Truth Jihad Radio

Rumble link Bitchute link

Captain Dan Hanley, founder of 9/11 Pilot Whistleblowers, drew half a million views and 7,000 comments on Redacted last month—a sign of the widespread mistrust of the 9/11 official story that is the biggest reason Americans now hate the media enough to elect an anti-media president. Captain Hanley recently wrote to the House Government Oversight Committee. Extract from his letter:

9/11 was the greatest crime ever committed on American soil in its history, a crime that has never been criminally investigated. Thanks to 9/11 Commission Executive Director Philip Zelikow, not one single pilot was permitted to testify before the 9/11 Commission as to the absurdity of the ludicrous notion that the alleged Muslim hijackers piloted the aircraft. There are countless expert witness pilots in our organization who are willing to step forth with testimony supporting our allegation if given the opportunity to do so before an open congressional hearing.

Captain Dan Hanley commenced flying 56 years ago in 1968 at age 19, first as a civilian pilot and then 10 years as a naval aviator and finally for 25 years as a United Airlines pilot. Over a 35-year career span he flew 15 different aircraft accruing over 20,000 flight hours. He currently serves as director and international public spokesperson for a global grassroots effort called 9/11 Pilot Whistleblowers. He presently resides in Islamabad, Pakistan where he has lived for the past 14 years with his Pakistani wife.

YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@911pilots4/videosX/Twitter: https://x.com/danhanley4

Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/dan.hanley.771/

Contact:  https://911pilots.org/contact-us/

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

In the spring of 2016 hardly anyone thought Donald Trump had a chance of winning the presidency. Musa al-Gharbi and I were among those “hardly anybodys.” We agreed, in a prescient March 27 interview (write-up here) that the “fixed” selection of Hillary Clinton by Democratic Party elites was a sign that Trump would be the next president.

In retrospect, it was obvious. Clinton was such a weak candidate, and such a perfect foil for Trump, that no Democrat with a lick of political common sense would have supported her if they really wanted to keep Trump out of the White House. Obviously somebody had dictated that the Democrats were going to throw the race to Trump. Later, when President Trump followed Netanyahu’s orders to murder General Soleimani, the greatest military hero of his generation and likely future president of Iran, and move the US embassy to Jerusalem while forcing abnormalization on the US vassals in West Asia…well, it wasn’t hard to figure out who was in charge of the 2016 presidential selection process.

2024 was almost an exact replay of 2016. Once again, the Democrats nominated a guaranteed loser. Kamala Harris had already distinguished herself as the most spectacularly unsuccessful presidential candidate in all of US history. As Ron Unz wrote last summer:

Biden’s departure quickly elevated Vice President Kamala Harris as the likely name to replace him on the ballot and within a few days she attracted enough pledged delegates to confirm her nomination. But although the main reason for Biden’s removal had been his perceived political weakness against Trump, polls during most of 2024 had shown that Harris was just as unpopular as Biden…Entering the presidential primaries in January 2019, she quickly raised more money than any candidate other than maverick socialist Sen. Bernie Sanders. With Sanders considered totally unacceptable by the party leadership, Harris therefore seemed ideally positioned for the nomination. But although Harris was enormously popular among the wealthy elite who dominated the party machinery, she proved so remarkably unpopular among actual Democratic voters that she abandoned the race after just ten months.

For decades, the byword for failed presidential candidacies had been the humiliating 1980 Republican campaign of former Texas Gov. John Connolly, who raised and spent $11 million—an unprecedented sum in that era—while only winning a single delegate. But Harris broke that longstanding record, with her dismal polling numbers leading her to drop out of the 2020 race before the first ballots were even cast in Iowa and thus gaining not a single delegate for the $43 million that she had raised and spent. So Harris ranked as perhaps the least successful presidential contender in all of American history.

Hillary Clinton may be nefarious and unpleasant, but at least she’s intelligent and experienced. No amount of media puffery could hide Kamala Harris’s obvious incompetence. She makes Trump look almost bright by comparison.

And then there is the genocide factor. Just as Hillary was the “b***h from hell” who cackled gleefully over the horrific murder of Qaddafi, so Harris appeared another “b***h from hell” who has been mindlessly cackling her way through the ugliest genocide in human history, presided over by her own administration.

Who selected Harris as the Democratic nominee? Certainly not the voters. On the contrary, the hidden hand of the central committee of oligarchs in charge of the Democratic Party orchestrated her coronation as the sure-to-lose nominee, in a totally opaque process that culminated with big media unanimously announcing that the fix was in.

When Biden withdrew, obviously the voters should have selected his replacement. Had they done so, Harris would have come in close to last, as she did in the 2019-2020 cycle. But the Democratic voters couldn’t be trusted. The Zionist oligarchs had other plans. They needed another Hillary—a candidate that Trump could plausibly beat.

As I wrote October 22nd for this month’s Crescent Magazine:

Experts on the weaknesses of US election systems like Jonathan Simon persuasively argue that those positioned to program or hack voting machines can easily determine the outcome of close elections. Since the 2024 election is expected to be extremely close, possibly coming down to a few tens of thousands of votes in key swing states, it seems likely that the president will be selected, not elected, and that the people doing the selecting will be oligarchs who own the voting machine companies.

So whom will they select? Historically, the computerized-vote-fraudster oligarchs have leaned Republican. And since Trump is the preferred candidate of organized crime, whose upper financial echelons are dominated by Zionist Jews, it seems likely that the victor will be the candidate the liberal media tells us will blow up democracy and end the world as we know it.

That prediction was right on the money.

Transcript of this morning’s Press TV interview

Trump has declared victory. The Republican former president is ahead so far, as vote counting is still underway in few remaining states. He's won Georgia, North Carolina, and projections have also shown that he's won Pennsylvania. Based on electoral college votes, Trump has 51% of the votes secured.

Well, for further insight on the results coming out of the U.S. presidential election, we're now joined by Maryam Azarchehr, who's with us in our studios from the Press TV Iran desk. Also, we have Kevin Barrett, joining us from Saidiya, Morocco. Let's start off with Maryam here in Tehran. Maryam, let's talk a little bit more about the results that we've seen. It's projected that Donald Trump will be the 47th president of the United States. Talk to us about the ramifications, the ripple effects that we'll be seeing in the region as the Israeli crimes are ongoing in the Gaza Strip in Lebanon. And also, if you may talk to us about the effect that it will have with regards to the Islamic Republic of Iran.

Maryam Azarchehr: Thank you so much. With the election and what happened with Trump today, the US has not only lost the Western front—basically the Western hegemonic front is not only losing militarily in the region, but it's also losing culturally. Because we have a person who has 34 convictions inside his own country alone.

You talk about the assassination of Commander General Qasem Soleimani, about the support of terrorism by every U.S. president. It really doesn't make a difference between Republican or Democrats. But what it shows to the world—they are always using all kinds of media, using Hollywood, to show the U.S. as if it was on some kind of moral high ground, as if it was democratic.

There were American values. There was the American dream. But the person they have as president, because of his convictions, it couldn't even work. And in order to gain more votes, he went and spent some time at McDonald's pretending he would understand the pain of the regular workers. He wouldn't even be able to be hired by McDonald's because of all the criminal convictions he has. And now he's the president of the United States.

The biggest problem, the biggest threat to the people in our region has not only been the American military and all the American military bases in our region, and not only the terrorists they have created and funded in the region, like Daesh, also known as ISIS. There are so many threats to our people because of the Western hegemonic front. But a major threat also was them believing the propaganda. Because the Western propaganda is always telling people, "if you are like us, you would have a better country, you would have a better world," basically setting the U.S. as an example for the world. And I think at this point, with Trump winning, there is really nobody who knows anything about politics, about anything, who would look at the U.S. as a model of anything. It is really not a model of democracy.

There's the Israeli genocide in Gaza. They've had (American) support for (genocide) for decades, but now people see it openly. And so probably the most significant effect it has for the people is to further understand this whole false propaganda about the US.

And now they see it on different levels, right? It's on the moral level, the complete downfall of the U.S. regime. On the military level, they haven't been able to destroy the resistance in the region.

So all of this Western Hegemonic Front together, supporting the Zionist regime with all the weapons they had, they have not been able to destroy the resistance with its thousands of resistant fighters.

And in terms of economy, it's always the U.S. enforcing sanctions on different countries and also punishing other countries. Not only is Iran constantly sanctioned, as it has been for over four decades, but it's also been sanctioned by other U.S. allies because the the U.S. will punish other countries that will do business with Iran.

But the U.S. hasn't even been under any sanctions, and the people are suffering in terms of economy. The highest GDP in the world, and then we have one out of every five kids is food insecure in the U.S. So many people hungry, so many people homeless.

So the U.S. has lost its ability to be a model in anything, much less morality.

Let's cross over to Kevin Barrett, who's with us from Saadia in Morocco. Give us your thoughts, please, on the outcome of the U.S. presidential race. Which of the policies, in your opinion, play the most significant role in this election?

The issue of foreign policy. foreign spending overseas, the Gaza genocide pumping all the money into the Russia-Ukraine conflict, and of course, the unequivocal support for the Israeli regime. These were all major factors, weren't they?

Kevin Barrett: I think that what we saw was a complete rejection of the status quo and the media brainwashing machine in particular. The American people have been systematically lied to over the years and the decades and told a story about how their system works and how their country works. It's just not true. The United States has not been a democratic republic since World War II. It's been an empire. And that empire is run by a combination of military intelligence people and oligarchs.

They've kept the formality of the democratic system. As Michael Glennon writes in his book, National Security and the Double Government, the United States today is comparable to how the United Kingdom or Britain was in the 19th century, and even today to some extent, when they had a royal family, a king, a queen, etc., who was supposedly running the government. But in fact, all real power had slipped away, and it had become just pageantry and spectacle, bread and circuses.

And American democracy is like that. It's just pageantry and spectacle. It's bread and circuses. The voters don't decide anything, and their votes aren't even counted properly. It's very, very important for those of us speaking in free media outlets to point out that, as Jimmy Carter, the former American president, has repeatedly stated, American elections are so corrupt that they're not even worth monitoring.

Since 2002 the votes have been counted by voting machines that are eminently hackable, and their black box software is controlled by a handful of Republican billionaires. And there has been a consistent shift towards the Republican party since then, with Republican candidates for national offices benefiting in the neighborhood of an average of two to four percent over what the polls show they should be getting.

I'm not saying that the democratic oligarchs don't cheat either. But the point is that these election results are really selection results. The United States is governed by a coalition of oligarchs who sometimes are feuding with each other, and sometimes uniting in defense of their common interests.

And they selected Donald Trump. He wasn't elected by the voters. Yes, it's possible that a few percentage points of Americans who absolutely otherwise would have voted for Harris decided not to because they opposed genocide. That could have had some kind of effect. That would be true if the votes were counted properly. But we can't even have confidence that our votes are counted properly.

People should read about the election integrity movement. Jonathan Simon has written about this in his book Code Red. But I think that the American people may not have awakened to that. They may not have awakened to the repeated frauds that are being perpetrated on them by the Zionist oligarchs who run their country. But they know that they're being lied to at least. And so that's why they're voting for a multiple convicted felon, that their most prestigious media outlets and all of their academies and universities, all of their elites are telling him that this man is a criminal and he's a potential Hitler and so on. That's what they're being told day and night by the most prestigious media and the most prestigious people with cultural capital in the United States.

And yet a lot of Americans support Trump. We don't know what the real numbers are. Again, the voting machines are completely untrustworthy. But it's clear that about half the American people who would actually be gullible enough to go vote would be quite likely to vote for Trump. And that shows that those people have lost confidence in the brainwashing system that's pushing their buttons and trying to make them drool on command like Pavlov's dog.

I think that the consensus of the oligarchs this time was indeed to select Trump as president. The reason was that given the state of extreme strife and division and acrimony between the red and blue camps in the United States, that if they were to select Harris, that the Trump side, the Trump supporters, would revolt much more violently than they did in 2020. And the country would become ungovernable, and the empire would become unsustainable.

So I think they felt that they had little choice but to put in Trump. And Trump's economic policies will benefit the wealthy, the billionaires, more than Harris's would.

And I think that they expect that if they have to wage military war on the various fronts where they're desperately trying to sustain their empire, that a Harris presidency would not convince the kind of Americans who are willing to sign up for the military to go and fight in foreign countries, whereas they're hoping that Trump can or could, so they can still use the American military as a big stick to threaten the world with.

So I think that the oligarchs, the plurality of oligarchs, selected Trump. Who knows to what extent these voting machines, especially in the key swing states, were programmed. I expect to be interviewing Jonathan Simon and other election integrity experts on my podcast to try to get to the bottom of that.

But once again, there was a huge divergence between the polls and the results. And once again, as always, that divergence massively favors the Republican Party. And is it a coincidence that most of the voting machine companies are owned by Republican Zionist billionaires? I don't think so.

Right. And let's go back to Maryam, who's with us in her studio. Mariam, many of our guests, including Mr. Barrett right now, basically are saying that this system of voting in the United States, it's rigged. It's not a democracy. It's an oligarchy. I want you to break that down for us a little bit about the system that we're seeing of the ballot box in the United States. And just to end it on a quote from the famed George Galloway, which we mentioned earlier: He said, it's not a democracy if you need a billion dollars to run.

Maryam Azarchehr: Exactly. As you know, a lot of even the people who do vote, and they actually believe that their voting makes any difference at all, which it doesn't, are fooled by what's called name recognition. They vote for the names they have heard. And who's name gets to be out there more is all based on money. Whoever has major money and whoever has the support of the most capitalists behind them wins. And as a result, those capitalists, those who gave that major money to these candidates, later expect them to pass policies that are very much against the interests of the American people and for the interests of those capitalists. This is what happens at the end: whoever has the most money will be heard more.

There are other people signing up as candidates every term. But they don't stand a chance. The third parties don't really stand a chance in the face of this two-party system that has only two front runners. And of course we know the type of individuals that they are. They have big money, they have big support of Zionist institutions like the AIPAC, and that's the reason they even get to be seen and heard.

So whoever wins, really, it's the Israeli regime that wins. It doesn't make a difference in that sense. And of course, it depends on a variety of different factors. But in the end, we had the supporters of Trump, the supporters of Kamala, and each side also is made afraid of what would happen if the other one won the election. So a lot of people are coming to understand that it's not the interests of the poor, it's not the interests of the middle class that are anywhere in this equation.

One thing that all of these voters had in common, for instance, is that over 50% of Americans are against genocide. They have different views on how to deal with it. But they are proceasefire, at least. But none of this majority of voters, none of their voices were heard in either one of the candidates. Each candidate was competing in showing their allegiance to the Zionist regime. So what it really is, is a vote for a very rich minority by a large number of people who actually—a lot of them are suffering in all kinds of ways in terms of economy, with all the money being spent in invasions and these wars instigated by the US regime. It's the people suffering, it's the people not being able to get an education.

A lot of people, a lot of soldiers, US soldiers, when they talk about why they joined the army, they joined the army to be able to pay for their college, to be able to pay for their rents, to be able to pay for an education that should be everybody's right, honestly. The right to education is not something that should be denied. Or the right to food. When the UN was talking about the right to food, there's only one country and one illegal entity that basically voted against the UN resolution of food being a human right. The country was the U.S., and the illegal entity was the Israeli regime.

So these people are basically bearing the burden of whoever they vote for. And they will not be counted for anything, but they have heard these names. And of course, the media machine, the propaganda machine, if you see there were even different Americans talking about how on Instagram, Instagram was sending them alerts and messages and basically trying to get them to vote, to go out and vote, even though this voting in the end will not basically affect the average American.

Let's just get one last question in for Mr. Barrett as well. Mr. Barrett, it's basically the Republicans and the Democrats, they fight tooth and nail over every issue. domestic policies, immigration, the economy, but they're always on the same page when it comes to the issue of the Israeli regime and the crimes that they've been committing against the Palestinians for over seven decades now. Why is that?

Kevin Barrett: Well, unfortunately, the Zionist oligarchs who represent somewhere between one third and one half of the richest billionaires in the United States—these people are ethnically Jewish, and they are fanatically ethnocentric. They are absolutely rabidly dedicated to their tribe crushing all other tribes, being the dominant tribe. And they're brought up with a kind of a paranoia that the whole world hates them and wants to throw them in gas chambers and drive them into the sea.

This is the mentality that these people, even highly educated people who become billionaires or who were born billionaires, have. Obviously, when one-third to one-half of American billionaires come from that ethnic background and are well-trained in ethnic nepotism, they are going to be able to totally control the country.

2% of the American big capitalist economy can totally control American foreign policy towards, let's say, Costa Rica. These are the United Fruit Company people because they have an interest there.

So the Jewish Zionist oligarchs have this very strong interest based on their psychopathological programming that they grew up with manipulating the United States to support the genocidal entity occupying Palestine. And because they have that kind of power, basically they own both parties. We saw that in this latest election. This is the most Zionist-dominated American election in all history, and it's coming in the middle of the worst well-documented genocide in all of human history. The Zionist donors gave—well, just one donor, Miriam Adelson, who is the heiress to Sheldon Adelson's organized crime gambling and alleged prostitution et cetera, outfit.

I'm told by contacts in the American intelligence community that the Adelson family does routinely send out hitmen to kill people when they feel they need to. These are criminals. These are mafiosi.

And yet Miriam Adelson gave Trump $100 million. One person representing an organized crime group gave Donald Trump $100 million for this election. And according to reports, Trump promised in return that he will rubber stamp the Zionist annexation of the West Bank. And AIPAC, the Zionist lobby, put more than $100 million into this election as well.

So they own the country. We need an American intifada to overthrow this Jewish Zionist tyranny that is driving the United States into the ground.

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

Alan Sabrosky returns to his “first Friday of the month” slot to discuss the burning question of whether or not it matters who wins next Tuesday’s election. Dr. Alan Sabrosky is the former Head of Strategic Studies at the US Army War College. He expresses his Jewish heritage via cuisine, not foreign policy.

Extract:

Alan Sabrosky: Do elections really matter? Not only in the United States, but in the Western world? I would say they don't. They really don't— (though) it is very likely that as you get away from the national election and national offices and get into state offices, that some of them matter. And when you get down to local offices, a lot of them do matter because they have a very direct impact on day-to-day life.

But in the grand scheme of things, if we're looking just at the United States, which is probably what we should do today—I don't think anyone else is foolish enough to schedule elections on November 5th at the same time as we're doing it… Do elections at the national level matter? You have two parties whose national offices and whose all leading national candidates, not just the two principal ones, but all capable-of-nomination candidates in both parties are subject to and owned by two factions of a national Jewish lobby.

And in case anyone says there is no such thing as a Jewish lobby, there are some 50 major Jewish organizations. There actually is a Jewish lobby. It has a website, very public about it. Its name is the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations, and it includes 48 to 50 organizations at any particular time, plus several affiliates. And among those 48 to 50 organizations are APAC, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, which is the master or mistress or whatever you do on that terms these days of Capitol Hill. And there’s the anti-defamation league, whose specialty is defamation of others… (to read the full transcript, click on "show transcript” at my Substack page.)

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

Note: I was just de-banked by Stripe—all Substack income removed. Please donate HERE.

Above is this week’s False Flag Weekly News, in which Cat McGuire and I discuss the election and other pressing concerns—including my loss of over three-quarters of my income a few days ago when Stripe de-banked me. That means paid subscribers to this Substack are no longer paying. (Stripe is Substack’s only payment processor.)

If you want me to keep doing this work, and indeed, to continue to access food, shelter, and cat food for Muse, please donate to my Paypal donation page. Recurring donations are especially appreciated. I assume the Zionist genocide perps are trying to cut off my Paypal, too, but it may take them awhile, since I’ve been a customer in good standing for 20 years, so please, use that Paypal donation page while you can! And if you can recommend a free speech payment processor, and/or the most user-friendly non-Zionist Bitcoin app, please drop a comment below.

This Substack will continue as usual, with all content free for everyone. I hope Substack will eventually find an alternative to genocide-supporting Stripe. Meanwhile, once again, the Zios have really pissed me off and rekindled my enthusiasm for (verbally) fighting them to the death.

-Kevin Barrett

PS Below is my new Crescent article.

Who Will “Win” the US Presidential Selection? And Does It Matter?

Crescent International

The genocide of Gaza keeps accelerating. An appalled world looks on in agony. The self-styled unipolar hegemon, the United States, continues to encourage and fund the genocide, supplying the perpetrators everything they need to continue the mass slaughter of helpless women and children.

The US pretends to be a democracy. Its president theoretically has the power to cut off aid to “Israel” and stop the genocide. If such were the case, the voters—who have supported an immediate and permanent ceasefire throughout the course of the now year-old Gaza genocide— ought to fire the genocide-enabling regime of Joe Biden and Kamala Harris and elect an anti-genocide president.

But mass media mind-control has convinced most Americans that there are only two choices: genocide perpetrator Kamala Harris, or the even more genocidal Donald Trump. Green Party candidate Jill Stein, who opposes the genocide, gets virtually no media coverage, so the brainwashed masses ignore her. The same is true of independent candidate Cornell West and Libertarian Chase Oliver.

Supporters of the two mainstream candidates argue about which one would be a “peace president.” Harris supporters point out that Trump is a reckless, irresponsible, ignorant, rabidly genocidal maniac who has urged Israel to “finish the job.” They claim that Harris, unlike Biden, might use American leverage to stop Netanyahu’s holocausts in Gaza and Lebanon.

Trump supporters argue that Harris is complicit in both the genocide of Gaza and the US-manufactured war on Russia through Ukraine. They insist that Trump’s willingness to buck the consensus of the national security state, and instead make bold moves based on personal diplomacy, offers more hope than Harris’s more conventional approach, which obviously isn’t working.

And then there are the accelerationists who think “Trump is so bad he’s good.” Trump’s recklessness and foolishness, they believe, could bring down the US empire relatively quickly. His quarrels with the managers of the national security state, and the American elite in general, will create fractiousness that might even lead to civil war. Consumed by chaos and internal strife, a Trump-led America will be in no position to keep paying for its 750 military bases around the world. And as the US is forced to withdraw under fire from West Asia, the genocidal settler colonial outpost in Occupied Palestine will inevitably implode.

Since the Republicans, including Trump, are so rabidly pro-Israel and so unabashed in their love of genocide, the Democratic establishment assumes that anti-genocide voters have no choice but to back Harris. But that assumption is mistaken. Since the accelerated genocide began in October 2023, Arab and Muslim voters’ support for the Democrats has “cratered.” Normally Arab-Americans support the Democrats by more than two-to-one. But a recent Arab News/Yougov poll found Trump actually leading Harris among that demographic, which will likely be decisive in the key swing state of Michigan. Al-Jazeera notes: “The poll is the latest warning to Democrats that President Joe Biden’s support for Israel’s war in Gaza could be putting his vice president’s election hopes in jeopardy ahead of the November 5 vote.” The Associated Press noted: “To say to Arab Americans ‘Trump is going to be worse’—what is worse than having members of your family killed? said Rima Meroueh director of the National Network for Arab American Communities.”

A two-month-old poll of American Muslims likewise found that the Biden regime’s complicity in the Gaza genocide could throw the election to Trump. That poll found that among America’s roughly 3.5 million registered Muslim voters, Kamala Harris and Jill Stein are tied with 29% support, far ahead of Trump’s 11%. If Harris opposed the Gaza genocide, it seems likely that she would gain most of those Jill Stein votes. But for Democrats, pleasing the party’s Jewish-zionist oligarch owners is apparently more important than winning elections.

The above perspectives assume that it matters who the president is. But since John F. Kennedy’s murder in November 1963, a still-unsolved crime in which Israel is the leading suspect, every American president has actively or tacitly supported most of Israel’s “totally mad” behavior. Though only Kennedy was “terminated with extreme prejudice,” Israel and its American assets likely played key roles in ensuring that Richard Nixon, Jimmy Carter, and George H.W. Bush did not complete two terms in office. (Though all three expressed obligatory support of Israel, Nixon was “anti-Semitic” and less than 100% pro-Israeli, Carter wanted to force Israel to accept peace, and Bush Sr. sold AIWACs to Saudi Arabia and failed to kowtow sufficiently to Tel Aviv, which led to the Israelis plotting against his life.)

Those who argue that it doesn’t matter who the president is cite books like Michael Glennon’s National Security and the Double Government, which makes a case that American imperial policy is dictated by a permanent national security state with presidents serving as mere window dressing. From that perspective, Israel has captured US Mideast policy not only through its domination of electoral politics, with pro-Israel Jews providing nearly half of all the bribes a.k.a. “campaign contributions,” but also by inserting its operatives into the highest levels of the permanent national security state.

Another reason not to vote is the problem of election integrity. Only 22% of Republicans and 44% of the general population believe their votes will be counted fairly, and though such beliefs are treated as damnable heresy by the mainstream media, historians know they are well-founded. Consider just a few of the many dubious US presidential election outcomes:

*Crooked backroom operators stole the presidency from Andrew Jackson in 1824 and Samuel Tilden in 1876.

*The Rothschilds ensured that only pro-war candidates would run in 1940 by murdering the Republican convention manager and inserting an obscure flunky, Wendell Wilkie, as the Republican nominee, as recounted in Gore Vidal’s The Golden Age.

*The Democratic organized crime machine stole the 1960 election by fraudulently handing Illinois and Texas to John F. Kennedy.

*Nixon (1968) and Reagan (1980) won the presidency thanks to secret treasonous deals with ostensible enemies.

*The 2000 and 2004 elections were likely stolen for George W. Bush through combinations of voter suppression and computerized voting machine fraud. (The IT guru who orchestrated the 2004 election theft, Mike Connell, died in a suspicious plane crash shortly before he was scheduled to testify against Bush campaign operative Karl Rove.)

*Israel made a deal with the Trump campaign to facilitate its 2016 victory, using various underhanded methods including voter-manipulating social media algorithms.

*The Democrats may have resorted to fraud to defeat Trump in 2020, as alleged by Trump and believed by the vast majority of Republicans.

Experts on the weaknesses of US election systems like Jonathan Simon persuasively argue that those positioned to program or hack voting machines can easily determine the outcome of close elections. Since the 2024 election is expected to be extremely close, possibly coming down to a few tens of thousands of votes in key swing states, it seems likely that the president will be selected, not elected, and that the people doing the selecting will be oligarchs who own the voting machine companies.

So whom will they select? Historically, the computerized-vote-fraudster oligarchs have leaned Republican. And since Trump is the preferred candidate of organized crime, whose upper financial echelons are dominated by Zionist Jews, it seems likely that the victor will be the candidate the liberal media tells us will blow up democracy and end the world as we know it.

Rabid genocide supporter Miriam Adelson has handed Trump $100 million in return for Trump’s promise to support Israel annexing the West Bank. So a Trump victory could put the US and Israel even more radically at odds with the whole world, especially West Asia and the Muslim-majority countries. If certified-genocide-perpetrator Israel were to proclaim that it had annexed the West Bank with the blessings of Trump, even the cowardly rulers of pro-abnormalization Arab nations would have no choice but to join an emerging pan-Islamic anti-zionist consensus, which would be universally supported by essentially all of the world’s nations except the US and its despicable orange-headed dictator. Such a move, in conjunction with Trump’s other clumsy and chaotic blunders, would likely hasten the demise of the US empire and its zionist occupier.

The Zio-American regime would collapse even faster if Trump were to make good on his threats to join Israel in all-out war on Iran. Like other recent US imperial wars only more so, a Zio-American attack on Iran would reveal the limitations of American hard power and end in frustration and defeat, out of which a fully multipolar world would emerge.

But will the permanent national security state allow Trump to quickly destroy the empire it worked so patiently to build? During Trump’s first term, the orange baboon was surrounded by apparatchiks who would steal executive orders from his desk in hopes that he would forget about them, which he generally did, according to Bob Woodward’s Fear: Trump in the White House.

But accelerationists tempted to vote for Trump in hopes of quickly collapsing the empire should keep in mind that a Harris regime, with its rainbow-flag-waving idolatry, could never succeed in rallying ordinary Americans to fight in imperial wars. It is not clear that the Democrats, despite their deference to the National Security State, will be able to outdo Trump in keeping Uncle Scam’s dying empire on life support.

Ultimately, voting for either major party candidate in this bogus “selection” would be an act of inveterate idiocy, and a signal of support for genocide. The dying US empire is an oligarchy, not a democracy, and there is no good reason to think its death could or should be hastened or postponed by way of casting a meaningless vote for a vapidly repulsive frontman or frontwoman.

As for me, I live in Morocco, thousands of miles from the nearest American voting booth, and have not bothered to request an absentee ballot. If I had, it would have been only to cast a protest vote by writing in the name of someone I respect, like Yahya Sinwar, Hassan Nasrallah, or Qassem Soleimani.

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

Ray McGinnis, author of the skeptical 9/11 book Unanswered Questions, discusses his new book Unjustified: The Freedom Convoy, the Emergencies Act and the Inquiry that Got It Wrong. Though it concerns events in Canada, McGinnis’s book is highly relevant to this week’s US presidential election. Trump stands a good chance of winning, despite enduring almost a decade of media abuse, not so much because 80 million US Americans love him—many of his voters don’t—but because they hate the “fake news media” even more. And who can blame them, when Western media has become such a sickeningly mendacious quasi-totalitarian propaganda machine, as McGinnis conclusively demonstrates in this thorough, well-researched, utterly damning book?

Ray McGinnis, author of the skeptical 9/11 book Unanswered Questions, discusses his new book Unjustified: The Freedom Convoy, the Emergencies Act and the Inquiry that Got It Wrong. Though it concerns events in Canada, McGinnis’s book is highly relevant to this week’s US presidential election. Trump stands a good chance of winning, despite enduring almost a decade of media abuse, not so much because 80 million US Americans love him—many of his voters don’t—but because they hate the “fake news media” even more. And who can blame them, when Western media has become such a sickeningly mendacious quasi-totalitarian propaganda machine, as McGinnis conclusively demonstrates in this thorough, well-researched, utterly damning book?

From the Foreword by Rodney Palmer:

“When the Freedom Convoy rolled into Ottawa on January 28, 2022, I had been out of the journalism business for twenty years. A call came from the Canadian Covid Care Alliance for which I’d been volunteering as communications advisor. “There are thousands of trucks in a convoy driving toward Ottawa to protest the Covid vaccine mandates. There is a filmmaker documenting their trek across the country. He needs someone on the ground in Ottawa to film the trucks when they roll in.” Suddenly I was a foreign correspondent again, covering the largest news event on the planet but this time in my own country. I filmed the first day as tens of thousands of jubilant Canadians flooded the streets in front of Canada’s Parliament to support the truck drivers. The truckers had just been handed a deadline, and potentially a death sentence, to get a Covid vaccine or be fired. They were the first group in the world to say “No. We’ve had enough.” The heart and soul of our country was coming to our rescue.

“On that first day I had a hard time holding my camera still as countless sights of unbridled love and joy swirled around me. There were nurses standing with their colleagues who were suspended because they refused to be vaccinated. Veterans warning against the signs of creeping tyranny in Ottawa. Off duty police officers and Armed Forces voicing their support. This was Canada on display. There was free food and music and people handing out bibles and cooking hot dogs. Everywhere young children walked, strolled or sat in wagons behind their parents as families joined peacefully to support the nation’s largest labour protest in history. If you were there, you saw that the earnest protest had transformed into a joyous celebration. It was like Canada Day in the winter. But if you watched it on the television news you saw a different story. After covering dozens of developing news events like this around the world for CTV News, I knew the obvious script: “In the midst of a globally coordinated lock down, Canada’s truck drivers saved the world today by being the first to say, “enough is enough.”

“But the news didn’t report the news that day. The CTV morning show in Ottawa said the lead organizers were white supremacists. Prime Minister Trudeau called them a “a fringe minority”. Jagmeet Singh said they promoted “pure bloodlines”.

“I knew they couldn’t all be that wrong. Having reported from China I easily identified the broadcasts as a coordinated misdirection. Classic propaganda.  There were a hundred thousand witnesses on the streets of Ottawa…”

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

Partial transcript

The lead story for this broadcast is the BRICS meeting in Kazan, where they are now creating an alternative to the SWIFT international payments system. It could be a new Bretton Woods such that the American Zionist sanctions regime run by the Global International Banking Crime Syndicate will no longer be able to prevent countries from trading with each other. And some think this is going to change the world. Pepe Escobar has been saying this for years, of course. What do you think, Wyatt? How fast is this going to change the world?

Well, I think we're trending in that direction. The current system in which Western countries make the rules and the rest of the world is expected to follow them—that's coming to an end. BRICS is a global movement representing now 40% of the world population and 30% of global GDP.

And it seems like the West is freaking out because they want to maintain control over global trade and technology. It seems like the serious countries are being drawn closer together and throwing off this yoke of Western domination.

Last week, I read an article by Dean Henderson, and he did a good job outlining some of the agreements being made right now between Russia and North Korea, Russia and Iran, Russia and the Houthis. Apparently Russia has agreed to give the Houthis anti-ship missiles.

So you can see this new constellation of world power beginning to form. I'm not sure how long it'll take to usurp the present power structure in this world. But America has lost the moral high ground and it looks more and more ridiculous lecturing about a rules based international order. and wielding their worthless fiat currency as a form of economic warfare.

And I noticed Ron Unz in his recent article alluded to this when he says that due to its ridiculously dishonest reporting on Israel and Gaza, America has lost all credibility. And that's a sentiment shared by guys like Douglas McGregor as well. So the writing's on the wall for this corrupt system that currently lords it over the whole world.

Yeah, I agree with you and Ron Unz that this complete kowtowing to Israel, letting them do anything they want, including commit genocide with American taxpayer-funded gigantic bombs and weapons, is destroying U.S. credibility. And so everybody's lining up to join BRICS. Of course, that's a "new dangerous alignment" according to American mainstream media.

Well, it's dangerous to the people who own the media, which would be the oligarchs who own the banking system and so much else. And as this conference was going on, there was some interesting action on the sidelines in Taiwan. There was a little confrontation or at least a war of words as China ran some drills right off the shore of its island province of Taiwan that it intends to bring back into the fold at some point. And they drilled, apparently, a blockade. And so the Taiwanese defense minister, Wellington Ku, which is quite a good name for a Taiwanese defense minister, pointed out that a blockade would be an act of war. What do you think, Wyatt?

Yeah, we'll see what happens with that. Beginning earlier this month, Beijing launched large-scale military drills, codenamed Joint Sword in the Taiwan Strait, simulating, among other things, a military blockade. And Taiwan's government hasn't minced words that this would be considered an act of war if China was to actually act upon it. They seem to think that they will, because they recently unveiled plans to strengthen their ability to respond to that eventuality.

But this is no small issue. One fifth of global freight passes through the Taiwan Strait and Beijing asserts jurisdiction over the Strait. But their claim is contested by the U.S. and other members of that sacred "international community." So we'll see what happens. But if there was ever a military blockade in that part of the world, it would have serious consequences for international trade. There's no question about it. And just like the war gaming with Iran, the war gaming with a war against China for Taiwan shows it would be a really tough row to hoe for the Americans.

Well, over in Turkey—more sidelines action during this BRICS meeting in Kazan. There was an attack on the leading aerospace company in Turkey, which is working on manufacturing some newfangled weapons to make Turkey self-sufficient so it doesn't have to get its weapons from the Americans. And the Americans don't like that.

And then somebody just did this terror attack. Two people were, quote unquote, neutralized after bombing and then shooting up the place. And I wrote this piece about Israel being the main suspect. But I also suggested that the mad Israeli attack dog actually may have been working with its American master. Wait a minute—it's the other way around, actually, in terms of who's the dog here.

But in any case, what do you think? Do you agree with me that this looks like a U.S. and/or Israeli attack on Turkey?

Yeah, I do. You did a good job pointing out how Erdogan was holding talks in Russia with Putin at the time. That seems to be a third rail. And also, Turkey wants to join BRICS. And if you look at what just happened to India, they went to the BRICS conference, Modi had very positive things to say about meeting with Putin, and then instantly there were all these bomb hoaxes called in to the airlines, which really, screwed things up for a while for him.

So it seems like that could be a third rail that Israel would act against. Similar to how Israel bombed French-owned oil stations in Beirut just days after Macron halted arms shipments to them.

That's how they operate. So I think you're right. I think you're over the target with that one.

Okay, yeah, thank you. It sure looks like the usual suspects, that's for sure.

And how about the Ron Unz article that we alluded to earlier, The Total Madness of the State of Israel? I thought that was another good one from Ron, highlighting these kinds of statements from Smotrich, who's a cabinet member, top of Israel's government. He says it would be just and moral for Israel to totally exterminate all million Palestinians, but they can't do it because the world would disapprove.

And Ron also points out that he's never heard of any country with a minister of government like Smotrich who's announcing that his country is planning to conquer all of the neighboring countries and steal their land. But that's what he openly says. Is this really total madness or is there any method in this Israeli madness, Wyatt?

No, these guys are totally unhinged, totally insane. In years past, Christian countries knew and other countries knew that the ideology that they had, this virulent ethnocentrism, which is why they were confined to ghettos and shtetls. They had the Judengasse and the Pale of the Settlement, and they were always sort of confined. So even though they had this crazed worldview and this crazed supremacist ideology, they didn't have much political power.

This ideology has now claimed a dominant role in our modern world, and they have a state with one of the best-equipped militaries in the world. It's a really dangerous situation. And Ron's brought up a good fact in this article that Israel's original admission to the United Nations was made contingent upon three conditions: that Israel settle its borders, that it grant a right of return to the Palestinians who had fled or been expelled, and that Jerusalem be internationalized.

Obviously, none of those three things have happened. And the reason they've never settled their borders is quite clear, because Israel's project is constant expansion. So that means constant warfare, constant problems with their neighbors.

So this thing is never meant to end. Very, very destructive for our world.

Indeed. Yeah, I think the U.S. empire would be bad enough even without Israel, but it's orders of magnitude worse because it's bound at the hip with this lunatic entity. In the article, Ron Unz also noted that the grotesque Jewish claims of fictional Hamas atrocities spread all over the world through the Jewish domination of Western media have had horrific real-life consequences, triggered a real genocide and all kinds of real atrocities not entirely unlike the imaginary ones that the Zionists used to gin up the real atrocities.

The right to rape, for instance: this mass rape epidemic going on in the Israeli prisons against the Palestinian captives. And now the lead rapist is a national hero because the Israeli media has celebrated him because I guess his name got leaked or something.

So there may be a bit of a wrist slap coming for a couple of these rapists, but also the attacks on the UN peacekeepers in Lebanon are just the latest in a long list of Israeli attacks on United Nations people. They've killed almost 200 UN personnel in the past year. So no wonder the UN and Israel don't get along too much.

I don't know if you saw this video embedded in the Ron Unz article of this lunatic so-called ambassador to the UN shredding the UN charter while he's fuming and sputtering. It has to be seen to be believed. I mean, what's wrong with these people, Wyatt?

Like I said, they're totally unhinged. And there's no pushback from the hallowed international community. These guys are allowed to behave differently in any way they want, including killing UN personnel, including bombing Christian villages and Christian churches. I think they blew up the third oldest church in the world. And still they get supported by their co-religionists, not (just) the Jewish co-religionists, but the Christian co-religionists. It makes no sense. Anytime the UN tries getting tough with them, they just flip them the bird and they carry on business as usual. I mean, who can stand up to these people?

Well, the Axis of Resistance really is pretty much the only group that's standing up to them right now. And they're standing up pretty well. Hezbollah's leadership took a hit when Hassan Nasrallah was murdered and then his successor was murdered as well. And of course, there were the exploding pagers that took out a lot of Hezbollah civilian personnel.

But the military wing of Hezbollah is standing strong against the Zionist invasion of Lebanon. The Zionists have still only managed to get a few hundred meters into Lebanon and they're taking hits all the time.

You read the Cradle, you refer to mainstream sources, to sort of try to figure out what's really going on. And the mainstream sources are not contesting the fact that Israel is stuck. They're not getting anywhere with their ground invasion of Lebanon.

Yeah, according to this report, Hezbollah fighters have killed more than IDF soldiers and officers. They've wounded hundreds more. They've destroyed Merkava tanks, bulldozers, armored vehicles, too.

They've always been very capable at bombing people from distances and blowing up third world countries with state of the art technology. But they're not known for being particularly great warriors. They're too degenerate to be competent warriors. And I think that's why they're banking on bringing America into this conflict to be their big, bad bully boy.

If you watch that recent Al Jazeera documentary, it shows exactly what I'm talking about. I mean, these guys are going through the drawers of women they've killed. They're dressing up in women's clothing. They're going through their underwear drawer and putting it on.

It's like a Monty Python skit.

Exactly.

So these aren't competent warriors on the ground when it comes to actual fighting. They can kill loads of civilians from distance, but we'll see how it shakes down with with the actual fighting. And that's why I think they're so hell bent on bringing America in: to be the blunt instrument of their aggressive state.

But of course, the U.S. is not exactly reputed for winning wars on the ground. We got kicked out of Vietnam, kicked out of Afghanistan, soon to be kicked out of Iraq, and certainly most of our ground forces are out of there too. So the Zionists would love to get a lot of Americans killed, but ultimately for what?

(read the whole transcript by clicking on the “transcript” button at the top of this episode’s Substack page, above the image to the right)

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

Rumble link Bitchute link

Press TV

Ayatollah Seyed Ali Khamenei says it's up to the country's officials on how to decide when this is done in line with the country's best interests.

Leaders of the country's enemies are suffering from what he called miscalculation when it comes to Iran, and this must be rectified. The Leader made the remarks in a meeting with the families of those martyred, while protecting the country's security. He was speaking after the Israeli regime's military aggression against the Islamic Republic. The leader said the evil act must be neither magnified nor downplayed. Ayatollah Khamenei also slammed Israel's war crimes in Gaza and Lebanon and called for a diplomatic, economic and even military coalition against the regime.

Joining us now from the city of Saidia, Morocco is Kevin Barrett for more on the story. Hello, Dr. Barrett. Pleasure to have you. Your initial thoughts on the Iranian leader's remarks today.

Well, I thought they were characteristically temperate, wise, and firm. The Iranian leadership is playing the role of the adults in the room, while these crazy, psychotic, or rather psychopathic Zionists and the Americans that they control keep behaving so irresponsibly.

It's also notable that what we're hearing from the Leader in Iran and the rest of the Axis of Resistance is truthful whereas what we hear from the Zionists is everything but. For instance the the Zionists showed old footage, like an attack on Lebanon, and a fire at an Iranian oil refinery - that was actually shown by the Israeli defense minister as supposedly depicting the Israeli attack on Iran, which it didn't.

So there's been all kinds of fake news being spread about this attack, trying to magnify it, when in fact this Israeli attack on Iran was - well, it did kill people. I mean, it was very serious. It needs to be taken seriously and responded to. But it was nothing like what they were claiming they were going to do. Before the attack they were saying "nobody will see it coming." But they ended up announcing what they were going to do ahead of time and telling us it would be very limited.

And they had said, "Oh, this will be the end of the world for Iran. This will be the biggest attack in the whole history of the region." And they'd been screaming and yelling about what a terrible, horrible attack they were about to carry out. And then it came as a bit of an anticlimax. And so to try to make it look impressive to their own people, I suppose, they used all of this fake footage and fake news.

So the lies that are just a normal part of standard operating procedure from the Zionist side contrast very markedly with the restraint and the generally hewing to the real world, in other words, telling the truth, coming from the Supreme Leader of Iran and the rest of the Axis of Resistance.

And also, the Leader said, Dr. Barrett, that the country's enemies are suffering from miscalculation when it comes to Iran, and this must be rectified. What do you perceive to be some of the miscalculations that the Zionist entity in the U.S. harbor when it comes to Iran?

Well, I think miscalculations maybe isn't even a strong enough word for the fundamental wrongheadedness of the Zionist and American approaches to Iran. The Zionists, of course, have this notion that they can drag the Americans into a big war with Iran, which will somehow play out well for them.

That's been the overall game plan of Netanyahu for years, since he orchestrated the attack on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon in 2001 along with other Israelis. They tried to get the U.S. to come into the region and destroy Israel's enemies. And the last on the list of the seven countries in five years that 9/11 and the 9/11 wars were supposed to target was the Islamic Republic of Iran.

And that didn't work out. The realists in the U.S. military and the defense community in the United States recognized that an American war with Iran was just not going to work out. And so they have been telling Netanyahu no ever since, but Netanyahu just keeps trying to drag them across that red line.

And so this is a fundamentally flawed approach to Iran and indeed the whole axis of resistance. And it's based on, I think, hysterical Zionist fantasies. These Zionists are brought up from birth to believe that they are superior to everyone else. The whole world hates them. The whole world wants to gas them in gas chambers. The whole world wants to throw them into the sea. And they're basically paranoid personalities, and that manifests as psychopathy. And so they imagine that they can't come to any kind of accommodation with the people in the region where they live today, just like they've had problems wherever they've lived in the past. And so rather than coming to understandings that would allow them to not only live, but thrive in the region, which they could do if they acted like normal human beings and negotiated and bargained and engaged in good faith, with give and take, under the understanding that we're all equal here — Instead, with their psychotic chosenness syndrome and persecution complex that these people have been dragging around for 2500 years, they have reacted emotionally and indeed hysterically, imagining that everybody wants to kill them, and so they have to kill everybody else first. That's the Rise and Kill First doctrine that Ronan Bergman talks about in his book of that name.

So the root of the problem is that these extremely emotional and basically mentally ill Zionists have so much power in the United States, and the people that feel an attachment to the Entity have that kind of power in the United States, that they've dragged the world's biggest empire into a self-destructive conflict that is likely to end with the end of that empire —and certainly will end with the end of the Zionist entity itself.

And before you go, Dr. Barrett, Ayatollah Khamenei also called for a diplomatic, economic, and even military coalition against the Israeli regime. One could even argue a proper diplomatic and economic coalition, if it was actually assembled, wouldn't even need a military coalition against the regime. Why do you think the region has been so unsuccessful in putting together a united front, a diplomatic and possibly an economic coalition, to ramp up pressure on the regime to thwart its adventurism in the region?

That's a really good question. And I think part of the answer is the old saying where the mice are plotting to try to deal with the depredations of a cat. And they decide that they can save themselves from the cat by putting a bell on the cat's collar. But then of course the problem becomes, well, who's going to bell the cat? Which mouse is going to sneak up on the cat and to put the bell on its collar?

So what's happening in the region right now, is that the Axis of Resistance, which is the courageous and principled leadership of certain countries and groups, is willing to put themselves in the line of fire. But a lot of the other leaders and countries and groups are afraid to join them because the first one that joins them is going to take a lot of heat. And indeed, that heat can be in the form of assassinations. The Zionists are the world's leaders in assassinations and all kinds of other dirty tricks, plus all of the economic pressure that the U.S. and its vassals can exert.

So I think there's fear of being sort of the first. And so the way it would have to happen is that a large number would have to basically join all at once. We would have to have that pressure exerted from Turkey shutting down the Zionist oil. And the Saudi Arabian leadership has been moving towards a better position on this recently, and they would have to join as well. They've already made clear that there's no way they're going to resume their fake normalization unless this issue gets resolved to the satisfaction of the Palestinians.

But somehow there would need to be a communications process that would allow all of these countries to exert that pressure together at the same time so that no single one of them would be singled out and picked off by the Zionists and their American slaves.

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

Is “Holocaust denial” a sin? That’s what Trent Horn thinks.

And who is Trent Horn? Dr. E. Michael Jones, arguably America’s leading Catholic intellectual, explains:

Trent Horn is a guy who works for something called Catholic Answers. Catholic Answers got started in the 90s by a guy named Carl Keating, who basically was going to defend the Catholic Church against fundamentalists who would say that the church was the w***e of Babylon—fever swamp stuff like that. And it was like shooting fish in a barrel. He made a lot of money. He retired. He got replaced by Chris Check, a guy I knew from the Rockford Institute and Chronicles Magazine, a guy I always liked.

And now the world has changed. And so Trent Horn (took over Catholic Answers)…Some people said he was trying to apply for a job with the Daily Wire. He wanted to get Candace Owens’ slot.

So he's going to be the Catholic guy who's going to take up the Jewish cause. Well, it didn't work. This guy singlehandedly resurrected an idea that really needs to be taken up, which is basically: What exactly is the status of the Jews and the Catholics? What is exactly the Catholic position?

And he took it to the extreme where he said basically it's a sin to deny the Holocaust. And then he's got “quotes” from people like Pope Benedict, which don't say what he said they said. The Pope would never say (that Holocaust denial is a sin). The Pope, responding to the Williamson affair when Bishop Williamson got attacked across the world, said that basically “this is not decent. Decent people don't do this.” Well, no one ever said Catholicism was just reserved for people who are fit for polite company.

So Trent Horn's trying to up the ante by saying Catholics commit a sin if they contest Jewish fables. Well, it's not going to work. And it bombed. There were hundreds of people who wrote in after this “Holocaust Denial Is a Sin” video, including people who noticed, as I did, there was fraud, academic fraud, going on here.

He flashes this image for two seconds, supposedly a letter from Himmler talking about the extermination of the Jews. Wait a minute. I have a pause button, Trent. And I put it on there. It turns out the beginning of this is Latin. It's the Lorem Ipsum text generator. And then plopped in the middle is some statement—I guess he doesn't think that anybody can read German because he apparently can't—that says “the extermination of the Jewish people.”

But the real quote that follows is in a completely different typeset. The real quote is “die Evakuierung des deutschen Volkes,” which means the evacuation of the German people.

So I can't tell you how angry I was. It’s been a long time since I got that angry. And I said that my friend Chris should either take the video down or stop claiming that he' speaking for Catholics, because this is not Catholic theology. And you're putting burdens on Catholics that they do not need to bear.

Catholic Holocaust Denial: A Confession

If crypto-Jew Trent Horn gets his way, Catholics the world over will be filing into confessionals every Sunday to whisper to their priests:

“Forgive me father for I have sinned. I have doubted the existence of the gas chambers.”

“Why would you do that, my son?”

“It has been six months since my last confession, and during that time I have been studying the issue.”

“ّWhy would you ‘study’ such rubbish, my son?”

“I was curious, father.”

“Have you not heard the old saying, my son, that ‘curiosity killed the catamite’”?

“No, I never heard that one, father. (Pause.) What’s a catamite?”

“That, my son, is another of those things you shouldn’t be curious about.”

“But why shouldn’t I ask questions about the Holocaust, father?”

“Because it is an article of faith, my son. If a Catholic denies OR doubts any article of faith determined by the Catholic Church, they are a sinful heretic. To be a Catholic is to be believe everything that the Catholic Church teaches. To doubt or deny ANY dogma is to proclaim oneself a Protestant - even if one continues to attend Mass and, God forbid, receive Holy Communion.”

“But father, is the Holocaust really an article of faith?”

“Of course it is, my son. There is no convincing evidence that it ever happened. That means we must accept it on faith. As Tertullian writes in his De Carne Christi: ‘I believe it because it is absurd.’ That certainly applies to the Holocaust.”

“I’m confused, father. What must I believe about the Holocaust?”

“It’s quite simple, son. Holocaustianity is the new Christianity. Instead of Jesus, we worship the Jewish people and their sacred six million. Instead of the Crucifixion, we have the gas chambers. And instead of the Resurrection, we have the state of Israel. That is the new Holy Trinity.”

“Is there a creed I should recite?”

“Indeed there is, my son. It goes like this:

‘I believe in the Holy Jewish People, the only chosen sons of Yahweh, masters of all things visible and invisible.

‘I believe in the sacred six million.

‘I believe in the gas chambers.

‘I support the holy state of Israel.

‘I will bow down to Antichrist, the Jewish messiah, when he comes.

‘And above all, I condemn Hamas.’

“But father, what you’re saying doesn’t sound like what I learned in Sunday school.”

“That was the old church, son. Today’s church is different. It’s new and fresh and irreverent about everything except the Holocaust and above all it’s no longer antisemitic. By the way, have you considered having a sex change?”

The parishioner hastily leaves the confessional, exits the church, and finds himself in the middle of a Hollywood studio lot. The church he just left, he discovers, was a paper maché mock-up, and the priest and parishioners were actors. (Was that Trent Horn playing the priest?) Discombobulated, he tries to find an exit from the studio lot, but it just seems to go on and on forever…

Genocide Denial IS a Sin

The notion of denial involves willful refusal to face an obvious truth. It does not apply to those who ask questions about matters that are far from obvious, including: Were six million Jews really murdered in German concentration camps? How many, if any, died in gas chambers? Were the deaths of German concentration camp inmates part of a preconceived bureaucratic plan to kill all Jews within reach of the German government?

The Jewish father of Holocaust Studies, Raul Hilberg, denied that six million Jews died. The more plausible number, he said, was 5.1 million. Was he “in denial”? Should he have been imprisoned along with others who offer even lower figures? What number is the cutoff, below which one goes to jail or commits a sin?

Mainstream historians have all sorts of different views about the alleged gas chambers and who may have died in them. Should those who hold less than maximalist views be imprisoned, or condemned for sinfulness, alongside those who see no convincing evidence for gas chambers at all?

Mainstream historians also hold widely varying views on whether there was a preconceived bureaucratic plan to kill all Jews within reach of the German government. Should those who argue for a more ad hoc Holocaust be incarcerated (or deemed guilty of mortal sin) alongside those who think that most of the roughly half-million Jews who died in the camps were victims of starvation and deprivation, not gas or bullets?

There is a plausible case that the German government committed genocide against Jews and gypsies during World War II. But all sorts of reasonable positions on the details of that genocide, if indeed it was one, have been criminalized. Though it is a crime in several European countries to discuss those details, calling it a sin seems a bit of a stretch.

Is Denying the Palestinian Genocide a Sin?

The genocide that is currently taking place in Occupied Palestine is one of the most fully-documented events in human history. It is being broadcast on social media and independent media (despite Israel’s relentless slaughter of journalists) 24/7/365. No reasonable person can doubt that the state of Israel is deliberately slaughtering Palestinian civilians en masse in order to facilitate its theft of their land and resources.

As I recently wrote for the next issue of American Free Press:

According to official body counts, Israel has killed about 42,000 people in Gaza during the past year. More than two-thirds of the dead are women and children, and most of the rest are noncombatants.

But the official body count is unrealistically low. It only includes identified bodies killed directly by the Israeli military. Thousands of other bodies remain buried in rubble, while others are excavated but not identified. And then there tens of thousands more whom Israel kills through starvation or deprivation. The Lancet, a leading medical journal, has estimated the real number of deaths in Gaza as over 186,000. Dr. Gideon Polya, an expert on avoidable mortality, thinks the total is even higher:

On 5 September 2024 Professor Devi Sridhar (chair, global health, University of Edinburgh) reported: “Total deaths since the conflict began would be estimated at about 335,500 in total” or 30,500 per month and 366,000 per year. Of these “first year” deaths about 55,000 were violent (from “bullets and bombs”) and 311,000 from horrific imposed deprivation.

By “horrific deprivation” Professor Sridhar is referring to Israel’s deliberate starvation of Gazans, its destruction of water and sewage infrastructure, and its obliteration of almost all of Gaza’s hospitals, clinics, and other medical facilities.

(For the full article when it comes out, subscribe to American Free Press.)

The USA and the West are indeed mired in what might be accurately called “genocide denial.” Most Americans and Westerners prefer to look the other way, deliberately averting their gaze from the sniper-murdered babies and whole families dying slowly beneath rubble created by American tax dollars.

That genocide denial is indeed a sin that puts them not only outside of all faith, but outside of all 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

Laurent Guyénot, author of From Yahweh to Zion, discusses  his new article “The Conspiracy Against Michael Jackson.”

Excerpt:

Laurent Guyenot has written about a number of things.  JFK-9/11 was one of his earliest books. And he's also traced the history of the Zionist Power Configuration, or the Kosher Nostra, Jewish Power, whatever you want to call it, in From Yahweh to Zion. Here's the original French version of that, which I translated. And he's now writing about, of all things, Michael Jackson.

Whoa, wait a minute. What about Michael Jackson? Well, let's ask him. Hey, welcome, Laurent. Comment ça va?

Hi, Kevin. Ça va, ça va. Very good.

Good to see you. New glasses, it looks like. So now...what what's the connection between JFK, 9/11, and the mysterious death of Michael Jackson?

Well, there is no real connection. I just discovered Candace Owen's video about Michael Jackson. I started to watch her videos, you know, here and there. I feel she's pretty good. She's nice to hear….she's a great person. And she made a great video about Michael Jackson, whom obviously she had loved all her life.

So I got intrigued because I had no idea about Michael Jackson. But what she pointed out is that he seems to have been the victim of a Jewish cabal. So that got me interested. And then I also read a book by Monica Wissak. I had read her book. I think it was called The Last President, a wonderful book about JFK.

So I decided to read her book about Michael Jackson. And she's another person who had loved Michael Jackson all her life. So I started to wonder why so many people loved Michael Jackson, because I was never interested in Michael Jackson. So I started to realize maybe I missed something about him.

He's a very interesting character. And that's always nice to study about the life of somebody unusual. That's one of the things that I loved about John Kennedy. I felt he was really an extraordinary person. Not just the assassination, but the whole dimension of the person and his life and his family got me really interested.

So Michael Jackson has also multiple dimensions which i felt are interesting. And of course you know he was obviously the victim of a cabal by mostly Jewish people. And so…when I learn something interesting I want to share it, hoping that some people can learn what I had learned.

I tried to connect the dots and make it short, go to the main point.  But of course I know that Americans know more about Michael Jackson than French people do (as evidenced) in the comment section of my article at the Unz Review…

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

Dr. Bruce Baird discusses Israel and its nuclear weapons, including allegations by Joe Vialls and others that the Zionists have used several low-yield low-radiation nukes in various false flags and deniable attacks beginning as early as the 1980s.

Extract from the interview:

We're at a moment in history when it's probably more timely than ever to talk about the Israeli nuclear program and the recklessness of the Zionists. We know how insanely over the top they are in so many ways,being the number one suspects in the Kennedy assassinations and 9/11, among so many other things. If there's any country on Earth that shouldn't be trusted with nuclear weapons, it would be the so-called State of Israel. And yet there they are, and they're committing genocide. and threatening all kinds of terrible things to various parties, including Iran. People in the Israeli government have talked about using nuclear weapons against the civilians of Gaza, against the civilians of Lebanon, and obviously, of course, against Iran. So what are the details about the Israeli nuclear program? Bruce Beard, you've been investigating this for a while. So just tell us a little something about your background before we get into the Israeli nuclear program.

Okay, my original career, I was a chemical engineer. And I did that for like five years, but then I decided that I wanted to be an historian, a professor of history. I went back to graduate school, got a PhD in history, and I taught history for a while. And so I still consider myself an historian, even though I have this sort of technical background...

...I wasn't the first to talk about Israeli nuclear weapons, but I started right away finding out that this was part of some kind of Israeli mission, or MO. This was a pattern Joe Vialls had exposed back in the early 90s. This was a pattern of Israeli nuclear extortion terrorism. As Joe Vialls had said, these were minimal residual radiation nukes. These are clean nukes that they were using. And they were responsible for terrorism going back to at least to the 1983 bombing of the US Marine barracks. And even before that, the 1983 US embassy in Beirut.

I did a lot of work, technical details, studying craters, explosion cratering technology. Most of my work was focused on explosions that left large craters like the 2020 Beirut blast.

I go into more detail with longer threads as time goes on related to focusing on the history of the development of these kind of clean nukes, which goes back to the 50s with the United States leading the way. Lawrence Livermore Laboratories was the main promoter of these kind of weapons.

And Israel's Mordecai Vanunu, with his revelations that Seymour Hersh published as well, information about these neutron bombs that Israel had been developing since the 80s, big time. They had large neutron bomb weapons development. I showed how that's not very much farther from developing these kind of clean nukes. And that explains why nobody ever sees radiation from these Israeli nukes.

And since then, people have reported nukes in Syria, Lebanon, and many other places around the world.

And Yemen.

Yeah. And so I've reported on these...And there's all kinds of other reasons to suspect their nuclear development. Cell phone cameras can pick up these scintillations, which would suggest ionizing radiation is causing them to sparkle.

In Yemen, there's two explosions in 2015. There were a couple of explosions in Syria in 2013 and there was evidence that those were nuclear. So they've been using them in war situations as well as terrorist situations, blaming them on car bombs or blaming them on accidents.

And if they're using them in Gaza or Lebanon today...it's hard for me to prove such a thing. I'm more of an historian. I can go back and say they certainly have a pattern of doing such a thing. But pretty much I sort of keep focusing on the historical angle.

So what's the strongest evidence that these are nuclear?

(Click on the transcript button at the top of this page to view the full transcript.)

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