Truth Jihad Radio

Rumble link Bitchute link

Joining us now for the program is Hussein Abu Khaiti, activist and political commentator from Sana'a, and Kevin Barrett, author and Middle East expert, joining us from Missoula, Montana. Gentlemen, I'd like to welcome you both to the broadcast here.

I guess we'll start there in the Yemeni capital with you, Hussein. Hope you're doing well this evening. Your initial thoughts about these latest operations against U.S. and Israeli linked or directly owned vessels?

Hussein Abu Khaiti: We've seen from the statement of Yahya Saray, the spokesperson of Yemeni army. He has spoken about three targets. One is a commercial ship called Conship Ono, which belongs to a shipping company that has actually violated the Yemeni ban to enter port in occupied Palestine.

And the two other attacks have targeted two U.S. destroyers when they were trying to cross the Yemeni army operation zone. They have seen the clear message that any type of military movement from the United States will be faced by those attacks till they stop targeting Yemen. And they should stop as well supporting the Zionist state of Israel.

We have noticed that since Yemen has launched and started their attack against Israel and formed a blockade we've seen that the United States could not hold their battleship, and especially their aircraft carrier, in the region.

They have actually sent the aircraft carrier Roosevelt, but it's still far away in the Indian Ocean. They are not daring to come close to Yemen. And I believe the Yemeni army who actually started to use anti-ship ballistic missiles, are one of the first armies to start using mass attacks using drones, especially when they did that against Saudi Arabia and against targets in the Red Sea. I think that we have reached the end of an era for the aircraft carrier, because now it's clear that with simple weapons you can stop the United States and their “most powerful aircraft carrier in the world.” Because especially Yemenis (dominate) the Red Sea and the Gulf of Aden. That's why it's so dangerous for the United States military, either destroyers or aircraft carriers, to operate in our region.

And I believe that this type of attack will continue. Of course, the United States will never admit that any of these drones or missiles have hit their target, because at the beginning they have failed to stop the Yemeni attack. They have failed to keep a major presence in in our region like they did at the beginning when they formed the so-called Prosperity Guardian. They had to withdraw their aircraft carrier from our region. That's why I believe they will not actually admit any attack. But at some point I believe that Yemen will be the first country actually to sink a U.S. destroyer, and I'm sure that they are planning to do so.

Yemenis have sent a clear message that those attacks will continue as long as United States keep supporting the Zionist state in killing Palestinian people, they will continue their attack on forming a blockade against the Zionist state of Israel.

Thank you, Hussein. And before I introduce and welcome Dr. Barrett to the conversation, for our viewers that don't know, the Yemenis have since mid-November, or was it mid-October, started carrying out retaliatory attacks against Israeli-linked vessels. Their argument is that if there's a siege on Gaza and Israelis are not letting humanitarian aid get into the besieged strip, and essential goods that Gazans need for sustenance is denied them, then we're not going to let the Israelis use the waterways that pass right in front of Yemen to receive goods at occupied ports in occupied Palestine.

Joining us now is Dr. Barrett from Missoula, Montana. Your thoughts, Dr. Barrett? All the U.S. and U.K. retaliatory attacks against Yemen for going after dozens upon dozens of Israeli-linked vessels have not deterred the Yemenis from standing with Palestinians against this genocide in Gaza.

Kevin Barrett: That's right. The Americans have not been able to carry through with their avowed mission to basically control all of the world's seas, keep them open for the shipping that they approve of, and then potentially shut them down any time that they so desire. That's basically the backbone of the supposed current unipolar world order. The United States claims that it has the ability to keep seas open when it wants to and then close them when it wants to. And that sea power has ruled the world since the time of the British Empire.

But things are changing now, and the Houthi regime in Yemen, the Ansar Allah movement, is in the forefront of this global change. They have had the courage to take on the world's most powerful empire. One would think that they're severely undermatched, but with the new military technology that allows for the use of these relatively inexpensive rockets and drones that can be used to put pressure on vastly more expensive platforms and incredibly expensive defensive platforms—and then also ultimately the ability to sink these ships if necessary with slightly upgraded weapons—it turns the American patrols all over the world, but particularly in this region, into sitting ducks. They're suddenly hostages, just as the American bases in the region are de facto hostages now as well, given the advance in military power around these rockets and drones.

So there's a change going on now in the balance of power around the world. It's not just that the global south is getting stronger and turning against the American empire due to its support for genocide in Palestine, but it's also that the actual weaponry has changed and sea power is no longer the way to control the world unopposed.

And the Yemenis are incredibly brave and persistent. No matter what the Americans and their stooges and the Zionists do to them, they continue to put this pressure on global shipping. The economic cost is massive, and I'm sure they're going to continue no matter how the Americans choose to respond to this.

If I can put your words, Dr. Barrett, to Hussein Abu Khaiti. Hussein, Dr. Barrett made some interesting points. The Yemenis that have said this time and again, (as well as) the resistance out of Lebanon and Hezbollah out of Iraq. They've all said that they're only using a fraction of their military power, and that if the (Zionist) regime really wants to push for escalation, they are ready to use much more sophisticated weaponry. Isn't that the case?

Hussein Abu Khaiti: Yeah, this is exactly the case. As an example, we remember during the Saudi nine years of war and blockade against Yemen, which was supported as well by United States and UK, Yemenis actually start using their weapons against Saudi Arabia, and their types of drones and missiles gradually (improved).

They didn't actually use the latest missiles or the latest drones. If they do at the beginning use, as they say, all their cards, this means they are exposing to the enemy what types of weapons they have. As an example, the anti-ship ballistic missiles, which were used for the first time in history in Yemen—I believe they were actually tested and were ready during the Saudi war against Yemen, because Yemenis clearly believed that at one point we're going to be facing the United States. And especially now we have seen that the attack against Gaza has actually made Yemenis start their attack against the Zionist state.

And I believe that in the coming 24 hours to 48 hours, I believe that there will be, or there could be, a major joint military operation from Yemen, from Iraq, from Lebanon, from Iran, as a retaliation of the killing of Ismail Haniyeh. And this could be actually one of the biggest messages toward Israel, as well as a clear message to all Islamic nations and Arab nations that they should unite.

We see that United States is supporting Israel, giving weapons to Israel, so why won’t our countries support the Palestinian people? We cannot send weapons to help the Palestinian people or to Gaza, but we send missiles and drones to target the Zionist state.

Thank you. We don't have much time left. Dr. Barrett, I really want to get this last question out to you, sir, if I may. Considering that many feel that Israelis, this Netanyahu regime, do not have any inclination to end this genocide taking place in Gaza, they haven't really done much as far as mediation goes and ceasefire talks. And after Ismail Haniyeh's assassination, to Hussein's point, what kind of tensions do you see on the horizon in not the distant but the very near future in the region?

Well, Netanyahu is totally reckless, has no interest in a deal. I think the Israeli government, unfortunately, is not all that different from Netanyahu. I think that the extremist forces have taken over in the Zionist entity, and they're gambling on a kind of last existential battle to try to desperately save their doomed settler colonial project.

And so I think that when the retaliation comes from Iran for the dastardly murder of Ismail Haniyeh, and from Lebanon for the death and murder of Fuad Shukur, supported, of course, by other members of the Axis of Resistance and supported by people all over the Arab and Islamic worlds and the Global South, supported strongly in their hearts and by whatever means that they can find to actually support this despite the inaction of many of their governments. (When the retaliation comes) I think we're going to see the genocidal Zionist entity increasingly isolated. And it's going to face a very difficult situation. Because I don't believe the Americans are going to tell them to go ahead and do anything that they want.

So I think the Zionists have backed themselves into a corner by this crazy strategy of murdering their negotiating partners and committing blatant genocide against women and children, even while they can't win a battle against people who actually fight back.

They're losing in Gaza. Obviously, hey can't take on Lebanon, much less Lebanon plus Iran plus Iraq plus Yemen plus all of the people of the region, the Islamic world, and the global south.

They've bitten off more than they can chew.

Their arrogance knows no bounds, and they've gone past the borderline. They've crossed all the red lines, and they're going to get what's coming to them.

And we may see a beginning of that very soon.

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

False Flag Weekly News Rumble link Bitchute link

Some of my earliest and most intense memories involve the Olympics. In 1964 I huddled in front of my grandparents’ black-and-white TV to watch Madison, WI newscasters proudly announce that my father had won a silver medal in the Tokyo sailing competition. Though the image quality wasn’t great, we could more-or-less make him out in the clip from the awards ceremony.

Then in 1968 it got even better. I attended the Mexico City Olympics sailing games, held in Acapulco, and watch the races from the spectator boat. One of my few unpleasant memories from Acapulco involves lavish quantities of vomit deposited all over the deck by seasick Mexicans who apparently hadn’t realized what they were getting into when they bought that spectator boat ticket. (Many viewers of the current Paris Olympics reacted similarly to its opening ceremony.)

Watching the sailboat races, tabulating the results day by day, and gradually realizing that my dad was ever-more-likely to win it all, was the ultimate peak experience for a nine-year-old boy. And sure enough, my father and his sailmaking business partner, Lowell North, won the gold medal in the Star class. This time I was present at the awards ceremony. The national anthem has never sounded better. Indeed, it’s been all downhill since then.

But there was a darker side to the 1968 Olympics, one that almost nobody knew about back then: an alleged genocide. According to Wikipedia, “In 2006, former President Luis Echeverría was arrested on charges of genocide” for ordering the massacre of hundreds of peacefully protesting students during the run-up to the games.

If ordering the massacre of 300 protestors is genocide, what should we call Israel’s massacres of tens of thousands in Gaza? And yet the Paris Olympics is allowing Israeli athletes to compete, while barring Russians, based on Russia’s relatively restrained war of self-defense in Ukraine.

I recently flew back to the US from my home in Morocco to visit family, found myself watching the Olympics on a living room big screen, and almost lost my lunch when the announcer referred to “Russia’s unprovoked invasion of Ukraine” as the reason the Russian team was banned. “UNPROVOKED?!” I unleashed a string of expletives, and explained to brainwashed Russophobic family members that one could arguably call the Special Military Operation all sorts of things, but unprovoked is not one of them. That is just a baldface lie. No military operation in history has ever been more provoked.

Since that moment I have been boycotting the Paris Olympics. But I can’t completely ignore them. My day job, such as it is, is to offer weekly news roundups on False Flag Weekly News. And the Olympic games, love them or hate them, are definitely news. So instead of watching gymnastic competitions on the big screen while exchanging chitchat with family members, I watched a few clips on the internet and discussed the meaning of it all with FFWN co-host Cat McGuire:

-

All right, and how about the Hunger Games news? That is, the Olympics, the Satanic Olympics, says Alexander Dugin.

It opened...with a pale horse.

Behold, a pale horse. The apocalypse has come.

Alexander Dugin says that “anyone who does not immediately take up arms to destroy this satanic civilization, unprecedented in its brazenness, is complicit with it.”

Right on, Alexander Dugin! Let's look at the depravity that he's talking about here.

This is a parody of Da Vinci's Last Supper:

They tried to deny it, and then they ended up admitting that, “well, I guess it sort of was.” What a bizarre, sick and twisted ritual. What's that all about, Cat?

Well, it's part of their inclusion and diversity. They're really proud of it.

And it's a wake-up call, like the genocide by the Israelis.

The entire world watches the Olympics. And to see this is just… people are like, “oh my God.” It's like when they finally heard Biden speak.

These are huge wake-up calls. These elites have become so arrogant. They think they can put their s**t right out there in public. And they don't know that they've been living in a little circle in their little closed world. And most of the public is not down with that.

So what do they do in a typical Judaicized way? They start censoring the video. They do make apologies, but then they censor the video. This is not what we want. And they never explained if they were so proud of it.

Why can't anyone see it now? (Note: It’s archived HERE - go to the 10:45 mark.)

You can say you're sorry, but still show it.

It's just very dangerous, the power that the Olympics has as a cultural event. Bolshevik fascist control totalitarian institutions on the cultural level. They have banned Russia from the games—or the Russian flag, at least, which in semiotics, is like banning the country. If any country should be banned, it's the pariah state of Israel.

And this is kind of tasteless, having somebody who looks like a star of a John Waters movie wearing Jesus's halo. I'm not really sure why Christians would put up with that.

And then, of course, they had to apologize. So there's the perfunctory apologies: “We were really just saying everybody should, uh, love each other!” That's not what I get from the image but whatever.

One thing I'd like to say is that both the director who created this whole thing, who imagined it, as well as that fat lesbian Jesus figure—both of them were Jewish. So it was clearly an anti-Christian message under the guise of being about diversity and loving all different kinds of people. Well, everybody in there was not very diverse. They were all sicko weirdos.

The Jewish antagonism to Jesus and to Christianity really seems to have gone under the radar of a lot of Christians. A few of them are waking up and figuring it out, E. Michael Jones being one of them.

How about the green aspect of the games? This was supposedly the first Green Olympics. It's low carbon, and they used cardboard beds and no air conditioning. But then the Americans brought in their own air conditioning. The rich countries all got air conditioning, and the poor countries didn't. That doesn't sound fair. They had a big advantage in the competition because of that.

And then they wouldn't serve real non-cardboard food. One third of food of the food had to be plant based. So there weren't enough eggs to go around. People were rioting for eggs in the Olympic Village.

And then Simone Biles says that the cardboard beds aren't very comfortable. Indeed, “they suck.”

So it looks like the Green Olympics were not all that popular among at least some of the athletes.

Well, the Green Olympics is as big a scam as the Paris Climate Accords. Same thing. It's just one big scam. And all the privileged countries got to have their own chefs brought in, their own air conditioners brought in, special lines for their food. In all of this supposed fair and equal, there was so much privilege going on.

And even with the audience, the people who came to see the Olympics for the first time, the Olympic Committee launched a new upscale program where they offered five-star VIP tickets for high-end seats. If you paid thousands of dollars, you've got high-end seats, much finer cuisine, no lines, champagne, soft music, in out of the rain. It was pretty amazing. Some people were paying like $25,000E for the VIP section.

So when push came to shove, it's austerity for thee, but thousands of dollars worth of high-end exclusivity for me.

So it's hypocrisy all the way around with the Olympics. And that's the New World Order we're getting. It's where we have to own nothing and be happy, but they don't “own nothing”—they own everything.

How about the Algerian judo guy who withdrew from his match to avoid facing the Israeli? Shout out to Algeria, my neighboring country. I live just a few miles from the border of Algeria. I hope that border will come down before too long. And I hope that Morocco will start to protest the Israeli genocide the way some of these Algerians are. So go Algeria.

Well, I don't know if he may have just used that as an excuse because he didn't make the weight the day before, but okay, use that. But the Algerian who should have dropped out was the fake trans guy who was acting like he was a biological woman, and the Olympics Committee allowed him to fight against actual women. It was a travesty.

Is there proof that that person is trans? I thought it was still disputed.

Yeah, there were two men who the Olympics committee allowed to act like they were biological women. And both of them had failed the test before, but this Paris Olympics allowed them to come on in. It was incredible. The female who fought the Algerian guy threw in the towel in less than a minute saying it was unfair. It would be like telling a heavyweight fighter, now you're going to go against a bantamweight fighter. There's no fairness there.

Of course it's unfair. My only question is the empirical question of what this person's real gender actually is. And I understood that was still disputed.

Well, whether it was disputed or not, and I think it's all fake, the Olympics committee allowed it. And gave their blessing that he was trans and so he could fight as a woman. It was completely unfair.

No, no, no, that's not true. No, officially that Algerian person is a woman, not a trans. There's no claim this person ever underwent any kind of gender reassignment surgery or hormones or anything like that. That's the official story anyway.

Well, the person's not a biological woman. The person is a biological man at this point.

Yeah, what's the evidence for that?

Well, I've seen a lot of pictures of the person outside of wearing the judo or the boxer outfit. Somebody said, well, where's that person's, how come that person isn't being covered? Where is that person's female attire? There were a bunch of pictures I saw that were showing him fully dressed as a man.

That's pretty weird. Normally, I wouldn't think Algerian culture would go along with that. But who knows? Let's say “more research is necessary.”

I know that, too. But that's who they put up.

There are these people… women vary quite a bit in testosterone level. And there are a few women with freakishly high testosterone levels, but they're still women. They have all the female equipment. That might be the case in this case. I don't know.

Comment from Tina Kimmel:

Great show, as usual!

I want to comment on the Algerian women’s boxing medal-winner, Imane Khelif. I am in complete agreement that “her” competing … and winning… is a sign of the end of civilization. However this case is slightly more interesting and complicated than you discussed.

“She” was disqualified a few years ago by the International BOXING Association (IBA) for failing their gender test. However, for various reasons, the International OLYMPIC Committee (IOC) disregarded the finding of the other association, and allowed Khelif to compete as a woman.

At https://en.as.com/olympic_games/why-was-imane-khelif-allowed-to-compete-at-the-olympics-n/, they say “The [IBA] test revealed elevated levels of testosterone, leading to questions about her eligibility to compete in the women’s category. This controversy sparked a heated debate within the sports community, but there is no indication that she is a trans athlete other than a woman with a medical condition.” and “She was born as a female but has a disorder of sex development (DSD) which may give her XY chromosomes and testosterone levels similar to a male athlete.”

This is the textbook description of someone who, unfortunately, has the 5-ARD (5α-Reductase deficiency) genetic condition (such as the earlier Olympian Caster Semenya, and the fictional character in MiddleSex.) These folks ARE XY MALES, but whose body did not make the sort of proto-testerone in utero that causes a developing infant to look like a male at birth. Thus, they generally look like unusual girls at birth, and are often given girls’ identities.

BUT then at puberty, they DO develop their normal ADULT testosterone, and secondary male characteristics such as muscle strength. (Colorfully, this condition is called güevedoces, “balls at 12” in the Dominican Republic.) This can cause social discomfort as these guys adjust to a new identity.

Worldwide, there are relatively few situations where it is a benefit to hang on to the (infertile) female identity… BUT COMPETING IN WOMEN’S SPORTS is one. Especially where there is a lot of money involved, there are going to be unfortunate pressures to lie. In my opinion, Khelif is not strictly transgender, but close, in sticking with the incaccurate claim to being a woman.

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

Dr. Alan Sabrosky returns for another “first Friday of the month”appearance. He emailed me:

“Let’s do three themes from FFWN:

1. Candace Owens and the primacy of Jews to Trump

2. Trump & Harris: Fallout of the Butler faux “assassination” attempt

3, Middle East tensions grow (how could they not with asymmetrical assassination as a weapon?)”

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.

Excerpt from the interview:

This is indeed the first Friday of the month, which is the day that Dr. Alan Sabrosky comes on to talk about: How can things get any crazier than they were last month? And I'm afraid I can't imagine what it's going to be like next month, because this last month was as nutty as it gets. Where do we even start, Alan?

That's a really good question. Just when you think things can't get any worse, they do. Which is one of those intriguing things that makes Murphy's Law seem like the 11th Commandment.

I guess there's a couple of things, just a couple of observations, and then I'd like to get into Candace Owens, because I reread the article on her. And I had an odd reaction on the second reading.

I guess there are two things from last month. One is the assassination (attempt). I’m very much with Mike Walsh on this, it just doesn't make any sense. None of the official details make any sense. It's almost like it was staged by a grade B studio on a very tight budget, with the keystone cops in attendance who just happened to be (firing) live ammunition and (causing) fatalities.

It doesn't make any sense in some very elementary ways. I mean, forget the idea that they saw this guy climbing up on a roof and they didn't do anything for a while.  On the rest of it, the notion that someone's ear is nipped—now that's the Hollywood technique (from a) 19th century western… it's not a high velocity bullet. You you tap an ear with a round and it'll take most of the year off. There'll be blood spattered everywhere. Facial and head wounds bleed copiously. Ever cut yourself shaving? I have. You know what the effect of it is. There's blood everywhere, fast, all the way on the side of the head, down the shirt, on the collar. It would be all over. (It’s) not there.

Yeah, but he had some really nice warpaint.

Yeah. On this side. Not on the side where the bullet hit. Supposedly on the right here. This guy supposedly got off his (8) shots. Now if the first one didn't do the job, why did the other seven just spray around the crowd instead of continuing to shoot at the target, which by then was almost stationary. And the upper part of the chest and the head were fully exposed. I mean, if I were up there… I certainly wouldn’t be negotiating my surrender. That's not going to happen.

The thing that struck me immediately after that was that...Sort of like Lee Harvey Oswald . And it was really, really intriguing. And maybe it's real. I don't know. But I can't imagine anyone on the Democrat side seriously wanting him dead. They want him in jail. They want him ruined. They want him off the election trail. Sure, there's that much.

But the one thing that could actually incite his base and send them back to their homes to get their ARs and shotguns over the mantelpiece and out of the closet would be to have their Messiah, as it were, the secular Messiah, Donald Trump, be shot and killed by a Democrat agent. That's the one thing that would do it. And so they weren't going to do it. They simply weren't going to do it. And I can't think of anyone else who would.

The whole establishment might actually unite on what they don't want. Nobody really wants Trump dead, except for maybe some idiots. But the establishment insiders know that the Democrats don't want Trump dead.

Because it would destabilize the country and they would be in Syria.

They would be hated.

They would be more than hated. More than hate. They would be removed.

Right. And the Republican insiders, presumably, at least the Trump loyalists—most of them obviously don't want Trump dead either. At this point, they're just riding their horse, and Trump is the horse. So since both sides don't want Trump dead…

Right, but to have him be very, very, very slightly injured and give your company a fist on it, and his anointment guaranteed…Whoever would want that could do it. One of the things is, they let him climb on the roof, they let him take his shots, they killed him so he couldn't talk.

Yeah, and I agree, Alan. I think that's the most likely explanation for these bizarre facts that don't really line up any other way.

I kept thinking about these things don't make any sense. They simply don't make any sense. I've been through these a number of times before. I was 22 years old when JFK was assassinated. And I remember all of the details that came up at that time, and what we knew at that time and how people reacted to it. And absolutely none of them afterwards ever showed anyone pointing up at the book (depository) building. None. They're all pointing ahead to a grassy knoll.

And a lot of these people were combat veterans. This was just after Korea and World War II.

There were combat vets under every bush. But they weren't looking up. They were looking out. That's where they heard the shots from. And I immediately hit that. I said, this doesn't make any sense at all.

Now, if Trump looked like he was going to beat Hillary Clinton and she was already anointed as the Democrat candidate, I could see Hillary Clinton with her past record figuring, “well, cool, won’t miss another one.” But other than that, it's not likely to have happened—not as a planned, hostile act from anyone outside of the Trump camp seriously intending to kill him. I can't believe that.

Yeah, I agree. Now, getting back to that alleged ear wound, which many of us suspect is kayfabe—kayfabe is is a professional wrestling term for “fake.” In a fake fight in professional wrestling if they need blood they take a blood capsule and smear it on their ear or whatever…

There was something I saw not not a month before about an assassination attempt, and they said that there's something like that that that actors also used…they would have it between their fingers or in the palm of their hand and whatever was supposed to be hit you know they would hit with it and there'd be a spattering of blood…

So Trump hits the deck. He comes up with streaks of blood on the wrong side of his face. And we see a picture of blood on his ear, but we don't see any wound on the ear. And then two weeks later, he finally takes off his bandage at his meeting with Netanyahu. And there's no visible damage to the ear. So to me, that makes it more likely that there was some kind of fake blood stunt than anything else.

Now, you said that if there was a wound, a real wound from that caliber bullet, that it would have been a lot worse. And there's a big discussion about this on the Internet. Some people disagree. A Secret Service ballistics expert was quoted by the Associated Press saying what you just said, which is that even a handgun bullet would probably risk a concussion coming that close.

Some handgun bullets, a .40 or .41 caliber, a very high-velocity weapon, a .357 Magnum or .44 Magnum, or in this case a .223.

You said that it might even rip the year off. And that's what the (AP-cited Secret Service) expert said.

Part at least, part of the ear. Part of the year up in there, depending on where it hit. These things are are intended…as soon as there's even a slight impact they start tumbling and they tumble, they tear…It’s instantaneous. How much damage is actually done depends on the precise point of impact. If it hit here for example inside the lobe of the ear there'd be more damage than if it just hit up on the side.

You don't have to give a live demonstration with live rounds.

Sorry, just getting my earphones okay. So…Depending on where the where it hit there would be a different degree of damage, of course. But you couldn't hit anywhere and not cause substantial damage and spattering of blood.

Right. And so why would Trump not show off his wound if he’d really been hit by a bullet in the ear? That's like PR gold. He should have been flashing that wound everywhere. It should have been on all the front pages. It should have been all over the Internet. But…nothing. He just covered it up with a bandage.

If he had been a little more ballsy and less of a showman, he would have gone back home and had someone with a pistol shoot off that part of the ear.

Apparently he didn't feel the need to do that, which tells you something about the degree of control of our media these days.

___

After the show, Alan emailed me:

Kevin -

Good show! Here are the links to the two (!) "liberations" of Dachau:

https://www.bitchute.com/video/gLoG3H6xn7Kb

https://www.bitchute.com/video/naqppWWmQj4G

Alan

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

Ron Unz, editor and publisher of the Unz Review, discusses “Donald Trump, Kamala Harris, and the Tottering American Empire.” a useful summary of ongoing ever-more-bizarre developments in American politics.  We’ll compare notes on the “Trump shooting” in Butler, Pennsylvania, an issue we sharply disagree on. The likelihood of a major escalation on the West Asian front, in the wake of Israel’s assassinations of Ismail Haniyeh and Fouad Shukur, will also be on the agenda.

Excerpts:

So yeah, things are not getting any less weird by the week, are they?

It's just a very strange time in American politics right now.

It certainly is. And the month of July may actually go down in history books as one of the stranger months in presidential politics, won't it?

Look, we had—there was a very suspicious assassination attempt against Donald Trump, who was leading in the polls. One of the main presidential candidates and a former president. And he came very close to dying in that assassination attempt, according to all the news media reports. And just a few days afterwards, his opponent, incumbent President Joseph Biden, was suddenly forced to leave the race, being replaced by his vice president.

There's never been a case before of somebody winning 99% of the primary delegates and then being forced out of the race by the donors and political operatives in his own party.

One of the aspects of your article that some might push back against would be: They would say, well, that's true, Ron. It seems very undemocratic that Biden would get virtually all the primary votes and then the donors and oligarchs would just force him out. However, the polls show that everybody approves of that, that all the Democrats almost unanimously approve of the oligarchs doing this to them. So what does that tell you about the voters?

Well, I mean, it basically shows, you know, that certainly would be the case. For example, if another candidate had simply been picked by fiat and if the media, the Democratic leading media, had all endorsed that choice, I think it's very possible that most of the democratic-leaning public would have supported it.

The truth is, Kamala Harris was an extremely unsuccessful presidential candidate when she ran. One of the points I made in my article was that when she ran for the nomination— she'd been elected U.S. Senator from the state of California—she checked off every diversitarian box. She's half South Asian, half Caribbean black. Her husband is Jewish. And so she ended up being regarded as one of the leading presidential candidates on the Democratic side in the primaries. She raised $43 million. She was one of the strongest fundraisers except for Bernie Sanders. And yet she did so badly with the actual voters in the Democratic primaries that she ended up dropping out of the race before the first vote was cast in Iowa, and got zero delegates.

So in other words, she clearly ran the most unsuccessful presidential campaign in American history. But again, the donors and the operatives then persuaded Biden to put her on the ticket. And that's why she's vice president and might end up being president in another few months.

It is all very strange. But again, for me, the strangest part is the acquiescence of the public, especially the Democrats that don't seem to have that much of a problem with it. Of course, there are so many things that they should have problems with that they don't. But how do you explain that? Kamala Harris has never been very popular. As you pointed out, her campaign was a complete fiasco. Nobody particularly liked her as vice president, including the Democrats. But now the polls seem to be showing that the people are not up in arms about this, to say the least. So do you think the media is succeeding in spinning this in such a way that they're basically bringing people on board with what they're doing?

I mean, that's certainly an aspect of it. The other thing is also Joseph Biden was an extremely unpopular president and was widely regarded as likely to lose to Donald Trump. A lot of people think that the reason he was kept on the ballot for the primaries, even though he was so unpopular and based on his debate performance and other statements since then really lost most of his mental facilities, was to prevent any open debate in the Democratic primaries.

So much of the Democratic base, the primary electorate, is so outraged with the position of the Biden administration on the Middle East, on the Israel-Gaza conflict, that if Biden had not been involved in the race as the incumbent, there might have been a very sharply contested battle among several candidates, one or two of which might have decided to go for the support of the base of the party by coming out with a different Middle Eastern policy.

So the Democratic Party apparatus, the donor class, the political operatives decided to sort of drag Biden across the finish line, since as the incumbent president, he would probably be able to win nearly all of the delegates, which is exactly what happened. And certainly it would be very unlikely that any prominent Democrats would enter the race against him, which is exactly what happened. And so once he'd accomplished that goal of preventing an open debate in the Democratic presidential primaries, they decided basically to get rid of him and put in somebody else instead.

It's just a very strange thing when you have the choice of the Democratic Party being somebody who received no votes in the primaries, just sort of was put in there. And Kamala Harris is making a few noises of objection to the current Middle Eastern policy of the administration of which she's a part. But there's a lot of skepticism whether she would actually implement any of those changes if she were elected….

It's interesting also, isn't it, the role that the Trump assassination attempt—or as I would say, the alleged Trump assassination attempt, because you and I have quite different views of that—played in this. Obviously, it gave the Democrats the excuse to knock Biden off the ticket, to finally dispose of him, as we assume they probably were planning to do anyway. But it would have been harder if they now didn't have this situation where Trump is posing with an Iwo Jima PR shot so it looks like he's basically been minted as the next president. So there's no way they're going to beat him now (with Biden). So they certainly have to drag Biden off the stage in the wake of that shooting, and the shooting played a very strange role in this.

But regarding the Trump shooting issue, obviously there are all sorts of very, very strange things about it. One can see it as a genuine shooting. We can take the official story at face value and say that the shooter got incredibly lucky due to outrageous Secret Service incompetence, and that Trump got incredibly lucky, because not just by being missed by the bullet, but by having the bullet do exactly the best possible thing that it could for Trump's political fortunes and indeed for his staying alive, giving him a perfect PR op. It couldn't have possibly worked out better for Trump.

And so we can look at this as the shooter getting incredibly lucky, the Secret Service getting incredibly unlucky or incompetent, and Trump getting luckiest of all. Or we can scratch our heads and say there's something fishy going on here. Maybe it was a real professional assassination attempt. Maybe there was another shooter somewhere who was supposed to finish the job. But if so, why didn't he?

But my analysis, as you know, which you disagree with, is that if we look at it from the “who benefits” standpoint and then sort of reverse engineer it, what we get is the strong possibility that the pro-Trump side—people who would like Trump to be in office and indeed to survive to be in office— would arrange such an apparent assassination attempt for that purpose. And I'm looking for a way for someone to prove that that's not the case, to falsify that hypothesis.

And I haven't yet seen it fully falsified. You've made reasonable arguments, but they're all kind of a priori arguments. And so give me the best argument against my hypothesis.

Well, again, first of all, I'm not at all convinced that there was any sort of conspiracy. In other words, probably I'd lean towards the official story being true. But as a secondary possibility, say one in three chance, I think there might very well have been a conspiracy…

(Listen to the interview, see who you think won the argument, and drop a comment!)

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

Kevin Barrett, editor at Veterans Today, is joining us out of Missoula. Hello, Dr. Barrett. Always a pleasure to check in with you. Your thoughts on the martyrdom of the top political chief of Hamas in Tehran by the Israeli regime?

Ismail Haniyeh was one of the greatest figures of our time. And that's, of course, why they went out of their way to martyr him. He was part of the resistance that is not going to go away and allow this slow motion genocide to proceed. It's standing up against genocide, exposing the genocide that's actually been going on in faster and slower spurts since 1948.

And this latest round of resistance that he was part of will be long remembered as the beginning of the end of the Zionist entity. The Zionist entity has gone insane, and they have revealed themselves as the enemies of all humanity. The vast majority of the people of this planet now see that. And it won’t be long before we see the final results. How much suffering there will be in the meantime, I don't know.

But God bless Ismail Haniyeh, and God bless the people of the Islamic Republic of Iran for standing strong and being willing to take this kind of horrific, insane abuse from this monstrous, psychopathic entity squatting in occupied Palestine. It needs to be eradicated immediately.

And we need people all over the world to figure out how to help do that. It can't all just fall on the current axis of resistance countries. The entire Islamic world knows this. The intelligent people in the Christian world know this. The whole global south knows this. Russia and China know this. The vast majority of the world knows that the genocidal Zionist entity needs to be put out of its misery and forced to stop spreading misery in the region and throughout the world.

And Dr. Barrett, why do you think this is the case that the whole world wants to see a permanent ceasefire in Gaza, has been pushing for one—Ismail Haniyeh was trying to negotiate one—and that he met this fate? Everybody wants to see a cessation of hostilities. They want to see entry of aid into Gaza. These were things that were topping the agenda when it came to Palestinians not martyring their top official. Why do you think the Israelis chose this narrative and path?

They must be incredibly desperate. I think they know that their time is numbered and they're getting ready for their Samson option. They're spreading death and murder and mayhem and torture. They're proud rapists. The Israeli people are forming these huge demonstrations for the right to rape, because they say that in a Jewish state, there's no such thing as rape of non-Jews, and therefore, this isn't rape, it's not a crime.

This is like the people of Sodom or Ahl Lut, except worse. And they're murdering people like Ismail Haniyeh precisely because they need to keep the war going. And by they, I don't know if I mean every single decision maker in Zionist entity, but certainly the current leadership around Netanyahu and his psychopathic, genocidal, lunatic co-workers, Smotrich and Ben-Gavir. Those people need to keep the war going for their own political reasons. And so they'll murder the person that they're supposed to be negotiating peace with.

Now, when somebody murders a peace negotiator, it's obvious that that side has no interest in peace. So this puts the onus of the soon-to-be-created ceasefire, inshallah, on the Zionists. They've proven that they're not interested. Now the whole world needs to unite and accept that reality and then force the Zionists to back down using whatever means are necessary.

And with the assassination of Fouad al-Shukri and the Hezbollah commander in Beirut the previous night and Ismail Haniyeh the following morning, where does that leave the region? And what is Israel trying to do with the region with these actions?

Murdering Fuad Shukr, and then immediately after that, killing the person they're supposed to be negotiating with—these people have gone insane. And I think maybe Netanyahu is demonstrating that he thinks he owns the Americans. He just went to America, and he convinced a bunch of shameful traitors and stooges of genocide to give him some sort of hero's welcome. But in fact, he's the worst war criminal of the 21st century, if not of all time.

And so I think that Netanyahu wants to stay out of jail. Ben-Gvir and Smotrich want to slaughter all the Palestinians and tear down the Al-Aqsa Mosque and put up a blood sacrifice temple. These people are all insane. And the thing is, Netanyahu is going to be in jail as soon as the war ends. So whether he's arrested for his corruption charges, which he was just about to be thrown in jail for when this war broke out, whether he's arrested for possibly being somehow complicit or at least grossly negligent on the Israeli side of October 7th, whether he's arrested for the most horrific war crimes of the century…

Though I don't know if the Israelis are going to arrest him for that because they're all a whole country of war criminals. They need to be deprogrammed. They need to be sent abroad to the Jewish autonomous oblast in Mongolia, and they need to be reeducated.

But ultimately, Netanyahu is a key part of the problem. And the fact that the Americans will not do anything to rein in Netanyahu, or better yet, get rid of him, is just utterly bizarre and shameful. Biden and Obama had no use for Netanyahu. So what is this Democratic administration doing, giving him carte blanche to drag the whole region into what could easily become World War III? Apparently, the American leadership has gone almost as crazy as the Israeli leadership.

And that's the thing, and I'm glad you mentioned that visit by Netanyahu to the U.S., because in many ways it was kind of a litmus test. He got there in front of Congress, tried to justify this campaign of genocide in Gaza, and he got standing ovations for that justification that was full of falsities and basically a bunch of fallacies and just a bunch of lies. So when he saw he got those standing ovations, it was a litmus test, because that kind of emboldened him to come back and do exactly what he did.

That's right. So really all of those people in Congress that were giving him those ovations, they're actually accessories to genocide. And they need to be dealt with on that basis.

They're also traitors to the United States of America. Netanyahu is the biggest enemy to the United States of America that this country has seen in recent years. Netanyahu was involved in creating the war on terror at the Jerusalem Conference in 1979. Netanyahu was involved in plotting the September 11th demolitions of the World Trade Center in New York.cThat was an Israeli job, and I urge people to search the internet for 9/11 Was an Israeli Job by Laurent Guyenot.

And so this is just the beginning of his crimes. And now he's gone all out for genocide. Again, he's by far the worst war criminal of this century. He was a terrible war criminal even before the century began. And he needs to be put to bed. If there are any sane Jewish squatting settlers left in occupied Palestine, they'd better get rid of this guy because he's going to drag the whole region to hell. And in the center of hell is going to be the 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

Thaddeus Kozinski recently published one of his most popular essays: “Seeking ‘well-being’ instead of God as our goal will lead to hell.” He asserts that “The totalitarians ruling us are satanists, whether officially or not, and they want to abuse us to such an extent that we no longer ask questions in the mode of salvation…There are only two paths in life, the one that leads to heaven and the one that leads to hell. And there are only two modes of living, salvation and well-being.”

In the interview, Kozinski discusses the “satanic” Olympics opening and responds to Laurent Guyénot’s dismissal of “satanic panic” on last week’s show.

Excerpt:

“It's not as if the pursuit of wellbeing is evil in itself. I mean, it's something we do, and we're supposed to. We're supposed to desire goods—worldly goods, emotional goods, earthly goods. But the problem here—and this is sort of Plato's insight— we have a deep existential and spiritual desire for something more than just feeling good or being happy in the contemporary sense. We have a longing for something that transcends all that.

“And the different religions, especially the monotheistic religions, tell us what this is and how to get there. And sometimes it's at odds with the pursuit of immanent, worldly, therapeutic kind of wellbeing. And when it's at odds, that's when this choice comes of how we should live. And sometimes we have to put wellbeing second and put something else first. And it's kind of mysterious what this is, what we're searching for, but we call it, God, salvation, and heaven and the spiritual life and the cross in Christianity.

“And I think that the main theme of the article has to do with truth. Truth is very important. So how does one value the truth of things? And most people would say, “yeah, I want to know the truth. I'm interested in the truth.” Well, here's the thing. Are you interested in the truth no matter what? Is it first? Is it your priority at all times? Are you willing to even die for it, sacrifice for it? And as I argue in the essay, it seems like our culture is sort of very systematically, deliberately oriented to cultivate in the citizens of the world, in the West especially, the tendency to not put truth first—to be willing to sacrifice it to something else.

“And this is really the most damning thing you can do, I argue in the article.”

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

Philip Kraske discusses his new set-in-Morocco play How Far Casablanca. Unlike the Bogart-Bacall film, it is not romantic war propaganda set in an exotic location, but rather a black comedy involving outrageous media lies covering up horrendous crimes of state (a genre Kraske has mined more than once). The underlying theme involves naive America, psychopathic Israel, and long-suffering Palestine. It’s a tight, well-constructed effort. If I ever teach a college class on red-pilled literature—an ever-unlikelier prospect—I’ll put this one on the syllabus.

We’ll also talk about Phil’s articles on RFK Jr.’s prospects and perceptions of Putin and Russia.

Philip Kraske is an expatriate American novelist, playwright, poet, and language teacher.

Excerpt:

“Kevin, you and I always exaggerate the interest of Americans in foreign policy. Yes, people don't like the images on TV. Yes, people say, oh, this is awful, Israelis can't do this. But number one, the mainstream media gives them a very sanitized version of what's going on. And second, what goes on beyond American shores…I mean, Every time I go back to America, it's just the same. The moment I start talking, even with educated people—the moment I start talking about what's going on in Europe (I live in Spain), what's going on in Spain, what's going on in the world, what's going on with President Putin, about how I think he's somewhat vilified, there's just no interest. It's like something that happens on Mars. Very sad, but that's the reality.

“And I have a feeling that Kennedy looks at it the same way. Yeah, everybody hates what's going on with Gaza, but when it comes to voting, when it comes to really worrying about it, well, it's a lot of university students who are making a lot of trouble and things like that. I just don't think it registers with the general public. It has to be like pretty close to nuclear war or a 9-11 before people sort of wake up and say, ooh, God almighty…”

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

Systems Neuroscientist Ph.D.  Kevin McCairn of the Korea Brain Research Institute joins Jewish interfaith dialogue specialist Doooovid and I to discuss red pill issues including COVID origins. (As regular viewers/listeners know, I think COVID emerged from a US bio-attack on China and Iran.)

Kevin McCairn is the co-author of “An open debate on SARS-CoV-2’s proximal origin is long overdue” among other papers.

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

Wyatt Peterson, author of the book Perfidy of Zion and the article “October 7 in Context”, returns to discuss his new article “Parallels: JFK, RFK & 9/11.” In light of the apparent Trump assassination attempt, Wyatt provides some interesting historical context:

“How many Americans are aware that the Jewish Secretary of the Confederate States, Judah P. Benjamin, was a close confidant of both John Surratt—a man accused of plotting Lincoln’s murder in partnership with John Wilkes Booth—and the Rothschild family of Europe?”

“In the spring of 1977 George de Mohrenschildt was found dead from a shotgun blast to the head after publicly complaining that ‘the Jewish mafia’ was trying to kill him for writing a memoir about his former friend Lee Harvey Oswald titled I Am A Patsy! I Am a Patsy!” 

“In his 2018 best-selling book Rise and Kill First: The Secret History of Israel’s Targeted Assassinations, Israeli journalist Ronen Bergman reveals that Israeli Military Intelligence had been working on a program the month before Robert Kennedy’s assassination to hypnotize and program Palestinian prisoners to kill PLO leader Yasser Arafat…Almost everybody today who’s familiar with the facts of the case, including RFK’s son Robert Kennedy Jr, acknowledges that (Palestinian-American) Sirhan Sirhan was under the influence of hypnosis when Bobby Kennedy was killed and couldn’t possibly have fired the fatal shot.”

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

On this week’s False Flag Weekly News I experienced a sign of cognitive decline: “sudden shouting.”

My outbursts of “sudden shouting,” also known as ranting, were occasioned by astonishment and anger at the audacity of the “Trump shooting” hoax and the gullibility of those who believe it. We have seen some bad magic tricks before—pathetic efforts to convince us that Oswald shot Kennedy from the Book Depository with the world’s worst rifle, or that the Twin Towers and Building 7 blew up due to modest office fires—but the claim that Trump was shot in the ear may be the most hilariously ludicrous history-steering hoax ever.

As I wrote a few days ago, if Trump had gotten his bloody 7/13 coronation PR stunt through sheer luck, he would have defied odds equivalent to winning the lottery. What are the odds that the first-ever amateur to attempt to shoot Trump at a rally would manage to squeeze off any bullets? Maybe 1 in 1000 at best. Normally, security would nail him long before he could shoot.

And if the lone nut defied those odds and somehow managed to bring a weapon to within a kilometer or two of a rally, what are the chances that his bullets would travel anywhere near Trump? Essentially zero, if the Secret Service were doing its job.

But let’s say our first-ever lone nut Trump rally gunman managed to defy all those odds and somehow took a few shots at Trump from a viable sniper’s perch about 500 feet away, as Thomas Matthew Crooks allegedly did, thanks to hilariously unbelievable “Secret Service incompetence.” What are the odds that he would manage to “graze Trump’s ear” in such a way as to create blood for the photo op, without doing any serious damage? If this story were true, which it obviously isn’t, never in all of human history has an ostensible shooting victim been luckier to have been shot in the head.

Crooks didn’t manage to blow Trump’s brains out, but the fabulators who concocted this ridiculous story sure did manage to blow America’s brains out. They must be rolling on the floor laughing with dupers’ delight as they feed us hilariously fake “evidence” that the shooting was real.

Consider the “magic bullet” photo op. The original “magic bullet”—the one that allegedly passed through John F. Kennedy and John Connolly several times, stopping occasionally to make sharp turns, before materializing perfectly intact on a stretcher—is a national joke. But at least the JFK assassination magic bullet didn’t pose for a photo op! The “Trump ear shot” magic bullet, which obviously never existed, felt the need to offer risible proof of its alleged existence by allowing itself to be photographed. Another miracle! Without that photo, there would be no evidence that any actual bullet came close to Trump. (The odds that a photographer would succeed in catching a shot like that are once again in win-the-lottery territory; the photo has been called “a one in a million shot” but the real odds are probably considerably lower.)

And if you thought the “Trump earshot magic bullet” was uproariously funny “proof” that Trump was shot in the ear with a 5.556 mm bullet traveling over 2000 miles an hour, get a load of the long-overdue but now finally released “medical report”! It’s written by an ultra-Trump-loyalist “doctor” (possibly unlicensed) who appears to make Groucho Marx’s horse-doctor-turned neurologist Hugo Z. Hackenbush look like a paradigm of medical integrity:

A spokesperson for the congressman did not immediately provide a response when asked about the status of his license, and Trump campaign’s did not immediately respond to questions.

Jackson has come under considerable scrutiny. After administering a physical to Trump in 2018, he drew headlines for extolling the then-president’s “incredibly good genes” and suggesting that “if he had a healthier diet over the last 20 years he might live to be 200 years old.”

In 2001 (sic - should be 2021 -KB) the Department of Defense inspector general released a scathing report on his conduct as a top White House physician that found Jackson had made “sexual and denigrating” comments about a female subordinate, violated the policy on drinking alcohol on a presidential trip and took prescription-strength sleeping medication that prompted worries from his colleagues about his ability to provide proper medical care.

Sounds like just the doctor to convince people like Keith Olbermann, among others who have been demanding an official, well-documented medical report and calling Trump a liar. If Trump’s personal Dr. Hackenbush is the only medical professional they can find to attest to Trump’s alleged bullet injury, that pretty much seals the deal right there, doesn’t it?

Experts who are not Trump loyalist quacks universally admit that Trump’s ear almost certainly cannot have been struck by a 5.556 mm bullet traveling over 2000 miles an hour, leaving only the minor injury that Dr. Quackenbush described. Once again quoting the AP story on the medical report:

“If a bullet whizzes by your ear from a low-caliber handgun, it’s not a big deal. ... You get a headache or feel dizzy like a bad concussion,” said Sarani, chief of trauma at George Washington Hospital in Washington, D.C. “But if the bullet is from an assault rifle, the energy is bigger, broader, and you’re more likely to develop bruises.”

He added, “in Trump’s case, he got very lucky…

Former Secret Service agent Rich Staropoli said the AR-15-style rifle used by the gunman fires a 5.56 millimeter bullet at such high speeds — over 2,000 miles an hour — that just the air pressure as it passes can cause extensive damage.

“The shock wave alone could have ripped his ear off,” Staropoli said of Trump. “It’s amazing the bullet nipped him” and didn’t do any other damage.

“It’s a one in a billion type of thing,” he added.

So multiply the billions-to-one odds of the shooting even happening by another billion to one. At some point we are going to start running out of zeros.

Jewish JFK-coverup commissar Arlen Specter pulled the JFK “magic bullet” out of his rear end to explain the inexplicable. But now the Trump team has one-upped Specter. Whatever will they think of next?

So to sum up: If you believe in the Trump shooting, you believe in miracles. And just as Christians signal their belief in the miraculous crucifixion-resurrection narrative by wearing crucifix necklaces, Trumpians vaunt their faith in the “miraculous ear shot” by gluing feminine hygiene products to their ears.

Dissociated Press

Following Donald Trump’s “magic ear shot” publicity stunt, millions of his supporters are wearing “brain bandages” symbolizing their gullible acceptance of the wildly improbable story. By gluing feminine hygiene products to their ears, the Trumpsters indicate that they have undergone brain-removal surgery and believe everything Trump and the media tell them.

The ear bandages symbolically suggest that the wearers were subjected to “brain vacuuming,” a new form of surgery involving an incision being cut through the earhole, a vacuum hose being inserted, and the brain being vacuumed out.

And if you doubt the above explanation for Republicans’ manifest cognitive decline, watch this clip of Trump smirking as RNC delegates lap up the cynical kayfabe showmanship of Hulk Hogan.

Hogan’s message was unmistakeable: “It’s all kayfabe!” Obviously someone who was genuinely angry that their hero had been shot, and who was sincerely expressing that anger, would not look remotely like this. Professional wrestling is a comedy act in which steroid-addicted men pretend to hate each other and beat the living sh*t out of each other, while everyone except maybe one little kid who just happened to have stumbled upon it on TV knows it’s outrageously fake. Its entertainment value stems from comedy associated with dupers’ delight: “Ha ha ha! Someobody, somewhere, might actually believe this is real!”

So when Hogan symbolically “unveils the truth” (that the shooting was kayfabe) by ripping off his shirt, with Trump smirking in the background, the crowd falls into a trance of “believing” while at some deeper unconscious level knowing it’s all fake. That’s the same reaction generated by the preposterous official stories of the JFK assassination and 9/11. It results in a pernicious form of cognitive paralysis, in which emotional defense mechanisms hysterically rally to defend the indefensible. As one of psychologist Frances Shure’s 9/11-denial patients told her: “I wouldn’t believe it even if it were true!”

Democrats’ Cognitive Decline

The Republicans may be the ones wearing brain bandages, but the Democrats are in even steeper cognitive decline. Their failure to question the kayfabe “Trump shooting” is even more inexcusable, because they have been conditioned to hate Donald Trump and believe him a shyster, pathological liar, and conscience-free reality TV showman who is capable of absolutely anything. (In those beliefs, if little else, they are correct.) Given those assumptions, how could anyone with two neurons to rub together possibly swallow the odds-defying spectacle in Butler? Yet polls show that only one in three Biden supporters suspects the Trump ear miracle may have been staged! That means that two-thirds of Biden supporters are absolute drooling idiots, even stupider than the Republicans lapping up Hulk Hogan’s revelation of the method while sporting feminine hygiene products glued to their ears.

But I suppose that shouldn’t surprise us. That Democrats somehow missed Biden’s obvious cognitive decline, despite several years’ worth of unmistakeable evidence, shows that they too must be suffering from cognitive decline.

In short, we have a brain-dead president, a brain-dead party behind him, an equally brain-dead opposition party, and a brain-dead Republic. Idiocracy has come to America, almost 500 years too early.

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