Truth Jihad Radio

Rumble link Bitchute link

WARNING: Warner spouts rank, ignorant b******t about "the Arabs have been fighting the Jews for centuries" and, when he gets called on it, gets offended and leaves the conversation at the 45'50" mark.

Author John W. Warner IV calls the accelerating flap over UFO disclosure issues (including Congressional hearings on the subject) “much ado about very little.” But by “very little” he means very little disclosure, not very little that ought to be disclosed!

Warner: “You can throw events, hold press conferences and raise some awareness about the massive issue, but its complexities, science, horrors and crimes are far beyond 99% of the world’s capacity to understand with cohesion. Richard Dolan’s work is good for those new to the subject, but his rather bland rhetoric about the Deep State and the toxic secrecy only goes so far. UFO tech is now seamless across technology platforms, cars, ships and aircraft. Our world runs on formerly ET tech like quantum A.I. For all we know they gave us the wheel, sword, plough, axe and bow and arrow long ago.”

(For more on this issue see my interview with former Canadian Defense Minister Paul Hellyer.)

John W. Warner IV is a writer and gentleman farmer whose passion for history, vintage cars, and the unsung heroes of WWII inspired two large-scale creative ventures: a DVD documentary series on the early bootlegging days of NASCAR, The Golden Era of NASCAR, and a historical novel series, Little Anton. The son of retired Senator John W. Warner III (R-VA), former Secretary of the Navy and Chairman of the Armed Services Committee (KBE), and Catherine Mellon, banking heiress and daughter of philanthropist Paul Mellon (OSS, KBE), Warner says growing up in a family that had a seat at many of the most historically significant tables led to his insatiable quest to research and reveal hidden truths behind world events. (more)

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

Director Ralph Cinque discusses his new film Dovey's Promise.  He writes:

"The murder of Mary Pinchot Meyer and subsequent trial of Raymond Crump are a buried part of American history and a forbidden segment of the JFK assassination saga. What the government tries to claim is that Dovey Roundtree was a great woman, deserving of much praise, but she was wrong about this, that Raymond Crump was guilty, and he only got off because there was a lack of physical evidence against him. But, that is not true, as my film demonstrates. Dovey was NOT wrong."

For more on the murder of Mary Pinchot Meyer check out my interview with Peter Janney, author of Mary's Mosaic. Also, for a rundown of the “Cohencidences” connecting the biggest crimes in American history, check out Wyatt Peterson’s new article “Parallels: JFK, RFK, 9/11.” Wyatt will discuss that great article while co-hosting False Flag Weekly News this Friday.

Kevin Barrett interviews Ralph Cinque: Transcript selections

It's JFK assassination anniversary season again. We, the voting machines, just elected another president who's promising to release the JFK files but didn't keep his promise last time and probably won't again this time. But it's an interesting moment in history anyway. So, Ralph, let's dive into the whole JFK thing by way of your new film, Dovey's Promise.

Well, let me just brief your audience on it if you don't mind. This was a trial that took place in the 1960s. The crime occurred 1964 and the trial occurred in 1965. It's connected to JFK. The victim, Mary Pinchot Meyer, was the secret lover of JFK. And she was much more than that. I want to emphasize to your viewers that this was much more than a sex thing. They were very, very close as friends and confidants. And they actually knew each other since they were teenagers. They met at a dance when they were just teenagers and had intermittent contact throughout their adult lives. And even when he was a senator from Massachusetts, when he and Jackie were living in Georgetown, they were neighbors to the Myers. Mary Pinchot's grandfather had been a famous governor of Pennsylvania. He was also the first head of the National Park Service. He was a very big environmentalist. And so they were a very well-to-do and very wealthy family. After World War II, she ended up marrying a man whose name was Cord Meyer. And he came from a wealthy family too. And he had some parallels with JFK because they were both very accomplished and they were both very heroic in the war. They both suffered terrible, terrible injuries in the war. Cord Meyer lost an eye. He came back wearing a glass eye.

They got married and they started a family. And of course, JFK went on to marry Jackie. But what happened was that so she had intermittent contact with JFK because they were neighbors and in the same social circle. And it's no secret that JFK was just a huge philanderer. He kind of was an addict that way. And there were various times that he had sort of, you know, tried to make headway with her. But she was very different that way. She just had no inclinations whatsoever to just have casual flings or affairs. If you read the biography of her by Peter Janney, Mary's Mosaic (you see) she was always very serious about her relationships and never had any frivolous affairs. So you might say she had a history of...putting JFK off that way.

But what happened was that Cord and Mary ended up getting divorced. And it was partly because they suffered a tragedy together that they just never really recovered from. And that is the death of their middle son, who was hit by a car right in front of their house and was killed. And after they got divorced... She didn't immediately start an involvement with JFK, but it wasn't long before she did. But it was based very much on this sort of purpose that they shared, which was the idea that the Cold War could be ended and there could be a reduction or elimination of nuclear weapons. And this was something that they were both very passionate about. So that drew them together. But it was also a sexual relationship.

And that started after he was president, right?

What I have seen is that basically, January of 1961 is considered the start of their intimate relationship. And then throughout his term, she visited the White House many times. That's on the official record. Basically whenever Jackie wasn't there, Mary was there.

If he'd just converted to Islam he could have had two wives—unless one of them was like my wife who definitely would not go for that kind of thing.

But yes, they definitely had this very, very close connection. And so naturally, when he was assassinated, she was devastated. And she was very vocal about the fact that she didn't believe the Warren Commission. And she saw all the signs that it was a CIA hit. And she was determined to expose them. And she was going around saying that to important people.

So then 11 months after he was murdered by supposedly a lone nut in Dallas, she gets murdered randomly by another supposed lone nut in Georgetown on the towpath, which is a park that goes through the city. It goes right along the Potomac river. They had a man-made canal built back in the 19th century that they used to haul cargo barges. They would have trains of mules that would pull the barge on the canal, which was next to the river. And after that became antiquated and unnecessary, they just turned it into a hiking trail, a park. And that's how it was being used. And it's still being used like that to this day.

So it was on October 12th, 1964, Mary was out for her usual daily walk on the towpath. And she was attacked first by hand. Somebody had started, you know, grabbing her and attacking her by hand, and then he took his gun out and shot her in the head. Somehow miraculously she stayed on her feet even though she had a bullet in her head and she tried to run off but she collapsed. And the assailant then dragged her back to where the struggle had started. And then he took his gun out and shot her in the back fatally, shooting her through the lung and rupturing her aorta and killing her on the spot.

Shortly after that, they arrested this very poor and very kind of hapless young black man whose name was Raymond Crump. And he was mentally handicapped, okay? He definitely was not all there. He had some incapacity that way.

And he was a drinker. And he'd been lured down there to drink and make out with somebody.

Yeah, right, right. There was a woman. And that's something, by the way, that... We put in the film, but I often tell people that this film, it is basically a true story, but we did make some dramatic adaptations just for the sake of the entertainment value. And one of them was that in real life...well, first of all, let me back up a minute and say that what happened initially was that because he was dirt poor, he just had to settle for a young public defender. And I'm sure that that was the plan all along.

But then when his mother contacted Dovey Roundtree. The two of them went to the same church, a very famous church in Washington, D.C., called the Allen Chapel AME Church, which stands for African Episcopal Methodist Church. And she begged her to go and talk to her son and see if she could help him.

And so Dovey did. And she became instantly so convinced that he could not possibly have done it that she agreed to defend him for one dollar. Now, that shook everything up because he wasn't supposed to have a good lawyer. He was supposed to have a crummy lawyer. And he ends up getting a great lawyer and a very famous lawyer, which only increased the notoriety of the case.

And I think it's fair to say that this trial in the 1960s, right in the middle of the decade, was like the OJ trial it was like the trial of the century. That's how big it was. There was daily coverage every day in the newspapers about it famous people went to the trial. For example Sam Donaldson, the reporter who went on to great fame for covering Ronald Reagan, attended every day of the trial.

So this was a very, very big trial, and it got a lot of publicity at the time. But after that, it basically sort of disappeared. And today, at least until recently... You might say it's part of taboo history. And what I mean is that it's not in the history books. If you read a history of the 1960s, it's not going to mention the Raymond Crump trial or the Towpath murder trial. It's not in the history books of the 20th century. It's not taught in school. Kids don't learn about it. And I have never, ever seen it discussed on television.

The only way people hear about this is through Peter Janney's book Mary's Mosaic. And the fact is that Peter's book is the thing that brought attention back to this case. And it's the reason why online there is a lively discussion about this case. Peter's book is kind of a masterpiece. Really well done. And it's brilliantly written, too. It's just such good writing. I found it to be a page-turner. So, yes, I highly recommend the book.

Let's point out that Peter knew Mary Pinchot Meyer. He was the best friend of her son who was killed. Can you imagine? He gets killed in front of the house in the street. Mary runs out of the house, holds her dying son in her arms, and he dies right there in the street. The tragedy of that is just unspeakable. Peter was personally very affected by it, not only because he was so close to Michael, but because he was very close to Mary too. She was like a surrogate mother to him. I get the feeling that he spent a lot of time at the Meyer household and that in some ways he felt closer to Mary than he felt to his own mother.

Yeah, she seemed like a very unusual woman. She was highly intelligent. She married Cord Meyer back when Cord was one of the world's leading peace activists. And she was right there with him as a leading peace activist right after World War II. And of course, she didn't like the way that Cord turned alcoholic and joined the CIA. That was part of the problem between them. But she was a brilliant woman and she was an artist as well. I think she painted.

Right, she was an artist. She was a poet. I think it's in the book that she had a half sister who was quite a bit older than she was, who tragically committed suicide. And Mary wrote a beautiful poem about her half sister. So she was, yeah, a very talented and creative person.

But anyway, this whole case was intentionally was driven into the shadows because of its connection to the JFK assassination. The trial was so dramatic and involved such famous people that you would think that Hollywood would have jumped on this to make their own courtroom drama to make money. But no, it was hands off, because the corporate media...I mean, there wasn't a law against it, but there was a protocol against it that this is off limits because we have to leave the JFK story alone. Let the sleeping dogs lie. You don't want to rattle that bear.

So because of the connection to JFK and the implications that it had for the JFK assassination, this story became off limits and it fell on an independent filmmaker filmmaker like me to actually bring this courtroom drama to the big screen.

We're supposed to believe that was just a coincidence that both JFK and Mary Pinchot Meyer just happened to be murdered by lone nut assassins. But it's really too much of a coincidence and not very credible.

There are some other interesting coincidences. For example, James Angleton, who later turned out to be just about everybody's leading suspect in orchestrating the JFK assassination, happened to be the guy who showed up right after this murder at Mary's house.

On the day of the murder!

The day of the murder, he shows up and steals her diary. You can't make this stuff up. He's the chief of counterintelligence for the CIA.

Right. He (Angleton) went to Ben Bradley, who was Mary's brother-in-law, and the two of them together went into Mary's house and they ransacked it basically to find her diary. And they found it and Angleton left with it. And he claims that he later destroyed it, that he burned it. Now, you might wonder, what was the legal basis that they would do that? Because when a person dies, then instantly there are protocols. In other words, it's not like anybody can go into their house and take their stuff. There are rules of probate that determine who can actually go through any of her belongings.

You might say the justification for why it was okay that they did that, was that they said that they talked to Mary's good friend, Ann Truitt, who lived in Japan at the time in Japan, and that Ann approved it because she said that Mary would have wanted them to do it to make sure that her diary wasn't read by anybody that shouldn't read it. But the point I want to make is that that is a ludicrous thing to claim because no matter how good of friends they were, no one ever said she was Mary's executor, and I can't imagine why Mary would assign someone to be her executor who was living in Japan.

So if she wasn't the executor of her estate, she had no legal right to authorize them to go into her property and steal her diary either. So this was clearly illegal, and it demonstrates that the fact that the CIA was already monitoring her and already had concerns about her, and it makes it even more suspicious that the CIA is the one that killed her.

Michael Collins Piper's book Final Judgment points at Angleton as the key guy in the CIA. And of course there's also some other work (like David Talbot's Brothers and The Devil's Chessboard) that points at Alan Dulles. But Angleton is at least tied with Alan Dulles as everybody's number one suspect.

Absolutely. He was the head of counterintelligence at the CIA. So Peter Janney's book stirred up some interest, a lot of interest, in this case. And now today there's quite a bit of blogging that goes on about it. But it's even affected the government, because for the most part, the operational plan, the MO, was to just ignore this case and just let it stay in the shadows, and not even talk about it. But then there was an article that appeared in Smithsonian Magazine, which is the magazine of the Smithsonian Institute in Washington, D.C., that was about the case. And the author of it was a guy who was a young cub reporter at the time of the murder and who was involved in reporting on the case when it happened in 1964. So he had a direct involvement with it himself. And he talked about his own experience and going to the crime scene and stuff like that.

But in a very glib, subtle kind of way, he threw in what was surely the most important thing he had to say, which was that even though the great Dovey Roundtree with her brilliant lawyering got Raymond Crump acquitted, that most likely he was guilty and that we should just assume that, yeah, he killed Mary Pinchot Meyer.

Now, I want to explain briefly why that's impossible, that there's no sound mental reason to think that that could possibly be true. The first reason is that when the crime occurred in articles about it every day in the Washington Post said the most likely motive for the crime was robbery. Well, that never made sense because the attacker had a gun and he didn't use it at first. He left the gun aside. He just had it tucked wherever it was tucked. And he just attacked her physically.

Now, why would a robber do that? A robber doesn't want to reach into the pocket of the victim and take the money himself. He wants the victim to see the gun and turn over his or her money because nobody wants to die over pocket money. So the fact that he left his gun aside and attacked her physically —That in itself proves that he wasn't just a robber out to rob her. So that means that not Raymond Crump nor anyone else could have been bent on robbing her considering what the assailant did.

That's a great point, Ralph. Let me just briefly interject that possibly the reason this journalist is saying, "well, yeah, Crump probably did it," is that Crump was set up as a patsy by professionals. They created enough coincidences: Oh, he was he was sort of near the scene. And there was this claimed witness report that the guy saw somebody who looked sort of like Crump. Although, as it turned out, Dovey Roundtree proved it couldn't have been Crump because this guy that the witness was too big. But they had that guy dressed exactly the way Crump had been dressed. So the reason that they fooled these people is because these people don't have enough imagination to recognize that when a team of professional assassins sets up something like this, they go to the trouble of dressing up their patsy exactly the way that they're dressing up the stooge who's dressed up like the patsy. They call in a tow truck to get the witness. The journalist who wrote that article probably doesn't understand that the American military intelligence community knows how to assign these teams to do these kinds of professional operations.

There's an expression that I use that I call Americana. I call it a mental illness. And what it is is that people have this disease and they are so convinced that America is a good country and that terrible things that have happened in the Soviet Union and Red China and Nazi Germany could never happen here because we're a good country. So if it comes down to a choice to believing that, say, the government killed Kennedy or a lone nut killed Kennedy— they're going to default to the lone nut because they're just incapable of even going to the mental space of thinking that the government could have killed him.

And then the government's killing all these witnesses too, killing all these people. It's horrible. Who wants to think that?

Let me just finish the thought I was starting before. So (for the motive of the Mary Meyer murder) robbery doesn't work at all. And it didn't work from day one. So by the time the trial came around in 1965 they added rape as a motive. So it was robbery and rape, or maybe robbery or rape. They were just putting it out there just so that there was something else. And basically "he was a robber, a rapist, the works." But that never made any sense either, because the site where the crime occurred, even though it was in a natural setting, close to the water with trees and grass, it was only 128 feet, which is about 40 yards, from busy Canal Street in Georgetown with cars zooming by, mothers with baby carriages walking by.

And it was wide open (to view). I've seen a picture of it from Canal Street. Somebody with a camera stood right on Canal Street and took a picture of the crime scene. It's like a picture window. So how could anyone decide to try to rape somebody right there? Because there were people on the sidewalk who could see you plainly. Plus, there were other people in the park. It was a well-used walking trail.

Now, I'm sure at the time that the CIA killed her, they probably had lookouts on both sides of the trail so that they were sure that there was going to be no interruption. They weren't going to take a chance on that. But an actual rapist wouldn't have that advantage. They would know very well that someone could come walking by at any time. Rape is something that is done in seclusion. It is done in isolation. And this was not such an environment.

But there's more. Because in rape, there is always a very great disparity in the strength and power of the rapist as compared to the victim, because it takes a lot of overwhelming power to be able to assert yourself on someone in that way. I mean, if it's anything close, the victim is going to fight back and make it extremely difficult to do. And in this case, the assailant supposedly was three inches shorter than the victim. He was 5'3 1/2". That was his actual height. It was on his driver's license. And she was 5'6 1/2". And on his driver's license, it listed his weight as 130 pounds, and her weight was 128 pounds. So they were essentially the same weight. She was three inches taller. She was a very fit, athletic woman.

So this little man, Raymond Crump, certainly did not have the kind of physical superiority and strength to overcome her to the point that he could, what, pull her clothes off her and get his own clothes down and get his erection going and penetrate her. It's just ridiculous to think that he could have done that.

So...The truth was that there was never any credibility to either one of those motives, and that's why there really is no chance that Raymond Crump would have done it.

But there's one final thing about the rape thing that I think is laughable, is that if you're going to try to claim that he did this to rape her. Then what was his reason for going to the park in the first place? Because we know the real reason. He went there to have consensual sex with a woman named Vivian. And this is an example of somewhere where we took dramatic license because in real life, Dovey Roundtree never met Vivian. She was able to reach her by phone and Vivian didn't want to meet with her. And of course she balked at the idea of testifying because she was afraid that her husband would physically kill her if he found out about the affair she had had. And we put that in the movie. But the way we did it was we actually put them together. We had them at a park where Debbie just came upon her because her investigator found out she was there. They talked about it in person, so we could dramatize it. That was one of the liberties that we took.

But it would be hard to argue that he went to the park and to have consensual sex with a woman. And then as he's leaving, he decided to rape another woman. It's ridiculous.

Here's a still from the scene where Dovey Roundtree is interrogating this witness, the retired Army lieutenant "William Mitchell" in what was actually the most heated testimony at the trial. Dovey here is laying into him about what he was claiming...

Isn't he Peter Janney's lead suspect for the likely head of the kill team?

Yes, you are absolutely right. Now, we don't bring that out in the movie directly. But we do certainly imply that there was something very, very suspicious about him, and that there was something very important about him.

We're indebted to Peter Janey for basically bringing this whole story back to life. And hopefully from here, it's going to continue. And hopefully this film is going to help make more people aware of it and to get more people talking about it. And that ultimately is my goal. Because to me, this is sequel to the JFK assassination. This was damage control for that. They had to kill Mary because she was a threat. She was not only a threat, but she was a very smart, clever threat. They just couldn't take the chance that she was going to be able to upset the apple cart. They ended up brutally killing her.

And again, it's something that even to this day, I'm going to say 99.9% of Americans just can't conceive of the idea that their government would do that. Because it's important to remember that when we talk about the CIA killing somebody, what we're saying is that the U.S. government killed them. Because the CIA is an agency of the U.S. government.

Your tax dollars at work.

Exactly.

Speaking of James Douglas (author of JFK and the Unspeakable) he's also aware that the CIA and the FBI killed Robert Kennedy and Martin Luther King and Malcolm X. And I remember he said at the time that his aspiration was to write books about all of them. I don't know what he's doing with that, but that's what he said.

But are you aware that just days ago that the family of Malcolm X has filed a hundred million dollar lawsuit against the CIA and the FBI over the wrongful death of Malcolm X? Obviously, the media isn't making too much of it, but I think it's just a very, very, very big deal.

And with people in the new administration, like a Tulsi Gabbard supposedly being in charge of the entire intelligence community, maybe things will get shaken up a little bit, who knows?

Well, think about this though. Robert F. Kennedy is supposed to be the chairman of the DHHS and he's going to go after the drug companies, which is good. And even though JFK truth isn't part of that, the fact is apparently Robert F. Kennedy has got Trump's ear. And that means that his beliefs about his father and his uncle having been murdered by the CIA is something he may be able to influence Trump about. So, yeah, maybe there are big changes in the offing in the realm of JFK truth.

Right. Another angle to this that we don't have time to get into is that RFK Jr. is a fanatical Zionist, a genocide supporter whose controller is Rabbi Shmuley. And there's no way that RFK Jr. cannot understand that whoever picked a Palestinian patsy to take the blame for the murder of his father was doing that for a reason, just as the fact that the Jewish mafia sent Jack Rubenstein to do whatever he did with Oswald is kind of a clue as to the fact that a major factor behind the murder of the Kennedys was John F. Kennedy's absolute devotion to shutting down the Israeli nuclear program, which led Ben-Gurion to resign and become probably the mastermind of the assassination, who then worked through James Jesus Angleton. That's the scenario that we get from reading Michael Collins Piper's Final Judgment, as well as from reading the books of the French historian Laurent Guyenot.

Well, I also knew Michael Collins Piper pretty well. Are you aware that he died under very mysterious circumstances at a hotel in Idaho?

I was just talking about that earlier today! You know, they don't kill that many people. Most of us in the truth-telling community probably are not losing that much life expectancy. But every once in a while, they do.

I worry about it in my case for what I've done in the JFK realm. I mean, I'm very careful. I keep my house locked. I'm looking behind my back all the time. I'm sort of... a little bit paranoid about it, I admit, because of all of killing that they did in the JFK case. And of course, they did a lot of killing. Many dozens of people were killed in 1964. And then again, during the HSCA investigation in the 1970s, you had a flurry of unexpected deaths…

(read the full machine-generated transcript 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

Transcript of Press TV live interview 11/20/24 @ noon Morocco time = 6 a.m. Eastern

Hamas said the sanctions are based on false information and seek to distort the image of Palestinian groups' leadership. It accused the Biden administration of ignoring the Palestinians' rights and providing cover for genocide. It called on Washington to end its bias towards Israel and pressure the regime to stop its aggression against Palestinians. On Tuesday, the U.S. Treasury Department announced the leaders accusing them of involvement in the group's fundraising and arms acquisition efforts.

Kevin Barrett, is joining us now from Saidia, Morocco. Mr. Barrett, welcome to the program. Please weigh in on the recent round of U.S. sanctions against a number of leaders of the Hamas

These latest sanctions will be no more effective than the other American sanctions that are out there. Americans have tried to use sanctions to stop the economic rise of China. It didn't work. They've tried to stop Russia and make Russia vulnerable to being taken down through a U.S. war on Russia through Ukraine. That didn't work. They've tried to sanction the Islamic Republic of Iran out of existence for decades, and that hasn't worked.

So these sanctions are ineffectual, but these are not just weak and sad, but they're also disgustingly immoral, because the side that needs to be sanctioned here is the genocide perpetrators. Biden should be sanctioning Ben-Gavir and Smotrich, who are openly genocidal, and Netanyahu, who's pretty openly genocidal too. He openly called for exterminating Amalek, using biblical language to call for the complete extermination of all Palestinian men, women, children, and even animals. That's what “Amalek” means.

It's just beyond bizarre the way that the Western leadership that's completely under control of this criminal Zionist genocide effort tries to make the victims out to be the perpetrators and vice versa. This blaming the victims thing, sanctioning the Palestinian resistance for its resistance to genocide, its brave and principled resistance, as opposed to the openly genocidal nature of the Zionist regime today…It's crazy.

It's like what happened in Amsterdam with Israeli football hooligans attacking the city of Amsterdam, attacking people, picking up weapons, beating on people, smashing vehicles and so on, and then getting it reported by the media as if they were the victims. They cry out as they strike you.

And I'm disgusted that my country, the United States of America, is under this pathetic, cowardly leadership that won't stand up to this criminal Zionist mafia of genocidal lunatics and instead just takes orders from them and sanctions the very victims that we should be defending, and fails to sanction the genocide perpetrators who all need to be tried, convicted and executed.

Right. And talking about the U.S., Mr. Barrett, how do you view this duplicative stance that Washington has had since the onset of the Gaza genocide, which has now also morphed into the aggression against Lebanon, where the U.S. claims that it's pushing for a ceasefire? It says it doesn't want a broader regional war, but at the same time, it's providing the Israelis with all the military support, the economic and political support to carry out its crimes and the genocide in Gaza and also the aggression against the people of Lebanon.

The United States has never been an honest broker in the region. But in the 1950s it was a lot closer to still being an independent country.  But since Israel’s murder of John F. Kennedy in a Zionist coup d'etat,  as Michael Collins Piper and Laurent Guyenot have written about, and then especially since the Israeli false flag attack on the United States on September 11, 2001,  the United States has been completely under the control of the Zionist entity.

And so it's just acting as an appendage of this Zionist genocide. It's not an honest broker anymore, if it ever was.  And the world has got to move on. The Americans have no business imposing their fake leadership on the region.

Again, they are occupied. The United States is an occupied country, just like Palestine is. It isn't under the kind of brutal, accelerated genocide that Palestine is. But it's just as occupied and just as in need of resistance, of every type of resistance, including the kinds of resistance that we're seeing from these groups that are being sanctioned by the Zionist-occupied government in Washington, D.C.

It's really unbelievable the way the American people have allowed themselves to have their country invaded and occupied by a genocidal settler colony. There are fewer than ten million Jewish colonists occupying Palestine. And those people, with the help of their co-religionists and co-ethnics in the West, have taken over Western governments and totally dominate them and  openly commit crimes against those countries.

They've attacked the United States repeatedly with the Lavon Affair in the early 1950s, with the USS Liberty attack in 1967, and of course with the Kennedy murders, and with 9/11. The Zionist occupation government in the United States is an affront to the American people. I can't understand why the American people haven't yet figured this out and risen up using all available means to rid themselves of this plague and pestilence and put an end to this genocidal occupation of Palestine and the concurrent occupation of Washington, D.C. by the genocidal Zionist entity.

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 (Note: The above video ends at 39:10 due to an inexplicable Skype video recording glitch. For the audio and text of the full 55 minutes see my Substack.)

Alexander Wolfheze writes: “Because I am originally from Holland and I happened to be here during the November 7 Amsterdam psy-op, you might be interested in having me on your show to give you a close-up account.” For background check out “Genocidal Zionist Thugs Get Beat Up in Amsterdam: Pro-genocide media cry out while they strike you“: “Viral video reveals Israeli hooligans attacked Dutch police while instigating Amsterdam unrest“; and “The media’s role in lying about Amsterdam violence just keeps getting darker.”

Below is a lightly-edited transcript of the interview.

Kevin Barrett: Welcome to the version of Truth Jihad Radio. I'm Kevin Barrett, waging the all-out struggle for truth here on the Internet airwaves since 2006, offering a video podcast now. We are definitely moving ahead in the world, well, in some ways, and going back two steps in other ways. Be that as it may, we have a great show coming up tonight.

Alexander Wolfheze is one of the most interesting authors out there. He's definitely among the very top leading Muslim intellectuals in Europe. And he is going to talk about the November 7th PSYOP in Amsterdam.

Alexander writes for Arktos, which is a really interesting publishing house often associated with the so-called European New Right. They have a wide variety of authors and outlooks there, so I wouldn't get too hung up on the left-right paradigm personally.

Alexander Wolfheze has published a number of very interesting pieces. Hhe's got a PhD in humanities. He's a student of Semitic languages and cultures. He's got cultural anthropology experience. He's authored a number of publications in Near East cultural history.

So, hey, welcome, Alexander. How are you?

Alexander Wolfheze: Good evening from where I am. Nice to see you. Thank you for having me on the show. It's an honor to be here. And thank you for the introduction. I would like to add that the Semitic languages I studied mainly pertain to ancient languages. Assyrology is my specialization. That being said, I do know Hebrew and I do know Aramaic.

Interesting. So between your Middle Eastern languages and my interest in modern standard Arabic and to some extent Quranic Arabic and Moroccan Darija, we cover a fairly wide array of Semitic languages.

Yeah. It's difficult to call us anti-Semites because of that. I studied Southern Semitic languages as well, so I have an additional qualification in that. That's Ge'ez, the church language of ancient Ethiopia, and modern Amharic, which are also Semitic languages. People tend to forget that.

So far from being anti-Semites, we're actually sort of adopted Semites. We spent much of our lives becoming Semites. Because what is a Semite? It's somebody who speaks a Semitic language. And the great majority of Semitic language speakers in today's world, of course, speak Arabic or some dialect thereof. So if you're against Arabs and on the side of the people who are genociding Arabs in Palestine, I guess that would make you anti-Semitic. And that isn't us, is it?

Not at all. I also make strong objection against anybody using the name Jewish. To use this kind of term, you should know what you're talking about, and these terms are being manipulated, they are being used by the people above us, to gain a blank check from history under false pretenses.

I must add to that that I'm in the Netherlands at the moment. Free speech here is not as broadly defined as it is in the United States or other places. So I will have to walk the line on that. But I guess we can say that the standard discourse that is currently still in place in Holland is shaking. And of course, that's also being borne out by the (November 7) events that have taken place that are the reason for you asking me on the show today.

Yes. we're going to talk about the November 7th attack on Amsterdam by Israeli hooligans, who seemed to be part of an orchestrated operation to start violence and then have the Jewish Zionist controlled media—I can say that, though I don't know if you're allowed to—but the media obviously was expected to dutifully report it all as always being the fault of the other guy (goy). Basically, every conflict between so-called Jews and so-called non-Jews or goyim has been so reported by Jewish historiographers and media reporters throughout most of history.

That leads to that question: You just mentioned that the word Jewish itself is problematic. Maybe you could elaborate on that.

Anybody that studies Semitic languages goes through a long list of languages before he starts studying them to know what they are. And then he finds out that there used to be a language called Hebrew, spoken in the time before Christ, resurrected fairly recently, but having the shape and form of Aramaic mostly. It has an Aramaic pronunciation, an Aramaic grammar to a certain extent. It's a very artificial construct. Anybody that looks at that immediately starts asking questions.

And if you compare the content of the Jewish state, so the state called Israel at the moment, to the Jewish tradition, there are also large discrepancies. So there is a discontinuity as well in that.

Now we are seeing a shape-shifting: Different words are being used to cover different phenomena in different times, but always according to certain political agendas. Now, of course, that's true for many identities and many terms around the world. But in this particular case, it has been weaponized to an extent that should caution us to any kind of use of these terms. Be very careful to define them correctly beforehand.

Well, the term Jewish has usually been first bandied about in today's discourse as a kind of ethnic identity with religious roots. People today who consider themselves Jewish may or may not go to a synagogue, although probably a majority of them still go through bar mitzvah and things like that. And so they have some kind of connection with religious roots to a tradition that seems to hold up the Torah, the Talmud, and to some extent the Kabbalah as their scriptural sources. And probably the majority, certainly of the more wealthy and powerful people in this ethnic identity group, don't really believe strongly in any religion. They are secular materialists in outlook, but they still maintain that ethnic connection to their religious roots.

So this is the way that "Jewish" is usually used, including when it's used for the so-called Jewish state of Israel, a nationalistic project based on that ethnic identity and its discourse. So what I just laid out is kind of the common mainstream understanding of the use of the term Jewish. In what sense is that wrong or does it need to be critiqued?

Well, there is this name that was attached to the Iranian (retaliatory) attack earlier this year on Israel. It was called True Promise. Most people in the West don't know that it's a term taken from the Koran, the holy book of the Muslims, and it comes from a surah (chapter) that is often referred to as Bani Israel. "True Promise" is a quote from an important sentence reminding the Bani Israel, which means the sons of Israel, of their ancient covenant with God. And it reminds them that they have to keep the promises that they have made according to this covenant.

So exactly as you said, most people that are now Jewish in the United States, or call themselves Jewish in America or in Europe, do not stick to any of these covenants. They do not attach value to them, at least not to the extent that it influences their daily lives. Religious conviction in these circles is also very small. It even goes so far in Europe, in my country, Holland, that many people that are just Jewish from, for example, their father's side or grandfather's side. They call themselves Jewish despite the fact that they're not even recognized as such by Orthodox rabbis.

So the whole identity has been blurred. It has been watered down. And it has been distorted and it has been secularized. I think this is a very important thing to keep in mind.

I'd like to remind the audience that there are groups which keep the Torah Covenant, which is of course an older covenant than Christianity and Islam, that are not specifically Jewish. There are people I visited in Lithuania. They're called the Karayi. They are a Turkish nation that also still has a Turkish language spoken. They adopted certain tenets of Torah Judaism, and they keep them quite strictly, without the Talmud and without rabbinical prescriptions.

And of course, there are also lines where ethnicity and religion are more closely connected. I refer to the Brooklyn Talmud, a group of people that adheres to a more biblical source, but also in a more purified version, and they do not recognize the State of Israel.

Both of these groups that are just quoted keep themselves very far removed from this modern phenomenon, this secular phenomenon called Israel, the State of Israel.

Would you agree that the whole Zionist project grows out of a radical messianic millenarian interpretation of Judaism that in past times would have been called a heretical, extremely radical, extremist, satanic strand of Judaism? Some of the Zionists were involved in kabbalistic Judaism of various types, but basically this particular spin-off from Judaism that created zionism is an apocalyptic messianic version that looks toward the prophecies that one day Jews will conquer the goyim and rule the world and make the world a paradise, mainly for themselves, and that this is connected with the Jewish return to the so-called promised land. (It calls for) Jews to satanically rebel against God. Instead of waiting for God to take them back to the promised land, they invade the promised land, commit abominations, spill blood.

And the groups behind this, the Sabbateans and Frankists, also go so far as to systematically violate the Ten Commandments. That is, their commandments are thou shalt kill, thou shalt commit adultery, and so on and so forth. So this offshoot of Judaism, which looks forward to a complete liberation from the law, a complete liberation from traditional Judaism by way of a messianic kind of event in which the whole world radically changes in favor of these particular Jews. I don't think that's real Judaism, but that's a spin-off from Judaism that led to Zionism.

Yusuf Hindi has written about this. I'm working on translating his first volume of Occident et Islam, which lays this out. Do you agree with that interpretation?

Yes. I spoke to Hindi myself in an interview. He's of course somebody that connects this whole issue to geopolitics, what's going on right now. And in this sense, I also advise people to read his books if they're able to read French. I don't think they're translated yet.

I expect to have a translation of his first volume done by early 2025.

Perfect. Yeah, well, people who want to familiarize themselves with his work and do not know French can go to the website geopolitica.ru and they can type in there just the title of my article, which is a book review, a quite substantial book review of one of his books, and they can find a summary of his thought. It's called "Liberation Philosophy." So if you go to geopolitica.com, and search for "Liberation Philosophy," you will find an outline of Yusuf Hindi's work.

In any case, of course, I agree with what you are saying fully. You refer to Sabatai Tzvi, who, of course, became Muslim, and who died in a city called Ulcinj on the Albanian coast. And his thought, of course, went through Jacob Frank and into Western Europe in the 17th and 18th centuries.

And his belief system spread. Holland, my country, was one of the centers of that. It was one of the places where Zevi's work was received. And there were all kinds of offshoots of heretical thinking—even heretical within the rabbinical tradition—that flourished in that time. Semi-mystical options being created in Jewish print shops here. Most of that work is not publicly available, but people who study it in universities can find all kinds of background information.

Readers who are not sufficiently familiar with conspiracy theory would do well to remember that in America, part of the ruling elite actually belongs to a Frankist background. So John Kerry, for example, and Madeleine Albright, are coming from, let's say, lineages that can trace themselves to the Frankist heresy. There is a continuity of programming, there is a continuity of fault, and there is a continuity of geopolitical effects of these heresies, but I think we are approaching a kind of culmination point at this stage.

I agree. And the interesting thing about this is that these people have such a radical religious or some would say anti-religious program. But the search for truth, which is at the heart of both religion and philosophy, doesn't really seem to be very dear to their hearts. They seem to be pathological, systematic liars. And a good example of this is this apparent PSYOP that happened on November 7th when Israeli Mossad agents accompanied fans of the Israeli football team to Amsterdam in an apparent pre-planned operation in which after their resounding defeat—they lost 5-0—Israeli fans or soccer hooligans, as we call them in America, football hooligans in Europe, went on a rampage in Amsterdam, attacking people and starting fights and riots. And they managed to get this reported in the media as a terrible anti-Semitic program against the poor, innocent visiting Israeli Jews.

So you were there when this happened. What's the connection between Zionism and its roots in a kind of satanic heresy from Judaism and this kind of bizarre attack on Amsterdam that was reported absolutely backwards in the media?

Well, we are all, of course, counting these years on October surprises, but that was not to be. So instead of that, we had the November surprise in Holland, our own 9/11, let's say.

A little bit background to this: Amsterdam is one of the poles, the heartlands of what I would call proto-globalism (which has developed into contemporary) globalism. The ideology, the vogue ideology attached to it as well, is being spread by the ones who rule us in the West. We can call that the G-O-G, the Globalist Occupation Regime, just to have a term. And that G-O-G, of course, has decided that Amsterdam is a fitting place to operate in.

The background to this is that Amsterdam holds symbolic meaning in many senses. And many European writers are aware of that. So if you look at a writer like Gustav Meyrink, who wrote The Green Face about the mystical and magical quality of Amsterdam. Albert Camus, the French writer who was, of course, from Algeria, specified it more precisely. He said this city, which is located under sea level officially, has symbolic meaning in its construction. So there are seven circles—seven circles of hell—the center being, of course, the red light district. Camus didn't feel particularly well when he visited Amsterdam because he was sensitive to this kind of thing.

In any case, that's the symbolic background. Now to say that Amsterdam was, of course, already, let's say, part of Jewish tradition. And Holland has now been again at the forefront of what I would call the Israelization of Europe, the Zionization of Europe.

So immediately after October 7th, 2023, Holland was the first country to get a real neo-Zionist government. There was led into power the party that belongs to the gentleman called Gild Wilders, the famous Islam basher. He was not personally invited into the government, but the prime ministership was given to the head of the intelligence services. He was not elected, he didn't receive a single vote, he was just appointed. Part of the party of Wilders, together with some coalition partners, was led to rule.

Which means, of course, that immediately discourse in Holland changed. The political climate has turned toward violence, and the propensity for violence has been in the air for a long time. And exactly at that time, after the appointment of this new cabinet, this new government here, and this new reality here, we are seeing this program being implemented through the hooligans—who, by the way, also visited Greece before and who afterwards visited Paris.

So there is a system in this, and I believe that there are certain PSYOP operations aspects that we should remember. It happened just before the memory date of Kristallnacht, something that the mainstream media here did not neglect to exploit, saying, "look how many years later, again, something bad is happening to a certain kind of people" who, of course, call themselves Israelis. But of course, the Israeli cries out in pain as he hits you. That is what's happened here as well.

Fortunately, the whole psyop didn't go that well, because social media is prevalent in public discourse in Holland, and many pictures leaked out and many stories came out, and the mainstream media had a very difficult task to convince anybody of this story. It's so fake and so shallow that even convinced boomers and convinced Zionists have trouble adhering to it.

That is not to say that it will not work. I believe it is more a pretext than really a PSYOP in the sense that it should convince everybody. I think to a certain extent the PSYOP is even meant to segregate people according to intelligence, much like 9/11 in America. I mean, some buildings imploded in New York and some didn't. So that's already a selection point for intelligence or lack of intelligence, for conformity and nonconformity. And I think the same applies to Holland.

So it's a core public they're addressing, and policy statements they are making. That's how I look at it.

One guy who passed the intelligence test was Bender, a young man with a YouTube channel who was out there following these Israeli football hooligans around and filming them as they launched their violent attack on Amsterdam. And he got threatened, but kept filming. That was kind of an interesting document. So as you say, it seems like the younger people are less likely to be taken in by this kind of thing, because they're getting their news from people like Bender, whereas it's the retiring boomers who are maybe not paying attention or don't have enough brain cells left who are buying the propaganda line from mainstream media.

So yeah, this was really kind of a pathetic psyop in a way.  9/11 was actually pathetic too. There's no reason anyone should have believed that those buildings just fell down from fires, or that the first successful hijackings in two decades had happened in this particular way by these particular people. And they couldn't even get the alleged hijackers' names straight. Tcouldn't produce any evidence that any of them were on the planes, etc., etc. That was pretty crazy, too.

The level of violence in New York in and in Washington was so much higher (than 11/7 in Amsterdam), it was so shocking, that it prevented people from thinking clearly. But in Amsterdam, the level of violence was pretty low level. It actually doesn't even rise to the level of really a good football hooligan riot. So I think that perhaps made it easier for people to look at Bender's video and look at the stuff on social media and realize that mainstream media was lying.

Well, of course, you're from America, so you faced their 9/11. And that was a very violent event. No matter how fake it was, it was very violent.

And you mentioned that here, of course, in Holland, what happened here was very mild in comparison. That's true. But you should not forget Europe is emasculated. I don't know how to say it another way. It has been so much, I don't know how to say it differently, feminized. people are susceptible to fear on very small subjects. Even small events can scatter their bubble and they're afraid and they retreat and take refuge with the mainstream media. Among a certain section of population that is really a problem.

Another issue here is that Holland functions as a kind of safe zone for what I call the globalized government. There are certain safe zones in Europe that they like to maintain. One of them is, of course, Greece. Many people from the Zionist entity are currently pushing up real estate prices by buying reserve houses. Another one is, of course, Budapest, called Jewdapest by other people. And another one is Paris. And another one is, of course, Holland. Holland is quite important as a refuge, as a place of reserve and refuge and fallback.

We have seen other weird events in Holland before. I'd like to remind people that

some years ago, an Israeli cargo plane crashed into some buildings in Amsterdam. Probably there was some form of uranium in them, so many people afterwards got sick. And this scandal has also been swept under the rug.

So the November 7 psyop was not the first time that such a thing occurs here. And I think the manipulation of the Dutch public is not irrelevant to to the GOG, to the globalist occupation government. They really need Holland on their side, which also is reflected in the political arena. As I said, it is the first country with a real Zionist government.

And I advise people to pay attention to what happens in Holland. Holland tends to be a kind of a place where things happen first. It was the first place where a real the PVV party, the Zionist PVV party, was established, the first country in Europe where the alt-right party for democracy was established, the first country where the technocrat government with intelligence signature was established last year, and now the first government that is promoting, in a certain sense, Islamophobia as a political line. So that's quite a quick shift, quite an interesting shift.

I'd like to remind our audience that as we are speaking at this time, November 15 at 6 o'clock in the evening, the government in Holland is in emergency consultation, because it is probably going to fall. It might fall any moment, because the resignations have occurred within the government. There is a Moroccan lady in that government. That government is, of course, founded on a very slim majority in parliament. So any loss will cause the government to fall.

That lady, a Muslim of Moroccan descent, has exited the government. And she claims, quite interestingly, that within government itself, within government consultations, last Monday, there was offending language being used between ministers, between people in the government. It stands to reason that it would be an Islamophobe insult that was hurled at her. And she has exited the government, and there is a crisis because of this going on right now.

So this whole affair in Amsterdam that we had with supporters continued through rioting over a number of days. And it now has political consequences as well.

That's interesting. Maybe you could talk a little bit more about the Moroccan diaspora in Holland and how it relates to this. The reporting in the mainstream media about this was a November 7th event was skewed towards sort of blaming these Moroccan or Muslim cab drivers who were supposedly using social media to orchestrate their pogroms against the poor, innocent Jewish soccer hooligans. And naturally, the European New Right, which you're actually a part of, seems to be the majority opinion is not very friendly towards immigration from Morocco and other Muslim countries and indeed other places as well. But they always seem to emphasize the religious side of it and talk about "Muslim" immigration. which always strikes me as strange. I'm not sure if the immigration problem is really that much of a matter of religion. In any case, what's the background there in terms of the ethnic composition in Amsterdam and in the relationship there to this crisis?

Well, of course, Europe has been an American colony since 1945, since the coming of NATO. Since then, there has not been really a much independent political entity. What has happened Globalist policies have been pushed through the European Union, which is of course also an instrument of globalist power, through NATO, affecting foreign policy. And one of the policies that was implemented in the 60s, it was mass immigration as it happened in other Western European countries. What happened was that in that time, the early 60s, some countries were eager to send surplus population to Holland, supposedly to work. But in fact, what happened is that Morocco emptied its jails and sent its poorest people north, actually, to Holland. Some of these people did very well here. They worked here. Others, they started their own businesses. But integration problems, of course, occurred as was predictable, as was planned.

So I believe that this whole immigration issue here, it was artificially constructed. It's not a homegrown issue. It has been an imposition by a globalist regime. That's first of all. Second of all, the problem with the Moroccan people here is that they have been overrepresented in crime. They have been overrepresented in all kinds of social problems that Dutch people loathe them for. But this loathing has, of course, also been manipulated by the people who are ruling. So what they did is never punish people that should be punished, although even, for example, young criminals in the circle of Moroccans were not punished, even when their parents and their elders called for punishment.

Another thing that has happened is that Dutch people that were affected by problems were never taken serious and they were demonized. So this has created an ethnic divide in an otherwise ethnically monolithic country before, an ethnic divide. But this ethnic divide we cannot talk about. There's all kinds of taboos in the political sphere in Holland, and one of them is ethnicity. So what happens instead is that the only discourse that could be held is the religious discourse. The majority of the indigenous Dutch people at this moment have been secularized, so 60 percent probably is secular. They do not believe in God. They do not believe in any kind of religion. And they are susceptible to Islamophobia because it reminds them that there is still a religious presence in Holland now through Islam.

And this creates a lot of tension because a big part of the native Dutch population has not only been secularized, they have also degenerated. They have lost family values, they have lost family structures, they have lost their work ethic even, which is quite something for Holland. And this problem creates a very artificial situation in which parts of the Dutch native populations are degenerated to abhorrent levels, while immigrants often have higher families values, higher ethical values than native Dutch. And this is being felt, this is being noticed by people, and this causes a lot of friction.

So Islamophobia on the political level is, of course, very eager to exploit this phenomenon and has by this also had a success in the political arena. So we should not forget Wilders' party, the Islamophobe Party, PVV, is the biggest party in the country. But it never addresses ethnicity. They only address religion in the form of Islam, which is, of course, also something that fits very well to the agenda there. The (PVV) paymasters are rumored to be, and I actually think proven to be, Tel Aviv, the Zionist entity.

Geert Wilders is known as somebody that has a triple alliance. It's Israel first, America second, and Holland last.

So this is well known. He even admits it. His visits to the Israeli embassy here, his consultations, they are well established. His links with the Zionist network are very well established. There's no doubt about that.

So it is the Islamophobia. It fits into a societal condition. It is politically opportune and it fits into the larger geopolitical agenda of the Zionist entity.

It sounds like Holland is under Israeli occupation, maybe even more than the U.S., which is saying something. And that would explain why when Israeli football hooligans invade Amsterdam and attack people, attack cars, police cars, attack cab drivers, tear down Palestinian flags, assault people on the streets, and generally start riots, and that this invasion of Holland from a foreign country, which normally would be reported as such in the local media, seems to have been reported backwards in the media. That leads to the question of how does the Dutch media cover these things? Obviously, there is a thriving social and alternative media out there. But to what extent does the average Dutch person get a range of viewpoints? And to what extent might they be aware of the way that the mainstream media is lying to them about this attack on Holland by Israel?

Well, we are having a situation that, as in America, here in Holland, we have a legacy media. This legacy media still serves for a neoliberal boomer constituency who still vote. There are many who do not in Holland. And this section of the population is caught up in the psy-op. But even there, there are cracks.

Because I knew we were going to have this program today, I went through the sadomasochistic pleasure of watching the Dutch television, which I otherwise never do.

I think it's just masochistic, probably.

Yes, it is. But I did notice that even in this perfect Potemkin village of the Dutch media landscape, cracks are appearing. The psy-op was so shabby and so facile that even Dutch people who are very comfortable and who actually do not want to think at all have problems swallowing it hook and sinker.

So there are cracks in it. Even in the mainstream, there are some critical articles appearing, which is quite significant in Holland. Then, as you said, there are the social media, there is alternative media. I believe that anybody with a brain in Holland knows by now what is the reality behind the events in Amsterdam. I think what we are left with is an almost Soviet situation in which 90 percent of the population, or maybe slightly less, is aware of the grotesque lies and the total Potemkin village quality of political discourse, but simply doesn't speak out, has been intimidated, has been silenced, is fatalistic in all kinds of ways.

But that does not apply to the ethnic minorities that are living in Holland, such as the Moroccan and the Turkish communities. These have their own thriving media. They also access media in their own country. So they are not dependent on the mainstream discourse at all. They never respected it and they will never be convinced by it.

And these people, these minorities, they have quite influence on younger Dutch people. They share colleges, they share workplaces where real life interaction,not fake social media interaction, takes place. There is a lot of cross-pollination, a lot of cross-referencing. And you can see that the rioting that happened also and the demonstrations that followed it, also attracted a lot of Dutch indigenous sympathizers to the thoughts of the people that were standing for Palestine and the people that were standing up to the football hooligans from Tel Aviv.

So it raises the question of whether the defense of Amsterdam that was primarily by the Moroccan immigrant community...Will it eventually permeate into the consciousness of the people of Holland that their country was attacked by a genocidal foreign entity, by thugs who ran rampant in the streets, instigating violence? And that the people who defended Holland were in fact Muslim immigrants who have become Dutch after however many generations? That makes me wonder whether there's any possibility that the higher  civilizational level of the best of these immigrants that you mentioned, the people who still believe in God, who have uh interest in higher things in life, who haven't suffered the materialist secular degeneration that has produced the lower moral and spiritual levels among the indigenous Dutch people...might the higher values among the better segment of the immigrant population actually inspire the younger Dutch people to find their way back to those higher values? Is there anything like that occurring?

This, of course, is already occurring. And I believe that the timing of this operation is not entirely coincidental. I believe that the system, the political system, the establishment as it is sitting in Europe, pro-NATO, pro-globalist, is on its last legs. They have reached the ultimate limits of how much can be lied, how much can be cheated, how much perverted discourses can be put on the people. And at this inflection point, I believe that the Zionists have opted for flight forward. So they are opting for a strategy of provocation, of genetic provocation as well, and there are accounting on political action taken against the immigrant population by the now installed Islamophobic  traitors that are in the government.

Now, we can see that already in legislation being prepared, for example, although there have been many years that there have been problems between immigrants from Muslim countries, but also others, and indigenous people, the first time that there has been a serious proposition to take passports and citizenship away from these people is now. It never has happened when Dutch issues, indigenous Dutch concerns, had to be met. But at the moment the Zionists press a button, it happens.

Similarly, there were never border controls. Holland has been without borders in many senses since the start of the EU. But from the 7th of November onwards, or 7th of December, one month later, there will be border controls again permanently. So this is something that was impossible before, but it has been realized at a switch, just after the Amsterdam riots.

So we can see the political activation of the elite that has been prepared. The Islamophobe party on top, they have been activated, and I believe that this flight forward mechanism means that extreme measures are in the pipeline and no backing down will happen. I believe we are reaching a real inflection point here at which discourse itself is not sufficient. Only kinetic action, including the stripping of citizenship and deportations, are now something that they can resort to, to keep their position of power. And I think that they will go to any length to maintain it. They are desperate.

You can see that also in the way the discourse in the country is changing. So texts that could not be said years ago, for which you could be arrested and put in jail, offenses in the public sphere, they now can be used against Muslims and against foreigners.

You mentioned earlier the  speech laws in Holland. I'm wondering what those are like. We're seeing a rollback in the western post-Enlightenment liberal tradition of free speech all across the Western world—the Zionist occupied western world—because there's been too much truth leaking out by way of the internet. And so they can't afford free speech anymore.

But in the US, we still have the First Amendment. It hasn't been revoked. Officially, it's still there, even though the spirit of it is very rarely observed these days in the US.

But still I can, as a US citizen, feel perfectly comfortable sitting here in Morocco and flying back to America at times...I can sit here and say that I totally 100% support the goals of the Palestinian resistance, including Hamas, Hezbollah, and Islamic Jihad. I view them as anti-terrorist organizations. I view them as anti-genocide organizations. I think they are heroes, absolute heroes. The law in America says that I can't give them money, I can't provide them material support, but I can express my feelings about them. And I just did. Can people do that in Holland?

Well, it's not so bad as in Germany. We don't have the First Amendment in Holland. But in Germany, for example, you can be fired from your job for eating an egg made in the style that Adolf Hitler liked. So if you eat an egg according to his recipe, you get fired.

Or if there's a mustache, a little pepper mustache on the egg, they'll arrest you.

If people grow a certain plant in their garden, they have to remove it because Hitler grew the same plant in his garden. That's Germany right now. We don't have that in Holland. You can support, you can voice support for the Palestinian cause, that's possible. You can even criticize the Zionist cause. You're not getting a good job after that, but you can, you're allowed to.

The speech limitations mainly pertain to what I'll call the topic of Holocaustology, of Holocaustism. This is the main topic that cannot be talked about. But exactly on that point, I actually believe we have a real problem, because people that cannot talk about their history, that cannot talk about their authentic identity—because that's part of true history—and who cannot come to terms with, let's say, psychohistoric collective traumas...They also cannot talk honestly about present affairs, and they cannot decide their own future. They are subject to Stockholm Syndrome.

Now, you talk very positively about the Palestinian resistance, the Axis of Resistance, which is quite right that you do that. We also support them. But my emphasis is on another thing, and that is correcting and lecturing my own nation. I believe that, I'm just going to say it straightforwardly, white Dutch people are on the verge of extinction. That is because they have sinned. They are going against God's law, man's law, and they are sinking into a swamp...collectively. I'm not talking about each individual. You can see it in falling birth rates, in the number of children born out of wedlock. You can see that in the number of abortions, the abhorrent trans cult that is dominating my country in schools and in the public arena, in the media. And I think this causes a degeneracy not just in personal morals, but also in the public sphere. I think this is one of the explanations why the regime that is perpetrating crimes in the Holy Land and get away with it. They can get away with it, they get support from countries like Holland. I'm talking about literal, physical, military support and financial support and diplomatic backing, like the United States does. because the people have degenerated to such a level that they are susceptible to real brutalization. They actually become twisted, sick, and are not able to awkwardly assess reality. That's also part of the psycho-historical drama, the psycho-historical trauma, I call it. And it renders them susceptible to illusion theater of the mass media.

And I think it's very important for me as a Dutch person to remind our own people that they have to wake up and they have to change their ways. Because it is one thing to condone mass murder and support mass murder overseas. It's another thing to yourself have to carry the consequences of that, because the chickens can come home to roost. They are already coming home to roost in many senses.

So the violence that has been exported for a very long time by the West, it can also come home. And I think that is something that people can bring upon themselves. Perhaps that's a little bit of the ancient Dutch duality. It's the merchant. And it is the preacher, but the merchant has won and the preacher has disappeared from the stage. And I think it is necessary for the Dutch to remember their own tradition—that they once belonged to an ethnic community, ethical community, Christian community.

And if they cannot join that, they can join others. That is their decision. But ethical values have dissipated in Holland to such a degree that I am not surprised by any development that is happening at this moment here.

It's an interesting and kind of gloomy picture that you paint of Holland as this degenerate moral swamp sinking into a morass. And you mentioned that Amsterdam is below sea level and the Dante-esque center of hell in Amsterdam is the red light district. And due to this loss of morality that the Dutch people are no longer having families and reproducing themselves. And so they have to open up the doors to immigrants, with ethnic strife being the result. All of this under the domination of a Zionist occupation government, just like we have here in the U.S.,

And then you mentioned that maybe the hardest single issue or the most difficult point is the Holocaust religion. I don't know what you're allowed to say about that, but it's so obvious that the allegedly historical tale of what happened in World War II in these German camps has been turned into a substitute religion and indeed a false religion. And that anyone who even discusses questions about it is going to be symbolically burned at the stake as a heretic. Is there any way that impediment to rational thought and to doing

actual history could be overcome through some form of hosting scholarly discussions about issues about what really happened during World War Two?

Well, I think that here, young Dutch people are getting actual help from immigrants, especially Muslim immigrants, people that come from Muslim countries where a completely different historical picture predominates, where people have a different view of events in the past. And these people now in many high schools and in many tertiary schools, they now predominate. So the majority of the students there is now from immigrant communities.

And these people do not take kindly to being corrected, so-called corrected, by their teachers. This is a big issue in Holland. There have been many even parliamentary discussions about this topic—the way in which the Dutch educational system is not able to implant its historical narrative, its ideological narrative, anymore in these schools. And of course, Dutch students that attend these same colleges profit from this because it allows them to explore other ways of looking at things.

This is one side. Then I believe there is another quite symbolic side to public debate that people tend to overlook, and that is that there are structural oppositions that nobody can miss. So, for example, there is one "caust", the Holocaust, that must be believed in. There is another "caust," the Gaza coast, that cannot be believed in. And the forces that impose these two requirements, the negative and the positive, can be traced back to the same power structure.

So that's a very interesting position that nobody can miss. In the end, this kind of public awareness cannot fail on this point. So the more this contrast is being widened, the more this contrast is being shown to people, the more they are able to notice patterns, to notice structures...And of course, people that are not educated do not express it in a sophisticated way, but they will act on it. And I think this change is coming, is already there to a certain degree. And I believe in this way that the sacrifice that the Palestinians have made and are making in the Middle East, the sacrifice that they also have to make because it's imposed on them through Western money and Western support for the regime—this same sacrifice is helping Europeans indirectly.

It's the heroism of the people of Palestine, and especially Gaza, that is changing history, and they're standing up to some of the worst brutality and oppression ever. Thank you so much, Alexander Wolfheze. It's great talking with you again. Keep up the fantastic work. God bless, and can't wait to meet you in person someday.

Inshallah.

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 Links to stories

E. Michael Jones and I opened this week’s False Flag Weekly News with a discussion of Trump’s cabinet nominations, including the good (RFK Jr. , Tulsi Gabbard, and possibly Matt Gaetz), the bad (Kristi Noem, Chris Wright, Doug Burgum) and the ugly ( Mike Waltz, Mike Huckabee, Howard Lutnick, Marco Rubio).

Actually, Trump’s foreign policy team is beyond ugly. It is a World War III cabinet. But among all of those horrid nominees, one name stands out as the most hideous…indeed, so far beyond ugly that blocking confirmation is a matter of existential urgency. That name is Pete Hegseth.

Who the hell is Hegseth? That’s a milder version of the question military and foreign policy professionals were asking when word of the nomination leaked:

“Who the f—k is this guy?” said a defense industry lobbyist who was granted anonymity to offer candid views. The lobbyist said they had hoped for “someone who actually has an extensive background in defense. That would be a good start.”

Hegseth is a genocidal Fox News blatherer with no relevant experience. He is best known for his enthusiastic support for war criminals and war crimes. During Trump’s first term, Hegseth successfully lobbied Trump to pardon some of the most horrific war criminals in US and indeed world history: Murderers of the children and elderly and helpless prisoners, rapist scumbags who kick in doors and slaughter entire families after violating the girls and women…these are Hegseth’s heroes, and his raison d’etre for public service.

While he devotes himself to helping child-rapists and mass murderers evade justice, Hegseth pursues a larger and more ambitious project: Setting off a nuclear World War III that would kill the majority of Earth’s population. He is one of the most fanatical members of an Armageddonite cult that seeks to unleash global nuclear war by blowing up the Al-Aqsa Mosque and building a Blood Sacrifice Temple in its place.

According to Armageddonite Christians, the war thus unleashed will kill all Jews and most of the rest of the world’s people, excluding only themselves. In some versions, familiar from Jack Chick’s “rapture” comic books, the cultists will be “beamed up” by Jesus while everyone else suffers horrific deaths.

Jewish eschatologists beg to differ. According to the messianic millenarian fanatics in Netanyahu’s cabinet, starting World War III by blowing up Al-Aqsa will lead to the destruction and subjugation of all non-Jews, otherwise known as “goyim,” who are considered subhuman beasts worthy only of extermination and enslavement. The Jewish Messiah, known to Christians and Muslims as the Antichrist or Dajjal, will then rule the world unopposed from the “rebuilt” blood sacrifice temple.

Crazy cults that yearn for the end of the world are a dime a dozen. Despite their ubiquity throughout thousands of years of history, the world has stubbornly refused to end on schedule. But putting those cultists in charge of the world’s biggest military, which possesses thousands of nuclear weapons that could destroy human civilization many times over, could grease the skids for a self-fulfilling prophecy.

According to middle of the road pundit Daniel McAdams:

President-elect Donald Trump’s designated Secretary of Defense is a certifiable lunatic. A cultist in the manner of Manson. Literally someone who needs to be in a mental hospital. Who craves an apocalyptic war to end all of mankind so that his twisted understanding of God will come down and slaughter all (including Jews) who do not convert to his cult’s beliefs. This is a truly dangerous person. This is the person running our military machine. The madmen have taken the asylum. 

Mike Whitney asks:

If, for example, Hegseth was ordered to stop the delivery of all bombs and lethal weaponry to Israel while ceasefire negotiations with Hamas took place, would a Christian Zionist like Hegseth obey such an order or act according to his own deeply-felt religious convictions?

Hegseth advocates all-out war with Iran (entailing thousands of dead US service members, Mideast oil exports ended leading to global economic implosion, and ultimately World War III with Russia and China):

“What better time than now to say ‘we’re starting the clock, you’ve got a week, you’ve got X amount of time before we start taking out your energy production facilities. We take out key infrastructure, we take out your missile sites, we take out nuclear developments, we take out port capabilities.’” Trump appoints pro-Israel, Iran hawk Pete Hegseth for secretary of defense

Can sane people take back the asylum, or at least enough of it to postpone Armageddon, by torpedoing the nomination of Pete Hegseth? Can #NoHegseth save the world? Let’s ask E. Michael Jones. Below is a lightly-edited transcript of our discussion.

#NoHegseth

E. Michael Jones: Once again, we're confronted with bait and switch. This was an anti-war vote (for) Donald Trump. And then the people he appoints are the exact opposite.

Kevin Barrett: So let's talk about some of those appointments because they're completely insane. Where do we even start? Let's start with who's paying for the appointments. Howard Lutnick, the billionaire of unmentionable ethnicity, is basically paying Trump to choose who to put in the cabinet. "Follow the money."

There's one good appointment. We have RFK Jr. at Health and Human Services. I would almost have voted for that. But I don't vote for lesser evils because I just don't vote for evil. (Tulsi Gabbard isn’t bad either.)

And Matt Getz is another not such a terrible appointment, really. He had a wild war with Israel over sexual blackmail attempts. That's a pretty crazy story.

The New York Times tells us that "these people that Trump's appointing, they're not neocons. They're America first.” Michael Walsh, Marco Rubio, they're no longer neocons. Now they're America first.

Well, let's look at some of these other people. There's Elise Stefanik, who wants to crush every anti-genocide kid on any American campus. And we have Mike Huckabee, a Christian Zionist Antichrist supporter who can't wait to blow up the Al-Aqsa Mosque, rebuild the temple and install the Antichrist on the throne over the world as the U.S. Ambassador to Israel.

And then the worst of all, Pete Hegseth, not only the least qualified nominee for SecDef in American history, but he's insane. So the overall set of appointments here, starting with this lunatic...is the world about to end?

E. Michael Jones: Yes. The answer is yes. If Hegseth gets in, he will promote the creation of the Third Temple. If the Third Temple gets created, the Antichrist will arrive, and the Antichrist will usher in the End Times.

Now, I have never talked about this before. But when you have a guy like this, this is what you're talking about, because he believes that. This is a certifiable religious fanatic who will bring about the end of the world if you give him enough power to do it.

Now, we as Americans simply cannot tolerate this. We do not, as Americans, allow people to take over government and impose their religious views on the rest of us.

Now, of course, the Jews did exactly that with Roe versus Wade. They imposed the Jewish sacrament of abortion on the rest of us, okay?

But now it's getting even worse. We're getting closer and closer to the arrival of the Antichrist with Hegseth, and the Americans are going to have to say something about this...

And I'll tell you something else. I think that Trump reads Twitter now. He was created by Twitter. If it weren't for Twitter, that guy would have never become president in 2016.

So I think he's reading X. I think he immediately pulled back (from Lutnick's JP wish list of appointments) without deliberately or explicitly throwing Lutnick under the bus, which he should have done. He pulled back by appointing Robert Kennedy. I think that was the message behind the appointment of Robert Kennedy as head of health and human services.

So X is back. This is why I'm saying pushback is important right now. The pushback on Lutnik was great (if it got us Kennedy). But now, pushback on Hegseth is absolutely necessary. If it's on Twitter, I'm saying Trump reads it. I'm saying there is a moment here where I think our voice can be heard on Hagseth.

And to be honest with you, I think it is being heard right now because suddenly, oh, wait a minute, there's a sexual impropriety with Hegseth. I think this may be a manifestation of the adults coming in and saying, what, are you crazy? Are you absolutely crazy to appoint a lunatic like this with the military at his disposal? I think now is the moment.

Kevin Barrett: So you think we should go on Twitter and build a movement to torpedo Hegseth? And that should be possible politically, Mike, because the Democrats are probably very open to voting against somebody with these crazed, supposedly Christian, fundamentalist beliefs, somebody who wants to basically blow up the world so that Jesus can come back and save him and a couple of his friends and damn everybody else to hell. I don't think Democrats like that kind of guy. They'll all vote against him. So all you need is five or ten Republicans, right?

E. Michael Jones: I think that's absolutely right. We'll see what happens, but I think that there are five Republicans. That would be enough Republicans, especially if some type of sexual issue comes up, to vote against them and torpedo this and send a message to Donald Trump and say, you got a mandate from the American people that was purely negative. You're in office because nobody could stand the Biden administration and Biden's minyan and Kamala Harris and the whole politically correct b******t that's been imposed on us for decades now.

That was a negative mandate. We are not endorsing you. We are telling you that the mandate is for America first. It is for peace.

And it's not you have no mandate to appoint religious fanatics, to put them in charge of America's foreign policy. That's precisely the problem that we have had for four years under the Biden administration. And the people in charge of the Biden, the Biden Jews, were mild compared to lunatics like Hegseth.

Kevin Barrett: Yeah, "Christians" like Hegseth actually make the Jews look pretty good.

Read the full transcript at my Substack. And for an opposing view, check out Moon of Alabama’s argument that Trump’s appointments don’t really matter because the US is in no position to escalate war on Russia, China, or Iran, as US military leaders know and will make clear to the likes of Hegseth.

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

Donate via Paypal

Rumble link Bitchute link

Dave Gahary, publisher of Moon Rock Books, was sued by the same people who sued Alex Jones. Gahary settled by agreeing to withdraw Nobody Died at Sandy Hook from circulation.

Below is an edited transcript of the interview, which makes a reference to my satire of the “Onion Buys Infowars” story.

Kevin Barrett: Alex Jones was front page news today, as they (the Sandy Hookers who sued him) allegedly sold Infowars to The Onion. You, being the publisher of Moonrock Books, got harassed and sued by these same people. What are your thoughts about this witch burning, this show trial, of Infowars?

Dave Gahary: It's surreal, of course, that here we have the legacy regime media complicit in crimes throughout the world, responsible for the slaughter and murder of millions of innocent people, primarily now in Muslim countries. And then you have...somebody questioning events, which I thought we were allowed to do in America, not only being sued, but companies being taken over and dismantled and sold for scrap. And in this particular case, to The Onion, a satirical "news outlet." It's almost like they want to send the message to Jones and all of his followers that

"you're not safe at all. You think you have the First Amendment, but look at what we can do. Look at what we did do to Alex Jones. Look what we did to his empire. A joke of an outlet called The Onion took it over with one of these gun control fanatic entities. And we're kicking him out and we're taking it over.

So it's absolutely nuts what happened.

Kevin Barrett: I often say these days that satire writes itself and I just take dictation. I don't even have to write satire anymore. And this is one of those self-satirizing things.

This whole situation with The Onion supposedly taking over Infowars reminds me of what happened with Popular Mechanics and 9/11 truth. Shortly before Popular Mechanics came out with what became the standard go-to debunking of the 9/11 truth movement, that magazine was taken over in a hostile takeover by Jewish Zionist neocons. I forget the details, but there was a coup d'etat at Popular Mechanics. And they overthrew the management, brought in these Mossad sayanim types, basically. And then, lo and behold, like a few months later, out comes this whole issue devoted to debunking the 9/11 truth movement. And it was really shoddy, low-level debunking. It cherry-picked the worst assertions that you could ever find in the truth movement, attacked straw men, and avoided all of the strong points made by the truth movement. It was extremely distorted, obviously mendacious, very, very weak. Anybody with critical thinking skills who compared the source material of the 9/11 truth movement, such as the books of David Ray Griffin, to the Popular Mechanics debunking, could easily see that Griffin was right and the debunking was just garbage. But still, it was out there and it was being pointed to by all of the usual suspects in the mainstream media.

So that takeover of Popular Mechanics in advance of its publicity stunt fake debunking of 9/11 truth reminds me of the way that The Onion was just taken over by these people like the new ownership...As Max Blumenthal posted on Twitter:

"The Onion was bought earlier this year by Jeff Lawson, a major Kamala donor and tech billionaire who hawks 'AI solutions.' This week, Lawson made headlines when he purchased Alex Jones's 'Infowars' in a fire sale.....To lead the Onion's parent company, which has subsumed 'Infowars,' Lawson has appointed a CEO with no background in comedy or business. He is Ben Collins, a former 'disinformation and extremism' reporter for NBC News, and one of the most recognizable faces of the Censorship Industrial Complex that sprouted up during the Trump era to hound alt-media figures like Jones. Collins has spent his short career pumping out a consistent stream of attacks on targets of the national security state and centrist political establishment, while spreading no shortage of misinformation along the way. Now, behind the brand of a once-edgy satire mag, Collins promises, 'we're gonna go after like every facet of alternative media that is trying to get you addicted to stupid stuff.' His top targets, he says, will be 'podcasters and TikTok influencers who have some really curious ideas of the world.' Now, though Collins doesn't explain which stupid stuff or curious ideas he finds so objectionable, his agenda is fairly clear and deadly serious."

So a shout out to Max Blumenthal, one of the Jewish voices of truth out there. I wish there were more. It's obvious this is all orchestrated. Somebody's writing the script for this, right?

Dave Gahary: It's the usual suspects who are writing the script, who always have been writing the script. And I guess it's always been the issue is that there's just not enough folks who are aware of the stuff that we are aware of. And we need the numbers so we can reach that critical mass and affect real change.

We're going in the right direction. It's all surreal, as you pointed out with them taking over Popular Pechanics and now The Onion. They've planned this for a while and this is the way they do things and they've got unlimited capital to do whatever they want. And we're just spectators. We might go to the polls and pull the lever for Trump and think we're gonna get something, but all we're getting is the most neoconned administration in the history of the country. We (truth tellers) probably will come under attack by this administration because of what we do.

Kevin Barrett: An interesting aspect of this is that the big crackdown on free speech that we see looming right now is going to be aimed at least as much against the left as against the right. And that'll be kind of a new one for at least in the past couple of decades. Because they're going to go after the Palestine supporters. And who are the Palestine supporters? Well, some of us who are not particularly on the left are supporters of Palestine. But probably the majority of the Palestine supporters are actually on the political left. They're mostly young people. They're millennials and whatever it is that's younger than millennials. They're young people who look at social media and they actually see the pictures of this horrendous genocide that the Zionist butchers are committing in occupied Palestine. And they learn about the issue unfiltered, not through the Zionist controlled mainstream media. And so then they get really upset and they go out and protest this genocide.

This genocide is very much the sort of thing that the Nazi Holocaust would have been if it had actually happened the way that we're told. Only maybe uglier. At least if the Nazis had really gassed six million Jews, which obviously they didn't, gassing people would at least be a relatively humane way to put them out of their misery.

But what the Zionists are doing to people in Gaza is just vastly more brutal. Most of these people are being killed, these families are being killed as the women and children are slowly being crushed to death beneath their own homes. And that's a very, very slow lingering death. When it's not a death, when they manage to dig the person out, they typically have to amputate limbs and the person is typically badly disabled for life.

And then the deliberate cruelty of the Zionist snipers who put two bullets through the heart or one right through the head, one right through the heart of these little children and infants. They go hunting them. They rape as a national pastime, a sport, where the lead rectal rapist in the top prison in Israel becomes a national hero. And they have right to rape riots, because after this little lame attempt to try to give a little wrist slap to these people who brutally rape prisoners for fun, the whole country then rallies in support of the right to rape.

So the cruelty and evil of the Zionists is off the charts compared to the Nazis who gassed six million Jews, if Nazis had actually gassed million Jews, which obviously they freaking didn't, folks. I mean, come on, guys.

Dave Gahary: Or even if they gassed one Jew.

Kevin Barrett: Right. I don't think they even gassed one. The evidence for gassing is just a joke. But the evidence for having a lot of Jews being killed is obvious. There were whole communities decimated at places like Odessa, lined up and shot with machine guns and thrown into ditches and plowed into ditches. The oppression of the Warsaw Ghetto was horrendous. Lots of innocent Jews suffered horribly because they were Jews, because there was a racist German government that had designated Jews as an enemy group for some perhaps valid reasons and others not so valid. And that government had a racist ideology. So I'm not like trying to lionize the German government or anything like that. But just the historical facts are so different from this myth of the six million gassed Jews in the total extermination plan that's become a new world religion...and people who question that world religion from places like Europe are likely to go to jail for heresy.

Dave Gahary: And not just Europe. As a matter of fact, I was just on a call before you reached out to me with a Canadian political prisoner who has been behind bars since February of last year with no trial, no hearing, because he made a video critical of Jews.

So it's outside of Europe. And that's what I was saying. I think that's coming here to the United States as well with this Trump administration.

Kevin Barrett: Yeah, and they're talking about deportations, because they have this idea that some of those Palestine supporters might be foreign. And then the next thing you know, they'll stage a false flag like this November 7 false flag in Amsterdam that I was talking about in the first hour. I'm sure you noticed that what actually happened in Amsterdam on November 7th was that these soccer hooligans from Israel flew in with Mossad agents in control of the whole operation. After the game the Israelis went out and rioted and attacked people and brutalized people and started fights. And when the Amsterdam natives fought back this was then portrayed in the media as a horrible pogram against the poor innocent Jews.

They'll do something like that in America. And then they'll use that as an excuse to demonize anybody who supports Palestine and who opposes the genocide of Palestine. And they might start deporting people. Apparently now in Holland, the Islamophobic party that's controlled from Tel Aviv wants to start deporting people, even citizens, people whose grandparents, great-grandparents, great-great-grandparents came to Holland, because they're the wrong race. Because it's a race of people who, by and large, don't support the genocide, they're going to push this law through about starting to deport these people.

And you can almost see that happening in America. And you can almost see the Jewish Zionist controllers of America, the same people that control Holland, moving towards these kinds of racist provocations to whip up white Americans against the "brown-skinned, evil American Muslims who don't like genocide, and let's start deporting them."

So we're really entering a totally Judeo-fascist situation. In fact, that comparison is kind of an insult to fascism...

…And I think it's interesting that the same sort of Jewish power configuration that was involved in opening up America's borders through its support for revising the Immigration Act of 1965 is now looks like it's making a U-turn and it's going to start supporting deportations.

In the first hour, Alexander Wolfheze and I were talking about the situation in Holland where the Dutch government, which is now under control of a radical anti-Islam Party that's totally controlled from Tel Aviv, is talking about deporting Dutch people. And the reason for that is that the young native Dutch people are actually learning from the young ethnic people, mostly ethnic Moroccans and to some extent Algerians and Turks. And these young people, the ethnic Moroccans and Turks and so on, they know about what's really going on in Gaza. And they also have a much more skeptical view of history. Here in Morocco, nobody really believes the Holocaust narrative, or at least they didn't when I was here in my Fulbright year and I asked all these professors. The subject came up once and I got curious: "Really? Does everybody think that here?" And sure enough, everybody here in Morocco is reading Roger Garaudy, the great French communist intellectual who then converted to Islam and wrote books on the Holocaust and suffered some consequences for it. He was a total best-selling celebrity here in Morocco. So Moroccans have a different political culture. They know about Zionism. They know Zionism and Israel are genocidal from the get-go. They know about the horrendous immorality of that whole movement and its supporters, the lies that they throw around without any compunctions.

So they all know that. And so they end up going to school in Holland. Apparently it's a big scandal that the kids in high school in Holland now are not going along with the programming. They don't buy the Holocaust BS that they're having shoved down their throats in history class. They don't believe the BS they're being told about the genocide and a lot of other things as well.

So now I think that the Jewish power establishment is moving towards shifting from its open borders ideology, which was designed to create a society that Jews could rule much more easily because they would be the only cohesive ethnicity—with their expertise in ethnic nepotism, they could rule the place easily if they could water down the majority ethnic population by bringing in all these other groups, as Kevin MacDonald has written.

But now I think they've discovered that, oops, that didn't work so well. We brought in all these people who actually are onto our game, and they're telling the natives. So you better ship them back home.

Dave Gahary: That's right. Or they didn't just discover it, but they knew that it was gonna happen all along. And as typical of the Jewish power structure, they make sure they cover both sides of the equation. So now you've got these alleged right wing Jews who are now in favor of pushing back against what the alleged left wing Jews did. It's kind of like voting Democrat or Republican...It's just a show. It's the contributors who decide what policy will be, not the electorate. That's why they continually vote against the best interests of the country or any individual. But these Jews now who are overseeing the reaction to allowing unfettered immigration, who now will go, see, I told you, we need to get these people out now. But the people who are in your think tank, those same people are the ones who just a couple of years ago said, bring them in. Now you're saying, get them out. So I think it's just the ongoing Jewish power structure game that we're seeing now go into effect. So yeah, Kev, nothing changes, right? I mean, it's a different day, but they're operating from the same playbook...

---

Regarding that whole (Sandy Hook) lawsuit...as I've explained to you before, the odds are that what I did had a lot to do with what happened to Alex. And I don't know Alex. I've never met him. I've never talked to him. But when Jim Fetzer told me about this former Florida state trooper, Wolfgang Halbig, who was visited by some homicide detectives in Florida and told that he should not question Sandy Hook anymore, I said, come on, Jim, that's ridiculous. That's impossible.

Of course, it wasn't too soon before that or after that, that he told me that the book Nobody Died at Sandy Hook was banned by Amazon. So when he told me that this fellow was questioned by some homicide detectives in Florida and told not to contact Connecticut, I asked to get his contact info. And I did get it from Jim. And I reached out to this fella Wolfgang Halbig and we did an interview.

And when I put that interview up on the American Free Press website—Wolfgang gave out his phone number in the interview—the night that it went up, he started to get calls from Europe. A lot of folks did not trust this whole Sandy Hook matter and the narrative that was being spun around it.

And so Wolfgang, that particular interview that I did with him, went viral. I had never had an interview go viral like that. And that came to the attention of Jones's organization. And then they started to interview Halbig. And then that's what the lawsuit was primarily based on, that Jones used Halbig, an "obviously insane guy," to promote this conspiracy theory that nobody died at Sandy Hook.

And that's what they used to take away Alex Jones' empire.

Kevin Barrett: I didn't follow closely, Dave, but I didn't really see evidence presented that Alex Jones himself actively asserted that nobody died or anything like that. Rather, he simply interviewed people like Wolfgang Halbig and was open to what they were saying. That's journalism, isn't it?

Dave Gahary: You're right. It used to be. But they used that Connecticut law to get him and to get all his assets.

So yeah, it used to be journalism. But now the lines are hardening. And I think we should be prepared for a lot of pushback. I don't know how it's going to affect you over there (in Morocco). But over here, I think Americans who think that they're shielded by the First Amendment should be prepared for somebody knocking on their door or something worse.

Kevin Barrett: Yeah, I agree. And I think in the big picture, one of the reasons for that is that we're in the middle of a stealth World War III. That is, this Zionist occupied U.S. empire is heading down the proverbial toilet bowl of history. (The dustbin of history is what the Marxists used to say.) But it seems that it's not going down without a fight. And, you know, if the U.S. empire were still sticking to its ideals, I'd be on fighting for it to maintain its integrity.

But unfortunately, it's quite the opposite. It no longer has any integrity and it's fighting for evil, decadence, depravity. And so, yeah, so we should expect anything at this point, I guess. And during wartime, they revoke all of the normal routines, the civilian protections for free speech and such. Eugene Debs had to run for president from a prison cell during World War I. And World War II also saw similar crackdowns on dissidents.

The majority of the American population had opposed entering World War II. In fact, it was like 80% prior to Pearl Harbor. But then when they orchestrated their false flag prearranged eight-point plan Pearl Harbor and stampeded everybody into jumping on board with this war psychosis. And suddenly all of the sane people, who had been the leaders of the anti-war movement, were all being intimidated and if necessary brutalized and imprisoned.

So, yeah, I don't think the First Amendment operates so much during wartime. I think we're already in stealth World War III, and they might announce it. Because things could get really bad if they actually go to war with Iran. Iran can take out all the American military bases in the region, sink all the American ships in the region, kill many thousands if not tens of thousands of Americans, and close the Straits of Hormuz, causing a complete collapse of the world economy.

And that's what Iran will do if it has to. They also probably already have nukes, and they're just waiting to announce it. And I hope they don't wait too long.

Dave Gahary: I think you're right. Yeah, this war cabinet is leading us into hell.

Kevin Barrett: And people who voted for Trump, I think, are going to have severe buyer's remorse.

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

Patronize the Poet

The Ballad of Genocide Don

There once was a scumbag named Genocide Joe

With a big genocidal baton.

But Genocide Joe got too senile and old

So he passed it to Genocide Don.

-

Though Genocide Don was a Hitler, Joe’d said,

He invited him in for a chat.

And they sat by the fire, and liar-to-liar

Joe told Don he didn’t look fat.

-

And you don’t look senile, you hair-sniffing penile

dementia-brained dickhead, Don said.

Joe told Don to f**k off, and they laughed till they coughed

About how many Gazans were dead.

-

Those two a******s sat there flapping, fouling the air

The way all scumbag leaders hobnob.

Don told Genocide Joe: “You killed ‘em! Way to go!”

And Joe told Don to finish the job.

-

There once was a scumbag named Genocide Joe

With a big genocidal baton.

But Genocide Joe got too senile and old

So he passed it to Genocide Don.

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

Donate via Paypal

Mees Baaijen, author of The Predators vs. the People: The Big Picture of the 500-Year Secret War Against Humanity, discusses “The project for world domination is not Jewish – nor is it American!”  Then Laurent Guyénot, a noted analyst of the Jewish world domination project, offers a different viewpoint—and discusses “Lagging behind history: Israel’s failure to catch up with the Weltgeist.”

Rough Transcript

I'm Kevin Barrett, broadcasting live on Revolution.Radio every Friday evening here in Morocco, midday in the U.S.of A. And whatever time it may be, wherever you are, Revolution.Radio is the ultimate free speech network.

I got canceled by Stripe recently. If people can help out i would greatly appreciate that. I'm going to start posting my Paypal button, as long as I still have Paypal, at truthjihad.com and KevinBarrett.substack.com

So let's get going with the second hour. Mees Baaijen will be coming on, and then Laurent Guyenot after that. Mees Baaijen is the author of The Predators vs. the People: The Big Picture of the 500-Year Secret War Against Humanity. And he has a new article out called The Project for World Domination Is Not Jewish, Nor Is It American. And so what is it then? Well, let's ask Mees Baaijen.

There may be multiple projects for world domination out there, of course. As that 80s band was saying, Everybody Wants to Rule the World. There's a good Patti Smith cover of that. But there is a Jewish project as well as various other ones, presumably. And Laurent is an expert on the Jewish one and where that comes from—the ideological roots, the cultural roots and the political identitarian roots of this Jewish world domination project.

If you're Jewish, you can go to Amsterdam and riot and attack people, and then the global media will portray you as the victim. If you're Jewish, you can slaughter people in the worst genocide in human history that's being livestreamed 24-7-365 and you can portray yourself as the victim and have most of the Western media largely go along with that.

Hello, Mees. Is that you?

Mees Baaijen: Yes, Kevin. Just when you started, the electricity went down. What I can do is pick up a battery here upstairs and put the modem on the battery. It will take me only a minute.

Kevin Barrett: That's interesting. First, we had Captain Dan Hanley in Pakistan going down because his internet went out. Now we have Mees—where are you exactly, Mees?

Mees Baaijen: In Costa Rica.

Kevin Barrett: Okay. So Mees is in Costa Rica and he's lost his electricity. I keep telling my American friends they need to move to a civilized country like Morocco. Maybe I need to tell my Pakistani and Costa Rican friends the same thing. We have reasonably reliable electricity and internet here in Saidia, Morocco. And this is not even the most developed part of Morocco. Over in western Morocco, Casablanca, Rabat, Fez, Marrakesh—they've got a Buraq high-speed rail train. They've got way better trains than America has. They've got all kinds of development going on over there. They're getting ready for hosting the World Cup in 2030. Western Morocco is really happening. But even here in "backwards" Eastern Morocco, we're doing okay in terms of infrastructure. Hats off to the Moroccans.

(While we wait for Mees) let's talk a little bit about about Mees Baaijan and Laurent. Mees has looked at finance as the root of the power that has allowed this global domination project to do what it's doing. And that makes a lot of sense, because whoever controls the financial levers is in position to buy and sell...well, people, among other things, and their technology.

And we've seen this historical rise of finance. And now it's not really so much useful capitalist finance, people who are using their money to build useful things. Elon Musk says he's doing that. Maybe he's an example of that old fashioned kind Henry Ford style industrial capitalism using money to actually build stuff.

But now there's this big global casino style finance of people who manage to just keep increasing their fortunes without doing anything productive. And that basically gives them free money. And free money is what gives you control. That is, whoever is controlling us, that's their job. And so they can't be out there working and doing something productive to have to make their money because that would then consume all their time and effort.

Instead, they need some source of free money to just keep flowing in in vast quantities while they go about their business of controlling us. And the various sources of free money that these people use would be, number one, interest. If you have a huge pile of money and you can make a lot of interest on it without doing anything, then you've got that free source of income that you can use to build a control system.

And likewise, oil is like that. Oil costs pennies to get out of the ground, and then you sell the barrel for $100 or whatever it is.

Drugs are the same thing. It costs pennies to produce the drugs, and then you sell them for 10,000% markup. It's basically free money. And so that's why we have CIA and other intelligence sources working with organized crime to dominate the illegal drug sector with its money laundering. They were laundering a trillion and a half dollars a year back when they took over Afghanistan in 2002 to get the drug pipeline going again.

And so all of these sources of free money, whether it's owning the money printing presses and getting interest on the money that you loan into existence with interest, which is what the financial cartel does, whether it's producing energy for pennies and selling it for $100 a barrel like the oil industry does, whether it's the military sector building gold-plated toilet seats. Basically, they're getting free money. And they get free (tax) money, and then their job then is to build stuff to kill and control people. Sof course, they're part of this control system.

So all of these folks who've engineered ways of having free money without having to do any productive work for it, then using that money to exert control over us and to squeeze more and more wealth out of us—that's the control system.

Is it Jewish? That's the question that Mies raises with his new article "The Project for World Domination Is Not Jewish, Nor Is It American." He argues that we're talking about a bankster elite that isn't really rooted in any nationality or ethnicity, but has been going on since Venice, many centuries ago.

That's an interesting perspective. It has a little bit in common with that of people like Mujahid Kamran http://www.mujahidkamran.com  the Pakistani physicist that I've had on the show quite a bit to talk about his research.

Then Lauren Guyenot will be coming on pretty soon. Laurent famously has looked at the ethnic Jewish political identity aspect of of the world control system we've seen getting cemented into place over the past century. And he thinks there is a significant Jewish component to it, based on cultural conditioning.

We're not talking racism here, folks. It's not about Jewish DNA. It's about the memes, not the genes. It's about the cultural control system that goes with Jewish identity politics, which has evolved from the Jewish religion, which was itself a kind of a control system. All of this has created today's Jewish-identity-based ethnic group that is fanatically ethnocentric, that uses ethnic nepotism to gain control of key nodes like media and finance and to promote its own interests.

And that's why basically Israel rules the world by ruling the United States, in the view of people like Laurent Guyenot. But Mees Baaijen has a slightly different view, and he's back with his camera on. Hey, welcome, Mees. How are you doing?

Mees Baaijen: We are on battery now. It should be safe.

Kevin Barrett: All right. We only have 15 minutes now until Laurent Guyenot comes on. So let's be succinct and describe why the project for world domination is not Jewish, nor is it American. I just very, very briefly summarized Laurent Guyenot's work on the roots of Jewish identity politics through the Jewish religion. And the upshot of that is that this particular cultural control system has created a people who are fanatically ethnocentric, heavily manipulated by their leaders, and very talented at things like long distance trade, finance, and propaganda. They have very high verbal IQs and a fair bit of number skills useful with handling money.

And so Jews have become greatly overrepresented in finance and media, the two key nodes of social control. And being fanatically ethnocentric, they have used ethnic nepotism to constantly increase their power. And today, that's why we have Israel getting away with complete genocide, with the West enabling it and handing Israel all of the money to do it, and anybody who criticizes it is going to be de-platformed and never allowed to work in this town again.

In other words, we have basically a Jewish global dictatorship. The Jews are committing genocide against non-Jews in Palestine, laughing as they get away with it, proud of it, blatantly telling the whole world about it and bragging about it, and nobody can do anything about it.

So clearly, we have a genocidal Jewish global dictatorship today. That's my exaggerated version of Guyenot's argument.

Mees Baijen:  Yes, yes, yes. Well, on the first side, yes, this is the case. When you start studying the history, (you see) they have had a very dominant role, very overrepresented. But as I see it, there is a global... control system being developed since 500 years in a war against humanity by a few rich people who want to use the planet, the God-given planet, our God-given planet, for their own purposes, as their own enterprise, with us roaming there as their cattle.

And of course they were very interested in groups like the Jews, who have a cosmopolitan character — intelligent people, very efficient networks, etc. So they have been using and abusing them. The same goes, by the way, for the Catholic Church, also a very cosmopolitan institution, fully infiltrated by the same people.

And so they are used as a shield, as a fig leaf, or as a front or as a facade, especially for the more public functions. They're in the limelight because they are CEOs, ministers, etc. But many, if not all, countries and institutions in the world are now governed by the same people, but with, let's say, in Holland, Dutchmen in these roles, not Jews necessarily, with British people and French people and so on.

In my conclusion, even Iran, China, Russia— all these people are criminal proxies of this group that I call Global Mafia or Glafia.

Kevin Barrett: When you talk about the global mafia or Glafia, how does it reproduce itself? Most mafias, most organized crime syndicates or groups, do tend to have ethnic roots, and they basically defend their own ethnicity, and they manage to persist through ethnic nepotism. But this Glafia, you say, is sort of multi-ethnic or non-ethnic. So how does it recruit people and what keeps them together? Why do they trust each other?

Mees Baaijen: Yeah, they have developed an enormous proxy system that is everywhere, like the octopus that was often used on cartoons even like a century ago. So it doesn't matter for them who... Everybody has to collaborate, and everybody collaborates. All the ex-colonies have elites, which the Americans, who are menacing them now as the forced hegemon of this group, used to call "son of b*****s, but our sons of b*****s." All groups are involved in this, all groups.

And so they kill, you can also see it on the other side, they kill and they harm any group, even the Jews, or even more, maybe in some cases. The Jews, because of this project, suffer more than the others. One example was in the Second World War, where the bankers helped to set up Hitler. That's well documented now, and a new book will come out by Jim McGregor on this. And it's perfectly clear that the Americans and the British set up Hitler.

Kevin Barrett: There was certainly some big money betting on Hitler, and Hitler was actually very popular and made the cover as Time Magazine's Man of the Year. But again, my question, though, is how does the top level of this Glafia recruit? Whoever's in charge of it must be basically taking the baton from older Glafia leaders. How do they get trained and groomed and so on to take the baton and run Glafia?

Mees Baaijen: Well, that's a big question. It is a hierarchic system with with a core of very rich people, probably a few hundred families, including bankers, merchants, aristocrats, etc. And then comes this enormous proxy system, which is everywhere now,

And we've never seen it more clear than during COVID. Everywhere in the world, all institutions, with a few exceptions, were manipulated in the very same way. And how do they train them? A program like the Young Global Leaders is a recent example. But more than a century ago they set up the London School for Economics. And that was to train the future leaders of the future independent, so-called independent colonists.

And so they prepared this years before the operation. It's incredible. So those are a few examples.

They take their time. They have a very long-term strategy, like for the First and Second World War and the Communist Revolution. There was already a book in 1853, over 60 years before the First World War started, which outlined what was going to happen. It's called The New Rome, published in the United States by two authors. https://openlibrary.org/works/OL15293540W/The_New_Rome

And for what we are seeing now, what is by many people known as the Global Digital Prison. Brzezinski already wrote a book in 1970, Between the Two Ages https://www.amazon.com/Between-Two-Ages-Americas-Technetronic/dp/0313234981 . He outlined the system they were going to set up. And that means that they were already sure at that point that they could do it, technically speaking. So that's 50 years before today when they are trying to introduce this technology, for the reason that the big proxy system that they had before has become much too complex. They have to have their people everywhere, in governments, in institutions, in universities, in think tanks, et cetera. So that takes a lot of coordination. And that went rather well as long as they could control the narrative. But since the, especially since -and even more since COVID, they can't control the narrative anymore. Of course, they are trying to block the internet now, but that's a very big problem. And if you can get an autonomous, anonymous, centralized control system via electronics, computers, that's what they want to substitute for all these proxies.

Kevin Barrett: So it sounds like what you're describing is, in some ways, not so much the individual people responsible for this global mafia or Glafia, but the technological control system that they use, which is based in finance, and that now involves computers and other kinds of digital control of people. But that still raises that question: Why the long-term aspect of this? One can certainly see how there's a system by which nations and political entities are ruled, and even multiple powers that straddle the borders of nations, and that there are technologies of ruling that rulers always are going to use. But the notion that it's the same group of people that are using this control method everywhere, that they have basically the same people and their descendants, or people that they hand the baton down to through the generations, somehow part of that group...It's not clear why there would be such a group. And that's where I think Laurent Guyenot's hypothesis that there's a Jewish world control "conspiracy" rhymes more with common sense assumptions about the world.

Jewish religious ideology has always held out progeny as immortality. Whereas Christians and Muslims look to immortality in the next world, Jewish immortality is more and more wealth and power for your more and more children. "You can never have too many children and you can never have too much money." That's a classic summary of how (traditional) Jews see the world.

And their tribal mythology that Jews are destined to take over the world, which is their eschatology, together with their story of what life is really all about, which is Jews defending themselves against the crazy evil goyim, winning each battle — "they tried to kill us, we won, let's eat." Every single Jewish holiday follows the same pattern.

And then gradually working for that "immortality" through world control, meaning ever-increasing wealth and power for one's progeny, one's ethnic progeny, one's descendants...that's their immortality. That ideology would explain why people would work on an intergenerational project of world control. Whereas this notion of a glafia that just seems like a random bunch of people...Why would any of those people even care who's in control of the world in the next generation? They would have no reason to.

So anyway, let's bring on Laurent and see what he thinks.

He has a new article out arguing that the Bronze Age Jewish ideology that we're seeing on display in the genocide of Gaza is outmoded and that the Weltgeist or world spirit today is far beyond that. And we can look to a better future as the Gaza genocide disappears and is ultimately seen as some sort of Bronze Age relic, along with the Yahwist or Jewish ideology that produced it.

So, hey, welcome, Laurent. How are you?

Laurent Guyenot: Hi, Kevin. I'm fine. Thank you. Hello, Mees. Nice to meet you...

Kevin, you summarized my theory, which is not my theory, really. It's a quite widely shared theory. There is an interesting debate between two different visions of who controls the world and how they are organized. You quite accurately represented my view. And the point you brought up, Kevin, is, I think, interesting. It's like if we think of it as a mafia, then a mafia is basically a family business or clan business, an ethnic business, but actually very much family-centered.

The Jewish mafia calls themselves the Mishpukah which means the family. And so a mafia means people who,if they control the world, they want their own children to control the world after them, and their grandchildren and so on, and their cousins.

Anthropologically it's like this. Human beings, even (criminal) those human beings, they have children, they have wives, they have cousins, they have brothers. They are sons, they are fathers. So they have this family, and a basic need to transmit their power, their fortune, their connections, their social world and so on to their children. That's automatic.

So in this case, we need to ask what kind of family, what kind of clan, what kind of ethnic background they have. And I strongly believe there is a...There might be different mafias, but actually, if we talk about the mafia in a literal sense in America, there was a Sicilian mafia and there was a Jewish mafia. But if you study this world, you quickly come up to the conclusion that the Jewish mafia is really on top. This was actually made...not very clear, but at least implicitly clear by the film The Godfather by Coppola.

Similarly, if we talk about not just the criminal networks—the mafia in the literal sense—but in a sense of the global network trying to control the world, I tend to think it's the same. The Jewish mafia is on top of others. There might be others too.

The other model to understand who's controlling us is not the mafia, but the Freemasonry model. Because Freemasons are not necessarily clannish. They introduce each other, not basically on a nepotistic basis—of course there is always a little bit of that, they bring their cousins in—but it's not supposed to be based on blood relationships. It's supposed to be based on just ideological connection.

So that's a possibility. The question is: Is it more of (an ethnic) mafia network or is it more a Freemasonry network of people who have a similar ideology, a similar purpose to change the world, to dominate the world?

But regarding this Freemasonry model, people who like it, people who envision the world like this, are generally people who underplay the Jewish element. For example, recently I've been writing a lot about the so-called "Satan worshipping pedophiles who control the world," according to one type of mythology which I consider quite naive. Because people imagine these Satan worshipping people as a kind of Freemasonry who meet in secret meetings and dress up with funny hats and kill babies and so on. But the point I was making in my articles is that these people cannot constitute a strong network, because a network that controls the world has to be connected by very, very intense loyalty. And such loyalty does not exist in Freemasonry, really. They're not that type. They can have influence, but they're not the type to commit crimes together. So I go for the mafia model and I go for the Jewish mafia on top of the other mafias.

Mees Baaijen: That's rather... I agree. It's... The core I talk about is dynastic families, clans who intermarry Jews with non-Jews, especially the British politicians, for example, of the 19th century. They use all kinds of mechanisms to hold everything together. And the ones that do not obey, I suppose they have their ways to control it. There are several mysterious Rothschild deaths, probably people that didn't want to continue within this system.

And it's a problem, of course, because there is the author of The Great Taking. https://www.linkedin.com/posts/andrewlafleche_the-great-taking-by-david-rogers-webb-is-activity-7165330975952986112-ztBD/  Maybe you've seen that? It's a book on how the financial world is organizing a takeover of all our properties in the coming years. And he is saying that for many of the descendants of these dynastic families, the ones who invented this whole plan centuries ago, it will be today very difficult for them to implement this. It's not an easy, it's a very difficult task. So, yeah, they have their own problems, but you can distinguish the Rothschilds, Rockefellers, and there are many of them, Italian families, because I think...between Genoa and Venice and the Jews expelled from Spain. They went to work together. They financed then the Dutch war for independence, etc. That's fairly clear. And then they went to England and then to America and now to China. That's why the title of my piece on the Jews is The Global Domination Project Is Not Jewish. Neither is it American.

Americans will be substituted. They will be used as useful idiots. They're interchangeable. If the Jews are interchangeable, we'll have to see.

I read your article today. And yes, I think Israel will end, but will Zionism or will this group end? You see them now active in all kinds of countries, Cyprus, Ukraine, Costa Rica to buy your properties. They are going to resettle after the...

Laurent Guyenot: Can I add one point to continue this debate on the identity of these people? Because if I listen to you, it sounds like a little bit an abstract model, because you don't name names. Of course, you just named the Rothschilds and the Rockefellers, and that's a good illustration of the debate. Is it the Rothschilds, who are Jewish, or the Rockefellers, who are not Jewish? Some people say they are, but basically they're not.

Mees Baaijen: They could be.

Laurent Guyenot: Well, they could be, but basically, you know, let's not speculate. So if we talk about the Jewish mafia, we have hundreds of names of people we could mention. People we know are controlling the elections with their money. We know they own the media. I don't have the list with me, but I think you would agree that we could name hundreds of names of people. And we know these people are intimately connected. They have a very strong ethnic identity. Anytime they feel accused as Jews, they're joined together, even though they might not like each other personally. But they form a very homogeneous organism when they are dealing with the outside world. We know these people, we can name them.

So when you talk about the bankers, then it becomes more difficult. And you are not naming names because it's more difficult. Anytime we want to name somebody, we end up with the Rockefellers. And then when you have said the Rockefellers, who else can you name?

So that is all very abstract. In my view, there is a very concrete model. We know who they are. We know how they work. We know that they have a common ideology. We know their ideology. Their ideology is based on the Bible, on Jewish chosenness, on Jewish superiority, Jewish paranoia,

Jewish feeling of being hated by the whole world for years, and so on and so on.

I've studied this and Kevin also knows very well, they have a very strong common ideology, which is a blood ideology, an ideology based on their sense of kinship.

Whereas the bankers, where is their ideology? I've never seen any credible definition or explanation of their supposed ideology, apart from the fact that they like money, they like control. But how can they be connected to each other? You don't connect, you don't create a network, just by a common ambition to be powerful, to get rich and to be on top of 99% of humankind. That's not an ideology strong enough to create a very powerful network.

Unless we understand that the Jewish are really—there's no other network like theirs. There's nothing compared to their capacity to unite, to work together as an octopus. You mentioned the octopus. The octopus is interesting because the octopus has one brain and then a brain in each tentacle.

And they're very much like this. But the tentacles don't fight each other. Tentacles, one can reach on the left and another one right. One can work in Hollywood and the other on Wall Street. But ultimately, they work together as an organism. And there is nothing else that you can compare to that.  The bankers cannot be considered like an organism in this way.

Mees Baaijen: Well, I'm not sure. I mean, if you say "We know who they are, we know how to deal with them," then for me, it's not (the real) mafia anymore. These must be proxies, because the ones that really are in the lead are not visible. They don't want to appear in lists of richest people in the world.

Laurent Guyenot: No. But Mayor Lansky—we know who he was, we know his name. Of course he was not advertising his crimes, but still we know who he was. Mayor Lansky was the top boss, the top godfather of the mafia in the 1950s and 60s. So even though they don't advertise how they work, we still know who they are.

Give me another name except the Rockefeller. Can you give me another name of these bankers who are ruling the world?We need names because if we don't have names, then we don't have evidence of this Freemasonic model of the ruling elite.

Mees Baaijen: There are more Jewish names and there are Italian names. And sure, there are also some aristocratic people involved. But the main argument I have against the thesis that it's a Jewish project is that they kill Jews by the millions. So the bankers with their proxies, they prepared the first world war and the second world war. They set up Hitler. You can already find that in Guido Preparata's book. I don't know if you know it.

Laurent Guyenot: No, but I know there was another famous book about the bankers who finance the Bolsheviks. And then the author wrote a second book about the bankers who financed Hitler. And I read both books by... Anthony Stutton. I found his book on the Bolsheviks absolutely convincing. But in fact, it's very well known that Bolsheviks were financed by New York bankers. But his book about bankers and especially Jewish bankers finance Hitler, I found it absolutely not convincing at all. Because all we can say is that American bankers worked with Germany. But everybody worked with Germany in the 1930s. Of course, some people helped Germany in the 1930s, obviously. Even the Bush family has been accused. Prescott Bush was investing in Germany in the 1930s, and he was blamed for it. But, you know, he was doing business.

The point you're making...it is true that these elite Jews, because when we talk about a Jewish network trying to control the world, in fact, we should think of them as the 1% Jews, just like we think about the 1% ruling the rest of the world. Even within the Jewish world, it's a little bit like this. It's 1% Jews who control the rest of the Jews, and through the rest of the Jews, they try to control the whole world.

So most Jews are manipulated by their own elite. This is actually a biblical pattern. In the Bible, it's always like this too. You see the Levites threatening and terrorizing the rest of the Jews. These 1% Jews, of course, will sacrifice other Jews, or let other Jews be sacrificed, when it's useful. But if we look closely, they generally try to avoid Jews being killed.

I have one famous example, Mordecai Vanunu. If he had not been Jewish, he would have been killed. He was not killed because explicitly, "we don't kill Jews." So they kidnapped him and put him in jail. And the reason why they say is explicitly, "we don't kill Jews." So they still have this code not to kill Jews. But they do, of course. The Jewish victims of World War II (were killed or allowed to die) to set up their Israeli state and so on.

Kevin Barrett: Well, Laurent, I think there are probably some Jews, powerful Jews, who are willing to kill other Jews–and others, such as the people in charge of Mossad when they kidnap Vanunu, who are not. Thomas Suarez's book, State of Terror, makes it clear that the early Haganah and these terrorist Irgun, these groups that became the IDF, were willing to kill their fellow Jews. The Jews that got in the way of the Zionist project were killed by these terrorists. So I think it depends. Jews, like everybody else, include different types of people.

Laurent Guyenot: That's an interesting debate. I feel it's a useful debate because a lot of people have difficulty understanding the Jewish mentality. And I think the only way to ultimately really understand the Jewish mentality is to understand that it's rooted in the Hebrew Bible. Because in the Hebrew Bible it's quite clear that they have a project. Their project is very explicitly written. And most Jews and especially Zionists, not only them, but especially Zionists—I showed in my book, From Yahweh to Zion that Kevin translated in English that they (the founders of Zionism) were very strongly biblical, which doesn't mean they were necessarily very religious.

Look at Netanyahu, still, just like Ben-Gurion before, he's quoting the Bible. When he wants to kill the people of Gaza, he's mentioning that they are like Amalek (the  non-Jewish tribe that the Biblical Yahweh orders the Jews to exterminate to the last man, woman, child, and even animal).

So the Bible is their project. The Bible is their ideology.

Mees Baaijen: All these people are atheists.

Laurent Guyenot: But that doesn't matter. They are biblical all the same. Because the Bible...

Mees Baaijen: But that's just a narrative. A false narrative. To convince others that they are...working to the Bible, because there are so many Christians.

Laurent Guyenot: Exactly. It's just a narrative. But if you read, for example, biographies of David Ben-Gurion, he's an archetypal example, he's very clear. His biographers always stress that he's an atheist. He ate pork for breakfast. He never went to the synagogue. He didn't know anything abobut the Talmud. But he was quoting the Bible all the time. ecause the Bible for many Jews is not a religious book. It's just the story of the Jewish people. In this story, there is one main character who is Yahweh, who is God. But people understand the Bible as the history of the Jewish people, the oldest people in the world, for 3000 years...This is their narrative.

When they founded the State of Israel in 1948 they explicitly, in their Declaration of Independence, declared this is the same Israel as the Israel founded by King David. For them, it's the same. So the Bible is a national narrative for them. The fact that there is a God in this narrative doesn't (matter that much).

Kevin Barrett: It's a mythology.

Laurent Guyenot: It's a mythology, but it gives them confidence that they are the only people who can control the world, because they have this strong common goal in a holy book.

It's very peculiar. That's why it's difficult for us to understand it, especially Christians who have been used to reading the Hebrew Bible allegorically as just announcing Christ and so on. So we don't understand how they read their Bible because they wrote it. So we're trying to tell them, well, you don't read it correctly. You have to put your Christian glasses and read it allegorically.

But they think... "get lost. We wrote the Bible. We know how to read it."

And they don't necessarily all read it as a religious book. That's a very important point which is hard to grasp. But it's very clear when you think about Ben-Gurion, when you think about Netanyahu. I don't think it's fair to say they're just pretending, they're just using the Bible as propaganda. I don't think it's fair to say that. I think they are really into it, you know, very deeply.

Mees Baaijen: If you see the role the Zionists played in the Second World War by rounding up the Jews in all of Europe—they collaborated with the Nazis. There are so many examples. How they got their Jews out of Iraq by terrorizing the Jews in Iraq to bring them to Palestine. It's totally against the spirit of the Bible.

Laurent Guyenot: No, no, no, it's not at all. In the Bible, you have a lot of passages exactly like this. The Levites, the special tribe that has no territory and lives off the tithes of the Jews settled in all the different cities...the Levites are the tribe of the priests. They threaten, they control, they murder, they slaughter thousands of Jews throughout the Bible. They are like the bodyguard of Moses.

And sometimes Moses says,for example in the golden calf episode, "you have to kill Jews who worship the golden calf."

So that's the Levites. The Levites have their sword. They're not just priests, they're warriors. And they slaughter about 3000 Jews, if I remember correctly.

So that happens all the time in the Bible. So (the Zionist terrorism against Jews to force them to emigrate to Israel) is fully biblical.

And another thing. During the Second World War, the Zionists wanted to bring all the Jews to Palestine. That was their priority. They prevented them from going anywhere else. they used the Holocaust. And, of course, the Holocaust was necessary for their project.

Kevin Barrett: Well, we're going to have to leave it there. People can learn more about it by reading Laurent Guyenot's great books including From Yahweh to Zion and Mees Baaijen's book The Predators vs. the People: The Big Picture of the 500-Year Secret War Against Humanity.

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 FFWN link

The replacement of “Genocide Joe” Biden with the even more genocidal Donald Trump is not going to help either Israel or the US evade the consequences of their crimes. State Department whistleblower J. Michael Springmann and I discuss the 2024 Genocide Selection above; below is an updated version of my recent Crescent International article. -KB

When a nation becomes known as a genocide perpetrator it suffers reputational damage. And reputational damage has economic consequences. A whole branch of the public relations industry specializes in such matters: Well-paid damage-control hacks are hired by wealthy individuals, corporations, and governments when reputations propping up fortunes are threatened.

By murdering tens of thousands of civilians in Gaza in a transparent effort to steal more and more Palestinian land, the illegitimate state of “Israel” has labeled itself genocidal in the eyes of the world. And a nation that is genocidal, like an individual who is a serial killer, cannot expect to be treated as a respectable member of the community. Just ask the Germans, who were labeled “genocidal” after World War II and have been suffering economic consequences ever since.[i]

Partisans of Israel have used ethnic nepotism to gain control over western media. Due to its disproportionate media influence, the zionist entity has thus far managed to evade critical scrutiny of its long list of outrageous crimes. But as social media and international media erode the power of the zionist monopoly on western mainstream media, Israel’s hasbara flacks have entered ever-more-desperate damage-control mode.

Their uphill battle is not winnable in the long term. Today, well-informed people in all of the world’s nearly 200 countries know that “Israel” is committing genocide in Gaza. That knowledge is now a permanent part of humanity’s collective consciousness, and will remain so for generations.

“Israel” has become an international pariah due to the Gaza genocide. And even if it stopped committing genocide and other crimes tomorrow, the damage has already been done. The zionist entity is tainted and unsustainable. The only question is the timing of its forthcoming collapse. And economic data reveal that the collapse could happen sooner rather than later.

Since Hamas’s “most successful military raid of this century” on October 7, 2023, the Israeli economy has lost roughly 50,000 businesses to bankruptcy. According to some estimates as many as 500,000 zionist squatters (aka settlers) have fled the country, leaving shuttered businesses and unfilled positions in their wake. What’s worse, from the zionist perspective, is that the people fleeing “Israel” are, by and large, its most productive citizens. Or make that “former citizens.” These disgruntled expatriates are the well-educated engineers, doctors, entrepreneurs, technicians, and above all, the computer professionals who run Israel’s high-tech sector, the most productive element of its economy. Shir Hever writes:

Prof. Dan Ben David, a famous economist argued that the Israeli economy is held together by 300,000 people (the senior staff in universities, tech companies, and hospitals). Once a significant portion of these people leave he says “We won’t become a third world country, we just won’t be anymore.”

So who will remain in “Israel” after its most highly-educated and productive citizens leave? Increasingly, the zionist entity is becoming dominated by millenarian-messianic religious fanatics. These are the people who vote for ultra-genocidal lunatics like Ben Gvir and Smotrich, and who make up the bulk of the illegal squatters on stolen West Bank land.

This ultra-zionist segment of the population is characterized by extremely high birthrates, with families routinely reaching double figures. They get little or no education in history, math, science, and other non-religious subjects. The ultra-zionists are exempt from military duty and often evince no interest in work, preferring to live on public subsidies.

Handouts to messianic settlers are “widely unpopular among secular Israelis but ultra-Orthodox parties are a key pillar of Netanyahu’s ruling coalition” according to the Washington Post. The messianic maniacs long for the day their Messiah will return, conquer the world for the Jews, and give every Jew 2800 non-Jewish slaves. The demographic explosion of these unproductive, parasitical lunatics spells doom for the zionist settler colony.

Though western economic institutions are disproportionately run by Jews sympathetic to “Israel,” that systemic bias can’t hide harsh reality. Foreign investments were down 60% by the first quarter of 2023 and have gone even lower since then. The zionist entity’s credit rating has sunk to almost junk-bond levels. Multinational corporations like Intel, which recently canceled its plan for a $25 billion dollar factory, are increasingly aware that the genocidal zionist entity has no future.

Desperate for funds, the zionists have begun swindling local governments in the United States by having their mobbed-up agents purchase worthless “Israel bonds” that will ultimately be paid for by US taxpayers. The worst offender, Florida’s Palm Beach County, is now facing a lawsuit of epic proportions.

Proverbial wisdom has it that if you find yourself deep in a hole, you should stop digging. But the deeper the hole gets, the faster the zionists dig. When I wrote the original version of this article on October 21, 2024, “Israel” had all but announced plans to launch a huge and devastating attack on Iran. Israeli leaders vaunted their plans to destroy Iran’s nuclear program, while others hinted they might “only” destroy oil refineries and other energy infrastructure. But when the attack finally came on October 26, it was anticlimactic. Israeli planes were forced to turn back before entering Iranian airspace, reportedly after being locked onto by a new Iranian air defense system, and their standoff missiles killed four soldiers and damaged radar systems. Iran says it will retaliate with a “crushing response…involving more weapons and more powerful warheads than the 1 October attack…the new barrage would come between Tuesday’s US elections and the inauguration of the next US president in January.”

In the wake of the upcoming (November or December) Iranian retaliation against Israel, which will be larger and more destructive than the two previous Iranian rocket barrages, the Zionists will once again threaten to target Iranian leadership, nuclear, or energy facilities. But if Tel Aviv conducts a major attack by targeting Iranian leadership, nuclear facilities, or energy infrastructure, the Iranian response—even a limited one—could push the zionist settler colony off the cliff.[ii]

If the zionists attack Iran’s nuclear facilities, Iran will almost certainly retaliate in kind. The sight of Iranian rockets pulverizing Israeli nuclear sites, with ensuing concerns about radiation, would accelerate the flight of the zionist entity’s most productive citizens and intensify the financial world’s disinclination to invest in an obviously doomed settler colony. And since Iran would likely react to an Israeli attack on its nuclear facilities by changing its principled anti-WMD stance and quickly developing and deploying nuclear weapons, thereby destroying the zionists’ regional monopoly, such an attack would amount to raising a self-inflicted radioactive mushroom cloud of doom over the zionist entity. (Indeed, it is not unlikely that Iran has already secretly changed its doctrine and now has a covert nuclear weapons capability waiting to be announced in the wake of regional escalation.)

The Biden regime, knowing this, has succeeded in convincing “Israel” to refrain from attacking Iran’s nuclear facilities. But even if the zionists “only” attack Iran’s leadership or energy infrastructure, the response could be just as devastating. Iran has demonstrated its ability to defeat the so-called Iron Dome and land its missiles, beginning with hypersonic ones, anywhere it likes inside “Israel.” And if the zionists attack Iran’s leadership or infrastructure, Iran will likely target the Achilles heels of the zionist energy grid. In a worst case (for the zionists) scenario, “Israel” could lose most of its transformers and find itself without reliable electricity for up to two years.

Any Axis of Resistance attack on Israel’s energy infrastructure would intensify already-existing vulnerabilities. Shir Hever writes:

The biggest supplier of coal to Israel is Colombia which announced that it would suspend coal shipments to Israel as long as the genocide was ongoing. After Colombia the next two biggest suppliers are South Africa and Russia. Without reliable and continuous electricity Israel will no longer be able to pretend to be a developed economy. Server farms do not work without 24-hour power and no one knows how many blackouts the Israeli high-tech sector could potentially survive.

If South Africa and Russia follow Columbia and cut off Israel’s coal supply, pressure on Turkey will mount to do the same to the zionists’ oil supplies. “Israel” is running its genocide on oil from the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan pipeline, which Erdogan is under pressure to turn off. One way or another, the lights in “Israel” will soon be going out.

The election of the uber-genocidal Donald “finish the job” Trump may hasten the process of Israel’s destruction. Trump, true to his promises to Miriam Adelson and other poorly-informed and emotionally-overwrought ultra-zionists, will likely give Netanyahu enough rope to hang himself and his genocidal settler colony. By wading ever-deeper into a conflict he can’t possibly win, Netanyahu, obeying orders from messiah-awaiters Smotrich and Ben Gvir, is courting national suicide. And even rabid-Zionist-owned Trump won’t be able to save Israel from its own hubris. If the US doesn’t sever its bonds with the Zionists and cut its losses, it too will go down.

The zionists think they can terrorize the world into submission in perpetuity. But reputational damage will gradually erode their impunity and impose accountability. Israelis, due to their own actions, have become global pariahs. Genocidal war criminals, they are despised wherever they go. No-one wants to deal with them, and no-one thinks they have a future. The economic blowback from their crimes will doom the blood-soaked settler colony and finally end its abominations in the Holy Land of Palestine.

[i] Germany was a genocide victim as well as perpetrator. Millions of Germans were murdered by the partially-implemented Morgenthau plan and by ethnic cleansings orchestrated by the Jewish-dominated US and Soviet occupiers in the wake of World War II. Today’s emasculated Holocaust-reparations-paying Lesser Germany, whose economy was devasted by its American masters’ destruction of the Nordstream pipeline, is a pale shadow, both economically and culturally, of what a sovereign Germany would have become. For more information on the anti-German holocaust see Thomas Goodrich’s Hellstorm and James Bacque’s Other Losses.

[ii] Most Zionist settlers, especially those who are educated and economically productive, are (1) rootless cosmopolitans who could live reasonably well in any large Western city, and (2) relatively intolerant of pain and insecurity. By initiating a long-term genocidal war that will inevitably make “Israel” the target of billions of people’s wrath for generations, the Zionist entity’s leaders are rendering the colonists’ lives insecure, and inadvertently “cleansing” Occupied Palestine of the very people who make the settler colony economically sustainable.

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

Were the media's lies about who was responsible for the genocidal Zionist scum getting themselves beat up in Amsterdam even worse than that same media's lies about the Holocaust? Probably not. But they were still pretty bad.

Here is a timeline of the “new Holocaust” in Amsterdam.

Fortunately the senile American president, Joe Biden, noticed that another Holocaust had occurred, and had the courage to speak out against it.

“The Antisemitic attacks on Israeli soccer fans in Amsterdam are despicable and echo dark moments in history when Jews were persecuted,” Biden wrote in a statement shared on social platform X. “Specifically, they remind me of the time when six million Jews were herded into gas chambers. But actually, this was worse. The gas chambers were at least designed to put people out of their misery quickly and painlessly. But Thursday night in Amsterdam, Jews were made to experience pain. Some of them actually cried out in pain—their own pain, not others’! What was done to those Jewish soccer hooligans was horrible to watch—much worse than the slow deaths of tens of thousands of women and children starved and crushed to death in Gaza. And you know why it was worse? Because they’re Jews, that’s why.”

Meanwhile, the ADL has ordered the US Congress to enact legislation appropriating six trillion dollars for the construction of Amsterdam Soccer Hooligan Holocaust Museums in every city in the Western world. Biden is expected to sign the bill into law by next Thursday.

In Hollywood, director Steven Spielberg and fourteen other leading directors and producers announced plans to make more than a dozen feature films memorializing the Amsterdam Soccer Hooligan Holocaust. In Brussels, the European Parliament passed a bill authorizing the payment of six million Euros in reparations to each Amsterdam Soccer Hooligan Holocaust survivor, as well as to all the family members of survivors, distant relations of family members of survivors, and any Jews who fancy themselves distantly related to the distant family members of the distant family members of the survivors. In Tel Aviv, Binyamin Netanyahu, flanked by two orangutans named Smotrich and Ben Gvir, vowed revenge, officially declaring the Dutch people Amalek and vowing that Amsterdam would soon look like Gaza and that the Dutch must be exterminated to every last man, woman, child, and even household pet.

Donald Trump, interrupted at Mar-a-Lago while performing favors for Jewish donors, said he wasn’t sure about the Dutch, much less the Gazans, but that he would try to do something to save the household pets.

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