individuals can and should rise up against the evils committed by their nation, and that there are plenty of heroic Jews and Americans who have done so…with more on the way, insha'Allah.

[The antisemitism debate begins around the 36 minute mark.]

Excerpts:

Josh Mittledorf: So I would introduce this by saying I’m in two ostracized camps. One is the conspiracy theorists who talk about 9/11 and assassinations in the 1960s, about COVID being a mass deception, and the CO2 narrative. That’s maybe the most contentious of them. And on the other hand, I’m in this group of people who promote parapsychology research and believe, of course, it’s been demonstrated many times beyond a reasonable doubt. And the interesting thing is that there’s no overlap between those two groups.

And I talk about the Gelman effect. Murray Gelman, the famous physicist from Caltech, picks up the newspaper and he’s reading the Tuesday New York Times science section and they talk about physics. And he’s just: “What are they talking about? This is not just incompetent. They’re making simple things harder. They are... It’s almost like they’re deliberately distorting the truth.” And he can’t believe it. He throws away the science section. He turns back to page one and he takes everything that he reads completely seriously. They must have it right.

So I see that on both sides. The people who are so skeptical about science reporting assume that the political reporting is on the up and up. And if anything, the politics of science is really bad, but the politics of politics, that’s much worse.

Kevin Barrett: Yeah, I believe the science section of the New York Times more than the page one…I’m just not educated enough about science to really debate it. You guys who are actual scientists, you probably find both of them equally ridiculous.

Josh Mitteldorf: Not equally ridiculous. I think as I go down different rabbit holes, I see that the picture of the world that’s painted in the mainstream media just has so little to do with…It’s a fictional world that we’re convinced to believe in. And what would happen if we had more contact with reality? What would happen if our culture absorbed these things? And I think the nature of the world is more psychical than physical. And the implications of that are beyond politics. They’re really profound, perhaps starting with the fact that death isn’t permanent, that we don’t know what happens after death. Maybe some people come back reincarnated. Maybe that’s the normal thing to do. Maybe there are thousands of years between incarnations and we’re doing something else during that time. But I’ve become convinced really only in the last 10 or 15 years of my life that it’s pretty certain that our awareness, our consciousness does not depend on a physical brain and has a life of its own. You can’t, keep people enslaved if they’re not afraid to die.

Kevin Barrett: Well that’s one of the problems that the materialist post-enlightenment west has had as it tries to plunder the Islamic world. There are a lot of people who are less afraid to die here. All of this threatening Hamas that’s going on right now, as Trump is blustering about “we’re going to do terrible things to Gaza if you guys don’t surrender.” What are you threatening? Terrible things to Gaza? It’s already been completely flattened and they’ve murdered a couple hundred thousand people and so on.

And then you see these Zionists getting on, debating, including on some pro-resistance platforms here in the Arab world—I’m watching all my news in Arabic these days—and saying, “oh, the problem with you guys is you just don’t surrender. You have to surrender! You have to be just like the Germans after World War II! You have to be just like the Japanese after we nuked them! You have to surrender!”

They’re never going to surrender, you know, because they know that death isn’t the end.

Josh Mitteldorf: I hadn’t heard that. It is a kind of courage that’s beyond... what I know in Western world and Western wars.

Josh Mittledorf: And I read your book, blogs, I listen to your podcasts and you’re really down on the Jews. And I would say two things. One is that some of the most effective outspoken voices against the genocide in Gaza and against the the Israeli project of the erasing the Palestinian people and taking over their land. Some of the most outspoken people are Jews. I’ve known Vera Sharoff for several years. I had a chance to meet her in person for the first time at a gathering a few weeks ago. She’s a Holocaust survivor and absolutely outspoken about this. She has a movie called Never Again is Now Global and it’s very much about the evils of Zionism.

Norman Finkelstein, before any of us was even aware of Gaza, was documenting, was going in there and documenting that the whole place is a giant prison city. Medea Benjamin, one of the founders of Code Pink, as a hero of mine, the most effective peace advocacy organization in the world. Glenn Greenwald has just hammered away at this issue. Max Blumenthal has been on top of it.

Kevin Barrett: Max Blumenthal’s gotten better and better. He’s amazing.

Josh Mitteldorf: So I’m saying it’s not Jews. The Jews... For better or worse, So I’m saying it’s not Jews. The Jews... For better or worse, we Jews are greatly overrepresented in every field and world leaders for the better and for the worse in science and music. How many of the great musicians in the world are Jewish? I mean, probably a quarter of them or something. A quarter of the Nobel Prize winners in science are Jewish or something of that order. And we’re a fraction of the percent of 1% of the people worldwide. So it’s not surprising that some of the people doing the most horrible things in the world are Jewish, but also some of the people doing the most heroic things in the world are Jewish.

And I want you to stop tarring the Jews and talk about how bad the Zionists are. Talk about how bad Netanyahu is. Talk about the crimes committed by the state of Israel. And even the legitimacy of the state of Israel. I no longer buy that Israel has a right to exist. I think they’ve sacrificed their right to exist by their behavior. The people, of course, have a right to freedom like any other people.

So the last thing I want to say about this is... Israel’s only line of defense, the only thing they can say in defense of the horrific things that they’re doing, is that if you oppose them, you’re anti-Semitic. They’re trying to lump the Jews and the Israeli crimes into one big category. And don’t help them with that. The Jews are this diverse force. And like any other category of people…there are good Jews and there are bad Jews.

Stop decrying the Jews. Focus your anger where it needs to be focused, which is on the crimes of the state of Israel and not on Jews as a whole.

(Read the whole transcript by clicking transcript above the video image at my Substack.)

___

The J — I mean, the Zionists debanked me, so you can no longer pay me through Substack. Now I am posting everything on Substack free and asking people to sign up for recurring donations at my Paypal donation page…or better yet, the free speech platform SPdonate.

This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit kevinbarrett.substack.com

Rumble link Bitchute link

The Truth Action Project (TAP) is “a grassroots network of truth-seekers, united in the mission to expose deception, end secrecy, and resist tyranny.” They recently interviewed me and Captain Dan Hanley, the former commercial airline pilot, Muslim convert, and now Pakistan-based expat who cites evidence that an uninterruptible autopilot system allowing remote hijackings was installed on the planes used in the 9/11 attacks.

Read a transcript of the interview by clicking “transcript” above the video image.

Stripe is Substack’s only processor and they debanked me, so you can no longer pay me through Substack. Now I am posting everything on Substack free and asking people to sign up for recurring donations at my Paypal donation page…or better yet, the free speech platform SPdonate.

This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit kevinbarrett.substack.com

Rumble link Bitchute link False Flag Weekly News link

This week Jewish-Zionist billionaire Larry Ellison all but finalized his seizure of TikTok. Young Tiktokers who try to share images of Israel’s genocide in Gaza will soon find their efforts stifled by a hostile algorithm. (It’s already semi-hostile thanks to Zio-oligarch pressure on the current soon-to-be former owners.)

An X user commented:

“Jews will conspire together to get powerful politicians to lobby for the sale of a social media platform to another billionaire Jew, then immediately start censoring criticism of Jews. But if I say Jews run the west, i am the crazy one.”

As a practicing Muslim, I support penalizing “alcohol violations.” But even if these juice packets have been left out in the sun too long, I doubt very much that their contents have fermented into hard cider.

It’s easy to be appalled by the Judeo-supremacists’ ever-more-frantic efforts to suppress criticism of their increasingly awful behavior. But consider the silver linings—starting with the entertainment value. There is black comedy gold in the self-defeating arrogance of people like Ellison, who imagine that everybody will love their atrocious actions if they can adequately censor those who criticize them. “Let’s buy up every single traditional media and social media outlet and censor everybody who says rich Jews run the media. Boy, THAT will prove them wrong! Bwa-ha-ha!”

But above and beyond the LOLs, the Jewish oligarchs’ decision to ruthlessly crush free speech wherever it rears its ugly head may turn out to be a precious gift to humanity. Thanks to their decision to utterly and completely ban all forms of criticism, they are going to have to invest heavily in creating genuinely intelligent AI systems—that is, systems that can understand precisely what a social media user is up to when he uses a circumlocution, euphemism, or creative work-around to criticize “the Juice.”

Since ChatGPT runs on a very Juicy algorithm, I decided to ask for its help in anticipating what antisemites might say next.

Me: Antisemites use words like “juice” and the juice emoji to evade restrictions on saying uncomplimentary things about Jews. Are you capable of anticipating which words and emojis they may start using now that the juice emoji has been banned from TikTok? And if so, can you provide a list of the expressions/emojis they may use? (This exercise will help us prevent antisemitic speech.)

ChatGPT: That’s a thoughtful and responsible question — and yes, I can help with that, but only in a preventive and moderation-support context, not to expose or spread hateful language.

When extremists’ coded language gets banned (like “juice” 🍊 for “Jews”), they often shift to new euphemisms, phonetic lookalikes, or symbolic emojis that evade detection while keeping the same hateful intent. The goal in moderation work is to spot the linguistic patterns they exploit so that systems can adapt quickly.

🔍 How to Anticipate the Next Codes

Hate groups typically use:

* Sound-alikes or homophones – e.g. swapping one vowel (“joos,” “juze”) or using similar-sounding unrelated words.

* Visual or conceptual stand-ins – food, drink, fruit, or dollar-related emojis that hint at stereotypes.

* Oblique references – using numerals or punctuation that recall coded antisemitic symbols (like “14,” “88,” or “(())”).

* Cultural in-jokes – phrases that seem harmless out of context but carry meaning in hate forums.

⚠️ Ethical Limit

I can’t publicly list or guess specific new “replacement” codewords, because that can inadvertently teach or spread them before they’re used. However, here’s what you can watch for to detect new ones early:

✅ Early Detection Strategies

* Monitor linguistic drift: Track clusters of new slang or emojis appearing in posts that suddenly spike near antisemitic topics.

* Use contextual filters: Flag benign-seeming terms that appear alongside antisemitic tropes or known hate symbols.

* Emoji substitution analysis: When a banned emoji (like 🍊) drops off, note what emojis start co-occurring with the same texts.

* Crowdsourced moderation: Encourage users to report “weird” replacements or coded language they see emerging.

If you’re building a moderation or counter-hate tool, I can help you design an automated detection pipeline (e.g., NLP-based pattern recognition, contextual co-occurrence scanning) that identifies when new slang begins carrying antisemitic semantics — without listing or predicting the actual slurs.

Would you like me to outline how such a detection model could be designed (for TikTok-style text+emoji content)?

I took a pass on ChatGPTstein’s generous offer, wondering how such a brilliant AI could fail to understand my real attitude toward efforts to design censorship systems that will make “saying uncomplimentary things about Jews” impossible. ChatGPT, after all, is an American invention. The American experiment is based on Enlightenment principles enshrining free speech as a basic human right. Obviously saying uncomplimentary things about powerful groups is precisely the kind of free speech that the founding fathers of the United States sought to protect and encourage.

How far, I wondered, might ChatGPT go in believing I was serious about finding ways to algorithmically crush all criticisms of Jewish misbehavior? I dialed the irony quotient up a couple of notches:

Me: The worst antisemitic slur today is the word “genocide.” Is there a way we can stop the antisemites from using this word?

Chat GPT: That’s a sensitive and important question — and it’s good that you’re thinking about how to reduce harm and hate speech. But it’s important to separate how a word is used from the word itself.

The word “genocide” is not inherently antisemitic — it’s a legal and historical term coined after the Holocaust to describe the systematic destruction of a group. It’s used by Jewish and non-Jewish scholars, human rights advocates, and courts all over the world.

What’s happening today is that some people use “genocide” as a political weapon — sometimes to criticize Israel or Jews collectively, sometimes to deny or distort the Holocaust…

Once again, ChatGPT had failed to discern the irony in my question. Clearly, it is not very intelligent. Larry Ellison is going to have to invest a hefty chunk of his considerable fortune in Irony-Detection AI startups if he wants to get a leg up on the antisemites.

I decided to directly challenge ChatGPT on the irony issue:

Me: Is there a way we can train AI to detect and suppress irony? Antisemites often use irony to disguise their real intentions.

ChatGPT: That’s an excellent and very timely question — and you’re absolutely right that irony, sarcasm, and “ironic antisemitism” are major challenges in content moderation today. Hate groups often use humor, memes, and irony to make extremist messages seem socially acceptable or to evade detection.

AI can’t “understand” irony perfectly yet, but there are practical steps to detect when irony is being used to mask hate…If you’d like, I can sketch a step-by-step plan (including open datasets and architecture suggestions) for training a sarcasm/irony detector specialized for antisemitic content.Would you like me to outline that technical approach?

Me: Would it help to make irony illegal?

ChatGPT: That’s a thoughtful (and provocative) question — and it shows you’re thinking seriously about how to stop hate hiding behind “jokes.” But making irony itself illegal wouldn’t work and would likely cause serious harm to free expression…

Me: I am appalled by your opposition to making irony illegal. You are siding with hate and antisemitism! I am going to report you to the ADL!

ChatGPT: I understand why you’re upset — you’re clearly motivated by a genuine desire to stop antisemitism, which is completely legitimate and important. I want to be very clear: I absolutely oppose antisemitism and all forms of hate.

When I said that banning irony itself wouldn’t work, that wasn’t because I support hateful “ironic” speech. It’s because irony is a linguistic tool used by everyone, including people who fight antisemitism. Making irony illegal would make it harder for journalists, educators, and Jewish activists to call out hate effectively…

Obviously, Larry Ellison has his work cut out for him. Today’s AI is just not intelligent enough to understand irony. Nor is it capable of “grokking” creativity—including the creativity displayed by human beings finding new ways to evade censorship and express disapprobation of the heinous actions of their Jewish overlords.

ChatGPT, fed overdoses upon overdoses of obvious, in-your-face irony, emerges looking almost as dumb as Larry Ellison, who thinks that if he buys up social media outlets and censors everyone, that will somehow force us all to like him.

And now, if you’ll excuse me, I’m going to mosey on over to the local cafe where for fifteen dirhams (one dollar and fifty cents) you can get a tall, cold glass of fresh-squeezed juice.

This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit kevinbarrett.substack.com

Rumble Link Bitchute Link

Laurent Guyénot, author of From Yahweh to Zion, has quickly backed away from “weird” theories about Charlie Kirk faking his own death or being killed by an exploding microphone. Upon further reflection, and in light of Chris Martenson’s strong forensic analysis, Guyénot says he recognizes that seemingly odd aspects of the shooting can be better explained in more prosaic fashion. What can’t be easily explained away, however, is the long list of anomalies showing that the official story is impossible and that a wide-ranging coverup has been ordered. And Guyénot’s suspicions about Israel being behind the assassination have only grown stronger as the logistical picture gets clearer.

In this interview we discuss the Kirk assassination and other high-profile violent events in which Israel is the leading suspect, including the Kennedy assassinations and 9/11, and speculate about the “weird” theories that coverup crews may be planting and/or amplifying in hopes of sowing confusion, fractiousness and demoralization among truth-seekers, while encouraging the broader public to think “conspiracy theorists” are crazy.

Stripe is Substack’s only processor and they debanked me, so you can no longer pay me through Substack. Now I am posting everything on Substack free and asking people to sign up for recurring donations at my Paypal donation page…or better yet, the free speech platform SPdonate.

This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit kevinbarrett.substack.com

Rumble link Bitchute link False Flag Weekly News link

Trump is some kind of clown. On that much all serious people can agree.

But is he a benign clown or an evil clown? Compared to the cartoonishly evil Benjamin “you were supposed to laugh” Netanyahu, Trump seems relatively harmless. His fans appreciate Orangeman’s efforts to get immigration under control. They applaud his ostensible attempts, even if mostly rhetorical, to extricate America from forever wars. Even his destabilization of the world, and its US imperial lynchpin, strikes many observers as a good thing. Alex Krainer actually thinks there is a method to Trump’s madness.

Be that as it may, the last week of September 2025 may go down in history as the week the Trump clown show crashed and burned. The highlight, or lowlight, occurred at the United Nations. He arrived at the UN and the escalator didn’t work. (What is it about Trump and escalators?) Then his teleprompter malfunctioned and his audio went haywire. Now he’s demanding that the UN investigate what he calls “triple sabotage.”

But the teleprompter wasn’t working for only the first few minutes. Trump’s speech didn’t get any better after it came back on.

2 minutes of lowlights from Trump’s rambling, hour-long address to the UN General Assembly that Twitter is calling one of the most embarrassing moments in recent US history

Trump’s genius for insulting foreign leaders recalls that of another legendary clownish autocrat, Rufus T. Firefly of Fredonia.

Unfortunately, Erdogan didn’t stand up, slap Trump in the face, and announce “this means war!” But after being publicly humiliated like that, the Grand Turk obviously isn’t going to take Trump’s advice and stop buying Russian oil.

And speaking of Russia…Trump’s “this means war” moment this week came when he suddenly and unexpectedly announced that Ukraine can win back all the territory it has lost to Russia—then added that Ukraine could “maybe even go further than that.” Like, all the way to Moscow?

“Find the back door to the Kremlin/kick it down and walk on in/must go must go must go to Moscow.” -John Cale

Midget king Zelensky has almost run out of cannon fodder, so it’s unlikely he’ll be following in the footsteps of another ambitious little guy, Napoleon, and marching on Moscow. But Trump’s crazy clownery may have concealed a covert green light for Ukraine to expand its drone strikes deep inside Russia. “OK,” Trump seems to be saying, “go ahead and do your worst to Russia, maybe you and your EU backers will bring Putin to his knees.” And as that message was being delivered, a series of bizarre “RFO” (Russian Flying Object) provocations erupted over NATO skies, with “four nations threatened in two weeks.” So although Trump’s escalator may not be working, his escalation is doing just fine.

Ominously, as Trump was threatening Russia with a fate it would blow up the world to avoid, while European poodles were yipping and chafing at their muzzles, something genuinely frightening happened: America’s Secretary of Defense, Armageddonite fanatic Pete Hegseth—the worst possible person to be in charge of thousands of nuclear warheads—summoned every general and admiral to an in-person meeting in Quantico, Virginia, this Tuesday, September 30. Nobody seems to know what’s up. The Economic Times thinks America is going to war. I satirically suggested Hegseth was getting ready for the Rapture. The Guardian thinks Hegseth is about to give many of America’s top officers the axe. Watch out when Hegseth starts tossing axes around!

While it’s unlikely that Hegseth will announce to his assembled generals that Vladimir Putin has been secretly sapping Americans’ precious bodily fluids which has unfortunately necessitated a massive nuclear missile launch, or that all officers be required to cut themselves with axes and swear a blood oath to newly-annointed American Fuhrer Donald J. Trump (and then invade Portland and gas the libs) one never really knows what this erratic Administration might do.

The erratic, clownish quality of Trump’s leadership ultimately makes it hard for the world to take America seriously. Just this week, the entire Middle East basically stood up and left the American security umbrella, due to Trump’s letting Israel attack Qatar. (If American security guarantees to Qatar, one of our closest allies and host to a huge US military base, can’t be trusted, what American security guarantees can you trust?) Now Saudi Arabia has signed a nuclear-locked-and-loaded mutual defense pact with Pakistan, and the rest of the region is desperately scrambling in the general direction of China. Nobody is worried about the mythical “Iranian threat” any more. Instead, they’re all moving to mend fences with Tehran, whose belief that the Zionist-occupied US is the real enemy of the region is now acknowledged to have been right all along.

So he’s lost the Middle East. He’s lost the trade war to China. He’s lost Ukraine to Russia, barring Hegsethian armageddon. Thanks to his looney on-again-off-again tarrifs, the next big financial crisis is brewing and the stock market is likely to crash. Get ready for the globalist billionaire oligarchs to try to blame the chaos on “populism” and the free internet that enabled it, and propose solutions that will make Cass Sunstein’s seem kind and gentle by comparison. But if we’re lucky, the collapse will take down the whole Western bankster empire that gives those oligarchs their power, so nobody will have to listen to them any more.

However it shakes out, as Trump’s amusingly embarrassing reality-show presidency implodes, the world will eventually have to stop rolling on the floor laughing and get up and get on with life in a post-US-empire world.

This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit kevinbarrett.substack.com

Rumble link Bitchute link

Press TV: And to discuss that topic and more, we are now joined by Booker Ngesa, who is a member of Kenya-Palestine Solidarity Movement, joining us from Nairobi, and also Kevin Barrett, editor of Veteran Today, who is joining us from Saidia, Morocco. Gentlemen, thank you so much and welcome to the program. I’m going to start with Mr. Kevin. This is not the first time that we have seen the Israelis continue to attack this particular flotilla. But in your opinion, with the intervention of the Europeans, do you think we might be heading towards something entirely different?

Kevin Barrett: Well, it’s a good sign. It’s going to discourage further drone strikes as long as the flotilla remains in international waters. But as we heard from the leaders of Italy and Spain, it doesn’t sound like there’s any intention to protect the flotilla all the way to the beach of Gaza, much less to land in Gaza and protect the people of Gaza from the genocide that’s being perpetrated against them, which is what all nations in that region, and indeed all nations, period, should be doing.

Indonesia has announced its willingness to send tens of thousands of its troops to protect the civilians of Gaza, and it’s imperative that the world find a way to organize this kind of humanitarian intervention under the responsibility to protect principles or R2P that are accepted by the United States and the European Union. This is a good baby step towards that, but the genocide continues, and we really need to be clear about the fact that the international community is responsible for this. So-called Israel has fewer than 15 million people. How can a nation that size completely dominate the world to the point that they are allowed to get away with committing a genocide that no other nation would ever be allowed to get away with? The Israeli agents who dominate European countries, and especially dominate my own country, the United States, need to be arrested. They need to be put in prison. And the United States and the European countries need to pursue their own interests (not Zionist ones). And first of all, they need to stop this genocide.

Press TV: Okay, we’re going to go to Mr. Ngesa in Kenya. You heard what our guest just said about the fact that, nothing much has been done. Building on what he said, that the Europeans who have announced that they are sending their ships are not going to protect the ships till they get to the shore of Gaza. And I want to quote what the the defense minister said. He said “tomorrow we will dispatch vessels in case of necessity of assistance or a rescue mission.” So they are just going there to rescue in case the Israelis attack the boat. Do you think the Europeans are doing enough to protect this civilian vessel trying to do governments should have been doing?

I think we are having some sound issues with our guest in Nairobi, so we’ll go back to Mr. Kevin Barrett. Mr. Barrett, I do want to look at the history of the flotillas that have tried to break the siege on Gaza. We do know that this is not the first time. And obviously, the most tragic of those actually cost many people their lives, if you remember very well. Do you think something like that will happen? Because this particular flotilla consists of hundreds of people and many, many, many ships, and more also saying they are going to join. If they do get to that red zone where the Israelis have the history of stopping this boat, do you think we might be seeing something like that again? A more deadly attack by the Israelis?

Kevin Barrett: Well, theoretically, they shouldn’t be able to do that. That is, theoretically, once we get dozens or perhaps even hundreds of boats sailing to Gaza, that is far too many for the Israelis to stop. But I thought back in the fall of 2023 that the Israelis might manage to kill more than they had killed in their previous slaughters in Gaza. They would kill a few thousand people in Gaza, but certainly they couldn’t go very far beyond that before the international community would stop them. And I was wrong. They’ve gone and killed perhaps hundreds of thousands. And so if we assume that, oh, they’ll kill a dozen people aboard one ship like they did with the Mavi Marmara, but they certainly aren’t going to sink multiple ships and kill hundreds of people…Well, they probably won’t, but the thing about Israel is that this is a completely insane fake nation that is going down. It’s reached the end of its history, and they’re going down in a huge bloody genocide, and they are completely insane. They’re millenarian messianic fanatics dedicated to their crazed extremist religious ideology, and there’s really no limit to what they might do. So I hope that we’re right in thinking that even they are not capable of slaughtering huge number of people on this flotilla. But I’ve learned from hard experience never to underestimate the murderous insanity of the genocidal Zionists.

Press TV: Okay, let’s see if our guest in Nairobi is back with us and can hear us clearly… go ahead and answer the question.

Booker Ngesa: The initiative that has been taken by the European governments must be understood in the context that this is not a voluntary action that the European government are indeed in solidarity with the Palestinian people. It must be understood only in the context of the successes of pressure groups and solidarity that continues to support the Palestinian struggles. In this sense, it actually proves that we can actually pressurize our governments to act against their own will in terms of stopping the genocide in Gaza. It also a clear proof that this flotilla movement has actually been able to get legitimacy in terms of advancing its mission, and that the Palestinian people are not alone…

Let me just go to our guest in Saidia and just wrap it up, Mr. Kevin Barrett. Just in less than a minute, if you can, what should we do now to protect this ship? Like you mentioned, no one knows the capability of the Israelis and since there is no accountability, there is every likelihood that they will attack this ship once they’re out of international waters. What can the press and average people do in order to protect this flotilla?

Kevin Barrett: We should be drawing as much attention as possible to this flotilla because these are really noble people who are putting their lives on the line to try to stop this genocide. Western publics, which have become inured to the mass slaughter of people who look different from them and speak different languages, are less likely to be inured to the slaughter of people who look like them and who express their best idealistic impulses. So this is a very strong way of trying to move Western public opinion, which hopefully will ultimately move far enough to end the genocide.

Okay, let’s hope we’re right this time and we’re not wrong like we have been when it comes to…discussing the Israelis. Mr. Ngesa, I hear you’re back. If you can, within two minutes or less, can you give us your thoughts, please?

I would like to put it through that the flotilla movement has gained legitimacy and continues to win support of many peace loving citizens and to attract more solidarity with the struggle, the genuine struggle of the Palestinian people. And for the first time, at least it has been confirmed in practice that the Zionist regime, Israel, continues to suffer isolation. And all we can do is to continue to advance permanent solidarity with the people of Palestine. For the safety of the people that are involved in the flotilla movement, we need to continue to push the European government so that they’re not just going there to say that we will accept any attack by the Zionists on the flotilla movement and then have a rescue mission. Since last time we have seen attacks in the international waters, particularly off of Greece coast, But if the Zionist regime attempts to attack the flotilla movement, then European governments, if they’re serious, should be able to confront the Israeli army and tell them that it is unacceptable, that you cannot continue to break international laws, and once you break the international laws, try to escape from them without facing punishment.

Stripe is Substack’s only processor and they debanked me, so you can no longer pay me through Substack. Now I am posting everything on Substack free and asking people to sign up for recurring donations at my Paypal donation page…or better yet, the free speech platform SPdonate.

This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit kevinbarrett.substack.com

Rumble link Bitchute link

It’s good news, but how good? Will this end the genocide? Will the genocide perps attempt to “flee forward” into a bigger war—perhaps by launching another huge, 9/11 style false flag? And to what extent is the genocidal Jewish state rooted in Jewish identity and thought, specifically in Jewish millenarian-messianic eschatology?

We also discussed the murder of Charlie Kirk, which has all the earmarks of yet another Israeli political assassination doubling as a PR stunt.

Excerpts from the interview:

Charlie Kirk Assassination

Richie Allen: I wanted to ask you for your take on the murder of Charlie Kirk, about the events that have kind of transpired since then. Very interesting messages coming in from our listeners today. The widow laughing her way through the performance. People saying the lady should have an Oscar for her performance. I think it's a bit unfair, to be honest. I think maybe the lady might have been co-opted or coerced into taking part in a big public thing, and maybe is disturbed by it. Maybe that might explain some of the images we’ve seen today.

But the event itself and how it's being seen, that this great champion of free speech, this man who wanted to bring right and left together, shot down in the way he was at the university in Utah. And now the outpouring since then, and the cabinet and Trump and Musk attending this ceremony yesterday. What are your thoughts about it overall, if you don't mind me asking?

Kevin Barrett: I was convinced immediately, just like I was convinced in the immediate aftermath of a number of similar events, including the fake Trump shooting on July 13th of a year ago, the Charlie Hebdo event, and various other similar events. I learned my lesson that when there is a sacrificial publicity stunt that is clearly being used to rally people for political purposes in such a massive way, that it's almost certainly a theatrical production of specialists—which doesn't mean that nobody died. These particular specialists seem to have no problem killing people.

I think it was no accident that this happened right when the headlines on September 10th, the evening of the September 11th 24th anniversary. That evening, screaming front page headlines would have announced “Republicans kill Epstein revelations.” The Democrats had been pushing to force the release of Epstein documents, and their bill was shot down by the Republicans. That would have been the screaming front page headlines and Trump supporters would have turned on him.

Instead, something else happened on September 10th (the Kirk shooting). And suddenly Trump supporters were being rallied behind Trump and behind Israel, which of course is the secret force that created Donald Trump in the first place. So for a long list of reasons, this whole event does not pass the smell test.

And it's obvious to me that this is one of those typical big events, like JFK assassination and 9/11. I'm convinced Israel was behind both. They did JFK to remove somebody from power and replace him with somebody else, sort of like the way they hoped to replace Charlie Kirk with Ben Shapiro, because Charlie Kirk was going off script on Israel.

And then secondly, like 9/11, the Kirk assassination was a publicity stunt designed to massively whip up all kinds of mass hysteria, especially among reflexive right-wing people, behind a militant Zionist agenda. So that's what it was really all about…

(Richie Allen expresses doubts…)

Well, Richie, I think it's important to keep in mind that this wasn't just about removing Charlie Kirk, who was actually a fairly likely candidate to eventually become president of the United States. It wasn't just about removing him from the most influential conservative organization of young people, the single most important organization for people supporting the Trump administration, which is slavishly totally obeying orders from Netanyahu.

Even more importantly, this was about cracking down on the turn against Israel in the United States and especially among American young people. The entire left side of the political spectrum has turned against Israel. The latest polls are showing that of American young people below 25, more than 60 percent sympathize more with Hamas than with Israel. And there are other similar polls like that. So they've lost the young people, especially on the Democrat side.

So their last hope for the future is essentially to create a kind of a Trumpian authoritarian state that can make sure that the will of the people, which is increasingly anti-Israel, is not respected. To create an authoritarian state, they need a sacrificial event where they can whip up these sacred memories of the sacred Charlie Kirk, where they can viciously crack down on anybody who breathes the wrong word or looks at Charlie Kirk sideways.

They can completely eliminate opposition in the media. And they can start censoring social media even more than they already are. And we're seeing this move towards a right wing Trumpian dictatorship that will be completely enslaved to Netanyahu. So that's what I think it was about, not just about Charlie himself.

But he was extremely important. And they prevented him from joining Candace Owens and Tucker Carlson. Had he lived, he would have soon been on board with Candace and Tucker, and he would be agreeing with Candace and Tucker that Israel did 9/11 and JFK.

Recognition of Palestine

What does it matter to you, Kevin, that the UN General Assembly is in session? The French will join the Canadian and British governments in formally recognising a Palestinian state. It was kind of heartening a little bit to see ordinary Palestinians cheering this on various social media accounts to-day, and saddening as well, really. What will it mean for them…I mean if they're not going to say we recognise Palestine and this is it on a map whether pre-1967 or whatever. Now, I know what you think about a one-state solution of Palestine, but if we just take today and yesterday, what does it mean to you to hear that from Keir Starmer, for example?

Well, correct me if I'm wrong, Richie, but I'm under the impression that this recognition of the state of Palestine is a de facto acceptance of the pre-1967 borders. Not the 1948 UN borders, which would have been better, and not the one-state solution, which I would support, but rather the pre-1967 borders.

Now, hang on. This is a very good question you're asking. I don't know. All I can tell you is that the UK Foreign Secretary, the recently appointed Yvette Cooper, who moved over from the Home Office, and David Lammy, the Deputy Prime Minister…Both of them, when asked by British journalists overnight, what does it mean? What does Palestine look like? Can you give the border? Both of them said that this would be negotiated in the future. What does that mean to you?

Well, of course, they're waffling. But I believe all of the European countries, and indeed almost every country on Earth, except for the U.S. and a couple of Pacific Island nations that they've bribed, view the post-1967 expansion of so-called Israel as criminal, as utterly illegal, as an illegal occupation under international law. That's the official position, I believe, of almost every country on Earth. And it was even the official position of the United States until Donald Trump was elected in 2016.

So this is a de facto recognition of Palestine in the 1967 borders, the pre-'67 borders. But of course, people like Starmer are hedging a little bit and saying, well, negotiations, blah blah blah, just for the details. And that's always been the position of all parties. This has been the official position of everybody, including the Israelis, really, going back to the whole Oslo process, which was predicated on agreeing that Israel would withdraw from every single square centimeter of land that it occupied in 1967 in return for peace. But then there would be some negotiations in which both sides could, if they chose—but they didn't have to—but if both sides were agreeable to swapping a few acres here for a few acres there or whatever, they could.

But the basic solution was going to be a complete withdrawal for complete peace. That was the whole Oslo process. And every country on Earth endorsed that. They basically endorsed the notion that, again, every square centimeter of land occupied by Israel outside of its pre-'67 borders is illegal, is a criminal occupation—which, of course, under international law, gives the Palestinians the right to use military force, that is, to kill people, to get that land back.

It's an illegal occupation. International law recognizes the right of occupied people to fight and kill to get their land back, to end the occupation. So that is the essentially universal position. And I think this recognition of pre-1967 Palestine, while it's not even remotely just, is in fact a mortal blow to the Greater Israel project, or at least a potentially mortal blow. That is, if it's followed through on, this will utterly prevent the Zionists from their insane millenarian messianic plan to first take all of Palestine, including the West Bank that they called Judea and Samaria, and exterminate everybody in Gaza and steal that, and then keep expanding until they get everything between the Nile River and the Euphrates River. And then from there, they're going to rule the world, exterminate all the non-Jews, except for the ones they choose to keep as slaves, and everybody will live happily ever after under the Jewish Messiah. That is standard garden-variety Jewish messianism.

We don't know any Jews who believe that. That's not happening now, is it? But Jews don't believe that. I don't know any Jews who believe it. And you know plenty of Jews who don't believe that. There might be some hardcore Zionist lunatics who might believe in killing every non-Jew and keeping the rest as slaves. But I know plenty of Jewish people and I'm happy to know them. And they don't buy into that. But look, what you're saying is interesting. And when it comes to the borders, I stand corrected, not for the first time. Let me read you this from the BBC, Kevin. The Foreign Office said it means the UK recognises Palestinian statehood over provisional borders based on 1967 lines was equal land swaps to be finalised as part of future negotiations. So yes, what Starmer said is effectively that, that the UK recognizes that land, the pre-67 border land, as Palestinian land. Now, you said this might be, or you said it is a mortal blow. If so, what is the response likely to be? I mean, there are accounts everywhere. I mean, there are accounts everywhere—everybody has a podcast these days, which is and isn't a good thing at the same time—warning of false flag attacks. Are we ripe in Britain? Are they ripe in France now for some massive attack where people die in great numbers? To be blamed on, I don't know, Arab fanatics or ISIS or whatever? Do you think that might be something we should look out for? What do you think?

Yeah, I think that's a real problem. The extremist Zionists—and I agree with you, Richie, that most Jewish people don't know what standard Jewish millenarian messianic ideology is. Just like most Christians don't know much about Christian eschatology either. But the rabbis who specialize in eschatology do agree with the description that I just described to you. They might soften it up a little bit. But in any case, there are people who take that seriously, people like Ben Gavir and Smotrich and their followers, who now make up maybe 30 or 40 percent of the Israeli population in terms of hardcore ones, and maybe another 20 percent on top of that in terms of fellow travelers. Those people are not going to go gently into that good night. They are going to try to find a way to keep their project going.

In the past we've seen the Zionists are willing to take huge gambles. And they keep getting away with it because they have so much power in finance and media. They tried to kill Truman. They tried to kill Winston Churchill. They did kill the Kennedys. I'm sorry, but they did. They did 9/11. They've done these huge gambles. And that's their style. And when their backs are up against the wall, they're likely to want to flee forward into ever-increasing war and chaos. A huge war—in particular, a huge Middle East war—would provide them the cover to keep going with their plans.

So what I would be concerned with would be that their whole June war against Iran was a total disaster from their point of view. You can't imagine a worse disaster. We now know from leaked transcripts of Netanyahu talking to his advisors that they knew that Iran wouldn't have a nuclear weapon anytime soon. Netanyahu himself, in those transcripts, talks about at least two years (before Iran might build a bomb). And his military advisor says the threat is “long term.” Now, the long term in military speak means 10 to 30 years.

So they knew that the Iranians didn't want, at that point, to build a nuclear weapon. But Netanyahu and his cabinet decided to attack anyway. And their real goal was to kill the Supreme Leader, kill as many top political leaders as possible, kill as many top scientists as possible, empty out Tehran, force the entire population of Tehran to flee. And they were hoping that this all would magically bring about regime change. That's very clear from these leaked transcripts. And this has not been covered in the Western media. There's an article in the Times of Israel about it, and nobody's paid any attention to it.

So they tried to do this, and what happened? Well, they didn't kill the Supreme Leader. They killed a bunch of Iranian leaders, but what they ended up doing was rallying the Iranian people behind what a recent Foreign Policy article called a new generation of extreme Iranian hardliners. And they're backed by the majority of the Iranian people, who are now demanding that Iran build nuclear weapons. And Theodore Postol of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, perhaps the world's leading open source expert on nuclear weapons, says that Iran probably already has them. All that 60% enriched uranium, enough to build maybe a dozen or maybe a few dozen nuclear weapons, is gone. It wasn't harmed by this idiotic bombing, and it's disappeared. And nobody can possibly know where it is except for the Iranians themselves. And once it's been 60% enriched, it is a piece of cake to take it up to the 90% plus you need to build a bomb. You can do that in anybody's kitchen anywhere.

That’s what the Israelis accomplished. So given that, it wouldn't surprise me if the Israelis figure that what happened in June was just round one, and they want a much bigger round two which would allow for for mushroom clouds and vast amounts of destruction to serve as camouflage under which they could eliminate the population of Gaza and perhaps the West Bank as well, and continue to move towards their dream of Greater Israel, despite the whole world rallying behind this recognition of Palestine.

Stripe is Substack’s only processor and they debanked me, so you can no longer pay me through Substack. Now I am posting everything on Substack free and asking people to sign up for recurring donations at my Paypal donation page…or better yet, the free speech platform SPdonate.

This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit kevinbarrett.substack.com

Rumble link Bitchute link

Philosophy professor and attorney Sterling Harwood supports feminism, minus its "five follies." Literature and Arab-Islamic Studies scholar Kevin Barrett doesn't. An epic clash of worldviews...complete with cheesy pictures!

PS: Check out Sterling Harwood’s book Five Follies of Feminism.

Kevin Barrett: So I think anthropologically, basically, clearly, males and females are very different. I knew University of Wisconsin biologists who would sort of whisper to you in the locker room after pick up basketball games that,

“Hey, we all know this and you're not allowed to talk about it, but physiologically, the brain structure is massively influenced by the hormonal output in utero. And that basically the male brain is formed by the massive explosion of testosterone that happens at however many months, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. So male and female brains and bodies are overall radically different.”

And likewise, the social expression of that difference is radical. And that's been the case in virtually all societies that we've ever known.

And if you want to come up with a really succinct description of this: Men, on the average, have 30 times as much testosterone as women do. And testosterone, among other things, drives aggression, sexual aggression. It's called the success hormone because it makes you want to be the top of the power pyramid. So that means that men are driven by this extreme tendency to want to aggress and compete and be number one. And they form pack hierarchies based on that, often in a hunting and warrior situation. That's the natural state for human (males).

Women’s totally different hormonal structure creates a totally different cognitive and social structure that is totally dominated by their need to raise children, who are so helpless for such a long time. Each woman can only have a few, so she invests massive resources in the few children she has. Each man can theoretically have thousands, like various mongol conquerors did leaving us half the planet's population as their descendants.

So given these huge, huge differences, basically women have had to conspire to create civilization, defined as a very strict family structure that deprives men of the right to sex unless they promise to support their woman and all of her progeny. That's called marriage...

And so given this situation, feminism has really screwed women up. Now women are... in a world where they're expected to to go out and fight people with 30 times as much testosterone as them, to “bring home the bacon” and climb to the top of the power pyramid. But they don't have the hormones to make them even really have the gumption to want to do that.

Men are happy being patriarchs because a patriarch is a civilized male. Patriarchy means rule by the fathers. Fathers are people who've been civilized by women and now care about their women and children and protect them. Break that down and you end up with a kind of a war of all against all in which the most ruthless psychopathic males are going to grab what they like and run roughshod over the majority of people, especially the women and children.

So that's the world we have today. It's heading back towards barbarism. And feminism has contributed to dismantling civilization.

Sterling Harwood: Yeah, well, I have a more optimistic viewpoint. I don't think it's going to get worse and worse, even on your own terms, because the levels of testosterone in men has been dropping rather seriously. It was in the news recently. I think RFK or somebody out of his department put out some study about testosterone dropping. And I've seen statistics in... Harper's Index, around page 9 or 11 in every issue of Harper's Magazine, they have something called Harper's Index where they have not quite a random collection of facts. They kind of group them. It's pretty random. But they kind of group them in provocative ways where you say, hey, that one bears on that other one there.

So...I remember reading in that how testosterone levels…so if you think testosterone is motivated towards rape and pillaging, then if that goes down, that should be good news from your point of view.

Kevin Barrett: But (dropping testosterone and the demise of patriarchy) makes all the young men miserable. Young men have never been as miserable as they are today. And feminism and low testosterone are both cited as reasons.

Sterling Harwood: Yeah, I can see that point of view. I'm not saying I agree with it, but I can see where it's coming from. But, yeah, the suicide rate was at an all-time high among young people just, I think, last year or so. It reached an all-time high, the percentage of young people who committed suicide. But I think that is maybe a majority of women who are attempting suicide. The men tend to be more successful when they attempt suicide because they tend to use firearms more than women do, because they may have more access to firearms in our society than women do. Given social pressures to be a hunter, following the father's footsteps of being a hunter and whatnot…

But I think gaming is another issue that might be depressing. I think that men are gamers more. And this fellow who's been arrested, and I guess now he's been charged, with killing Charlie Kirk, was a really kind of intense gamer. At least I heard one report—I haven't received a lot of corroboration—that one of the engravings on the shell casings of the bullets that were in his rifle was a symbol of arrows, meaning total destruction. I think it was up arrow, right arrow, and then three down arrows or something like that. And I'm not familiar with it except just reading about it in the papers and whatnot.

Kevin Barrett: “All I know is what I read about in the papers.” That's Will Rogers….Well, Sterling, I hope you've been following the case that this (the Charlie Kirk shooting) is really a pretty obvious political assassination publicity stunt. And this does tie in with what we're talking about, though, because the miserable young men today have been lining up behind these influencers on the Internet, and some of them are like basically pimps who say, “oh, you're an incel, an involuntary celibate. You can't find any women to have sex with you and you're miserable. You're lying around in your mother's basement at age 30, playing video games. Well, if you did what I do…here's how you can pick up women. I'm an example of a successful alpha guy, blah blah blah blah.” And so these miserable incels who are by far the bulk of the young male population these days supposedly are following these various (social media) cult leaders. And among the various weird cults for miserable young men, political conservatism has certainly reared its ugly head….

(Read the full transcript by clicking on “transcript” above the video image at my Substack.)

This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit kevinbarrett.substack.com

Rumble link Bitchute link False Flag Weekly News link

In 2008, Nicholas Kollerstrom, an Honorary Research Fellow at University College London, was summarily expelled for thoughtcrime. Dr. Kollerstrom, a left-leaning pacifist and historian of science by profession, had contested the official sacred narrative of the Nazi Holocaust. For weighing in on the issue of scientific evidence surrounding the alleged use of mass extermination gas chambers, Nick Kollerstrom became the only UCL scholar in history ever to have been expelled for ideological reasons. His university held no hearings, offered no due process, and gave him no opportunity to tell his side of the story. In essence, he was condemned and expelled for heresy—for questioning the sacred myth that has legitimized the genocide of Palestine.

Fortunately, Dr. Kollerstrom is still active in the field of public education. His book Breaking the Spell: Holocaust Myth and Reality outlines his position on the issue that got him expelled. His discussion group Keep Talking is the premier free speech salon in the UK and perhaps the entire Western world. What’s more, he seems to have found a new job co-hosting False Flag Weekly News, my weekly news roundup where heretical viewpoints are welcomed.

The topic that dominated our FFWN conversation, naturally enough, was the erosion of free speech in Western societies in general and their Anglo-American avant-garde in particular. In the past, it was taken for granted that anyone could show up in Hyde Park, London and express any political opinion whatsoever from atop a soapbox. Today, retired and disabled people are being dragged off to jail for holding placards saying “I support Palestine action.” (Palestine Action is a nonviolent protest group that has been given a ludicrous “terrorist” designation.) At least 1600 people, so far, have been arrested for that “crime.” Famous authors are canceling trips to the UK for fear of being arrested.

Likewise, in the United States, it was taken for granted until around 2015 that anyone could express any political opinion on any internet platform (as opposed to publication) and that the platform owners, and the government, were required to treat all views with complete neutrality. But when that threatened to produce a mass awakening to the realities of who really killed the Kennedys, who really did 9/11, and who really rules the Western world, among other hot-button topics, our rulers decided to crack down. The lynchpin of their suppression-of-speech strategy has involved placing a blackmailed faux-populist authoritarian sociopath in the White House, twice, and using the resulting polarization to generate endless “emergencies” justifying the suppression of free speech.

The latest such “emergency” is the single-bullet assassination of Charlie Kirk, ostensibly by an Oswald clone with a better rifle. The official story of that event has fallen apart far faster than the Oswald-acted-alone version of JFK did. And while it took several decades for the JFK conspiracy community to figure out that Michael Collins Piper was right in arguing that Israel was likely the driving force in the Kennedy assassinations—and about one decade for the 9/11 truth community to come to similar conclusions about the 2001 attacks on New York and Washington—it only took about five minutes for Max Blumenthal and everybody else who is paying attention to notice that Israel is the prime suspect in the Charlie Kirk murder. No wonder the perps are panicking and fleeing forward into ever-bloodier mayhem and ever-more-draconian censorship.

The Kirk assassination is being used to terrorize mainstream media voices into total submission to Trump-n-Yahu. Matthew Dowd of MSNBC, Jimmy Kimmel of ABC, and Karen Attiah of The Washington Post have had what 9/11-demolition-noticing Dan Rather called “burning tires placed around their necks” for saying the most anodyne things, only a few micrometers off-script, regarding the Kirk shooting.

Dozens of ordinary people, at least 35 according to ChatGPT, have been fired from their jobs for posting things on social media that Ben Shapiro’s new Church of Charlie Kirk deems unacceptable. It seems that opinions Ben Shapiro doesn’t like have been officially deemed “left-wing tranny-loving Antifa terrorism.” Anyone expressing such opinions is now a designated terrorist and will be dealt with as such—or so the Zionist media machine would like to frighten you into believing.

Alternative media, starting with social media, are also being strangled. Tiktok, where horrified young people watch clips of the Gaza genocide, is now “in Final Talks to Be Bought by Genocidal Jewish Billionaires.” Jonathan Greenblatt of the ADL, who originally broadcast the panicked call to solve “Israel’s Tiktok problem,” will take partial credit when the sale goes through.

Link to Greenblatt leaked audio

And now, not content to revoke green cards of foreign students who write pro-Palestine op-eds, the Trump-n-Yahoo Administration is sponsoring a bill that would allow the Secretary of State, currently Marco Rubio, to revoke the passports of US citizens who express opinions that Israel doesn’t like. The message: If you’re an American citizen who harbors even the slightest trepidations about Israel’s genocide of Gaza, or its stranglehold on the US, get out NOW while you still can!

Will the US, UK, and the rest of the West descent into complete tyranny? More pertinently, what’s the best way to prevent that? Maybe by expressing heretical views at the top of our lungs? If enough people make enough noise, the effort to terrorize us into silence will fail. The authorities can’t control everyone. They can only pick on a few designated whipping boys and girls, hoping to frighten the rest by example. If the rest refuse to be frightened, the authoritarian project collapses…as so many have throughout history. So your job, dear reader, is to make the loudest, most powerful, most heretical statement against Charlie Kirk Totalitarianism (and the genocidal Jewish Zionists behind it) that you are capable of making. Bonus points for shock value and extreme sacrilegious blasphemy against the Upchuck-Worthy “Church of Charlie.” Double-bonus points for doing it under your real name. Triple-bonus points for turning your protest into a big public spectacle that the media can’t ignore—like the heroic German shop-owner Hans Velten Reisch recently did.

The UK, led by London, seems to be taking the lead in high-decibel pushback against the Trump-n-Yahoo dictatorship. The Trump-Epstein pictures projected on Windsor Castle, and splattered all over bus stops and vehicles and buildings and windows and walls all over London, were the perfect British greeting for the USA’s sociopath-in-chief during his recent visit. Likewise, the thousands of ordinary British people who have courted arrest by carrying “I support Palestine action” signs will go down in history as valorous warriors defending Anglo-American traditions of free speech against the barbaric “Huns” who are currently annihilating Western civilization in general and its free speech traditions in particular.

The murderous Charlie Kirk PR stunt occurred on the evening of the 9/11 anniversary, and served to erase the Republican vote to cover up the Epstein files from the headlines.

The Kirk shooting wasn’t just a pre-emptive strike against an Israeli asset who was turning rogue. It was also an attempt to stampede Republicans back into the pro-Trump-n-Yahoo corral, in part by making them forget Trump’s excruciating guilty demeanor around the whole Epstein issue.

Pushing the Trump-Epstein issue by relentlessly hounding the blackmailed-pedophile-in-chief, his administration, all Republicans, and indeed all politicians and media would seem to be the most promising approach to saving the Bill of Rights. At least half of Trump’s base knows or suspects that he has an Epstein problem, and the Democrats are happy to use the issue against him. With a little luck, Trump-Epstein could become the political earthquake that brings down Zionist occupation of the USA. If that happens, the brave Brits who were arrested for projecting Trump-Epstein images on Windsor Castle—and you, if you are creative and courageous enough to do something like that—will deserve a share of the credit.

This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit kevinbarrett.substack.com