Truth Jihad Radio

Rumble link Bitchute link

Laurent Guyénot, author of From Yahweh to Zion, discusses his two new French-language articles “Hollywood, CIA, Epstein, Pizzagate : Check out the Documentary Out of Shadows ” and  “Manufacturing False Memories and the MK Ultra File.” (Non-francophones can cut and paste the text into Google translate to get a sense of their contents.) We’ll also discuss the apparent Trump shooting. Spoiler: Laurent agrees with my interpretation.

Laurent wrote me to ask about Islam’s interpretation of Satan and satanism, adding:

“I’ll have to state from the start that I don’t believe that Satan exists, except as a collective Idea. There was no satan before christianity. I’m a stoic: evil is ignorance.In a nutshell, my general opinion is:– Satanism in pop culture is like pornography: a way to destroy the youth. Those who promote this do not believe in or worship satan. They believe in Yahweh or in the self-chosenness.– Satanic ritual abuse is, to a large extent, a psychiatric phenomenon of « false memories » produced in psychotherapy: this position attracts me a lot of insults, but I’ve been studying the topic for twenty years.– the notion that the world is rule by pedosatanic people is a psyop of Q-Anon. In real life, there are pedophiles, and child prostitution.– The idea that satan rules the world is the smartest way to destroy the real dissident movement. To control people by fear, there is no better tool than Satan.– There are a lot of crazy people in the conspiracy world who, when they run out of topics, speak about Satan. It makes them look courageous and deep, and it impresses gullible people.”

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

Please note that this is not the actual broadcast, which is in Farsi. The interviewer is doing a running translation from Farsi, which is why the word choice and delivery are not “broadcast quality.” It’s also the reason I speak unusually slowly, in hopes of making the translator’s job easier.

IRINN

When we see these pictures from Palestine, this bloodshed, this genocide, it seems that it is a very catastrophic situation and that unfortunately international organizations are keeping silent about this matter.

The international reaction to this genocide is bifurcated. It's split between the people—the majority of people worldwide deplore this genocide—and the leadership class in the West, and in the part of the world dominated by or intimidated by the United States leadership, The leaders have been largely complicit with only pro forma protests.

And the scale of this catastrophe is beyond what has been reported. The Lancet just estimated there have likely been 186,000 or more Palestinian deaths, which credits Ralph Nader's estimate in March of something approaching 200,000 deaths.

This is just a completely unimaginable genocide. And the American empire has so far had the power to allow it to continue.

Every day we can see different attacks on different hospitals in Gaza Strip. Why can we not see any international reactions?

Well, in the United States and to some extent in Europe, the people are not seeing this. They're certainly not seeing it on mainstream news channels, except in very, very small doses. The younger people are seeing it on TikTok and social media. And that's why young people in the West are motivated to protest against this genocide. But the mainstream media in the West is dominated by Zionists. It's owned by Zionist billionaires. And it has grossly downplayed this genocide, to the point that the owners of Western mainstream media are arguably guilty of complicity in genocide. They ought to be tried, condemned, and executed.

I want to talk about Mr. Senator Vance as Vice President for Donald Trump. And when we look at the stance and political positions of Mr. Vance, it seems that this man is a supporter of Israel.

Senator Vance is a strong supporter of this genocide, and he could not have been chosen for this role if he were not. Donald Trump has reportedly been offered $100 million by Miriam Adelson, as well as presumably large sums from other Zionist billionaires, in exchange for his green-lighting the continuation of this genocide, and perhaps even the acceleration of it beyond what we're seeing now. So it is not surprising that Trump's vice presidential choice would be another ultra-genocidal Republican.

Kevin, we are witnessing Israel continuously doing satanic actions against Palestinian girls, Palestinian boys, with large numbers of Palestinians killed by the Israeli regime. At the same time, when we look at NATO's (human rights) stance in the era of Moammar Qaddafi in Libya, NATO has a strict stance against Moammar Qaddafi. But about Benjamin Netanyahu, they keep silent.

Yes, well, Qaddafi was an independent leader who was actually opposed to Zionism. And the Zionists, with their power in the West, can decide when one leader needs to be publicly executed and another leader is allowed to get away with genocide. Obviously, NATO has a grotesque double standard in terms of what it claims are criminals in leadership positions.

NATO is just a euphemism for the American occupation of Europe. So the powers in control of the American empire will lie and propagandize and try to justify their actions, which are based on raw Machiavellian power calculations. They don't care about human rights and they don't care about the worst genocidal crimes if those crimes are being committed by their allies.

After military actions by IRGC against Israeli regime three or four months ago, at the same time, we’ve seen lots of US students protest in different universities of America. What should Islamic countries do against the Israeli regime?

I think it's very hard for the leadership of the occupied Islamic countries, that is, Islamic countries under the influence of the American empire, such as the country I live in, Morocco. It's very hard for the leadership of these countries to provide open support for the Palestinians. However, one hopes that the leaders of these countries are finding ways to provide covert support for the Palestinians. We know that there is a lot of covert support for Palestine and the resistance coming from all over the Arab world. And one certainly hopes that the leadership in Arab countries are looking the other way and encouraging, not just allowing, but encouraging this kind of help. And we certainly hope that sooner rather than later, the Palestinian resistance will obtain the kinds of weapons that it needs to once and for all put an end to the genocidal Zionist occupation of Palestine.

Mr. Kevin, recently I was in North Africa, in Algeria. It seems that majority of African people, those who live in Africa continent, are supporter of Palestine. But when we want to talk about governments, it seems that they have some considerations. How far is useful for government of African countries to be supporters of Israel? It is very strange.

Yes, I agree that it's strange. I understand why the leadership of these countries tries to avoid publicly being marked as strong supporters of Palestine, because they would be replaced. They would be assassinated or overthrown. However, some of them seem to go further in developing relationships with the genocidal Zionist entity than one thinks would be strictly necessary. And while I don't know what's going on behind the scenes, I'm appalled by this huge difference between the unanimous support for Palestine and overwhelming support for the Palestinian resistance among the people of these countries, and the very very different and and indeed shameful positions of the leadership in those same countries.

Can Palestine and Gaza be a turning point about a changing international system? After World War II, when we want to talk about the United Nations, it seems that the United Nations is dismantled. The United Nations says nothing about what is going on in Gaza. Can we say the United Nations has been dismantled?

The United Nations has passed a long list of resolutions about Palestine, and they've been ignored. There's the right of return. There are resolutions insisting that Israel withdraw from the territory that it occupied in 1967. And all of these resolutions have been completely ignored by the Zionists. And because the United Nations is structured so that the winners of World War II, led by the United States and its European vassals, have veto power, the United Nations cannot enforce anything. So there is no real international law and international law enforcement.

But the current failure with this accelerated genocide, this second phase of the Nakba of 1948, is so extreme that this could lead to a shakeup in the United Nations and international law. And as the relationship between the great powers shifts and a new power structure emerges, then we may see the possibility for reforming the United Nations. And if that happens, inshallah, I think that the Palestine issue will probably be the single most important issue behind it.

And the last question, Mr. Kevin Barrett. Mr. Barrett, you are American. I have one of my friends living in the United States. And when I talked with him about the Holocaust, he said that officials of universities in the United States took students to the regions that the Holocaust has happened. And they have propaganda in support of the Israeli regime. When we want to talk about censorship, why do they censor some brutal acts of Israel in Gaza?

The Holocaust narrative is the centerpiece of Zionist propaganda. Indeed, the Zionist entity would not have been able to claim its existence in 1948 if it hadn't been for this narrative.

That Holocaust narrative has been made sacred in the West. It's illegal to question it. Many of the West's greatest historians, including arguably its all-time greatest historian of World War II, David Irving, have gone to jail for questioning this narrative and seeking the true facts.

So it's a terribly shameful situation in which a very likely exaggerated, mythical version of the Nazi mistreatment of Jews in Europe has been used to justify a vastly more horrific and inexcusable genocide of the people of Palestine.

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

Cat McGuire and I broadcast yesterday’s False Flag Weekly News just a few hours before Donald Trump’s ear was apparently struck by a bullet during a rally in Pennsylvania. According to the official story, an apparent lone nut named Thomas Matthew Crooks took several shots at Trump, piercing his ear with one of them and killing one person and wounding another, before being shot dead by the Secret Service.

According to a BBC interview, a man with a rifle spent several minutes crawling across a roof, in plain view of witnesses who kept screaming at the Secret Service and pointing out the shooter. Elon Musk, among others, is demanding the resignation of the head of that Secret Service detail.

Coincidentally, our FFWN broadcast had just cast the US presidential elections as a bad horror movie, described the Biden regime as a zombie presidency, and speculated about how long it would be before the zombie-in-chief (or his candidacy) keels over dead. Also coincidentally, we had noted that Israel and its assets are pulling out all the stops to put Trump back in power, preferably with a big mandate, so he can greenlight “finishing the job” of the Palestinian genocide.

Those are the bare-bones facts. Now let’s consider the historical context. While there may arguably have been a few cases where angry, politicized lone nuts have taken potshots at presidents or candidates, the vast majority of such shootings have been professional operations involving one faction or another of the Deep State. The Kennedys, for example, were removed from power by the state of Israel and an allied hardline faction in the US security community. As for unsuccessful attempts, when John Hinckley Jr. shot President Reagan, he did so on behalf of the Bush crime family, as members of the Reagan Administration knew at the time according to insider witness Barbara Honegger.

If the Trump shooting was, like most such events, a Deep State operation of one kind or another, let’s flesh out the implications. First, could it have been a genuine attempt to kill Trump? That seems highly unlikely. If Deep State professionals decide to kill Trump, they would use a plan with a high probability of success, like poison, a plane crash, or a “bulletproof” shooting plot like those that killed the Kennedys. (Dealy Plaza was awash in crossfire from top-level marksmen, while RFK was killed from pointblank range by a handgun pressed against the back of his skull. In neither case was there any realistic chance that the gunmen would miss.)

Having someone shoot at Trump and miss would be a surefire way to enhance Trump’s chances of winning, while providing “life insurance” by riling up Trump supporters to the point that another attempt on Trump’s life might unleash social unrest. That’s why anti-Trump pros wouldn’t take the chance.

So…cui bono? Obviously the way the shooting played out benefits Trump enormously. So if the spectacle was arranged by pros, they must have been pro-Trump pros.

Keep an eye on any Secret Service guys who resign. Will they enjoy a lifestyle way above what one would expect on a government pension? Or will they disappear and live lavish lifestyles under new identities, with none of us the wiser?

Gordon Duff, a Marine Corps trained marksman, master gunsmith and retired CIA “troubleshooter,” posted the following:

Cue Bono – Who Benefits

Timing

Metal detectors at all Trump rallys

The rest is all a Hollywood fake just like 9/11 and all those Syrian gas attacks and several of the school attacks but we won’t say which ones for obvious reasons, ask Alex Jones

We expected this, a Mossad false flag to save Trump from being beaten by Kamala who is polling ahead of him.

Sad that we had to see this kind of cheap theatre…no it can’t be anything else

What we saw:

Fireworks followed by a preplanned face gesture then ducking to the ground where his face was cut.

The rest of it, patsys as usual. Watch it play out, it will be totally predictable.

So most likely this was a false flag by Israel and its assets in the US security and organized crime communities. The only other realistic possibility is that the Secret Service just happened to royally screw up and allow some amateur to take potshots and pierce Trump’s ear (will he start wearing a bullet earring?)

There is absolutely no way this could have been a professional assassination attempt by an anti-Trump Deep State faction. If and when one of those happens, it won’t just leave Orangeman with an ear piercing.

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

Richard Falk, Princeton International Law Professor Emeritus, returns to Truth Jihad Radio to discuss his recent article on Biden's worldview (and competence or lack thereof), and the Gaza genocide.

Memorable quote: "The Netanyahu invitation (to once again address a Joint Session of Congress) is an edifying metaphor that confirms the dark foreboding of skeptics like myself critical of the US global role since the end of the Cold War and deeply pessimistic about the future of the country."

Richard Falk has been repeatedly and ineptly attacked for daring to come on my show and discuss third-rail topics.  He has positively reviewed David Ray Griffin's work on 9/11, served as UN Special Rapporteur to Palestine, and earned a reputation as an accomplished American academician of rare courage and integrity.

Rough transcript:

I am overjoyed to welcome back to the show a guest who's been on several other times and has been attacked by the usual suspects for even having the temerity, nay, the unmitigated audacity to talk to me. And that is Princeton International Law Professor Emeritus Richard Falk, one of the heroes of the American Academy, a truth seeker, truth speaker, and a man of integrity…so welcome, Richard Falk. It's great to have you back.

Good to be with you, Kevin. You've been doing a good job for a long time.

Well, thank you. I appreciate that. And that quote will undoubtedly be used against you by the New York Sun.

They can have it.

Okay. So...I'm not quite sure where to start, but I guess we could mention that you've been continually publishing very good, balanced, accurate commentaries on various topics. And most recently, you have a piece on Biden's worldview, the elections, the fact that Netanyahu is coming back to address a joint session of Congress, and that all this bodes ill for America and the world, and that you're feeling rather pessimistic. And I'm pretty sure you're not the only one. So maybe you could tell us how that feels.

Well, it doesn't feel as lonely as it might have felt a year or so ago. I think there's a lot of skepticism about how the Democrats are running their campaign, (with) a mentally challenged president who won't step aside, even for the benefit of the country, of having a candidate that has a good chance against Trump.

And a Democratic Party that doesn't want to talk about what the U.S. is doing in the world. It wants to proclaim, with some justification, what the Biden presidency has done in the United States by way of social programs and basically a liberal agenda. But that's not the whole story, given the futile and destructive war in Ukraine and the genocidal attacks on the Palestinian people in Gaza, and the spillover to the West Bank.

Do you think that what there is of democracy in America has gotten disconnected from these global issues, almost as if there's a deep state running these global issues in a profoundly mendacious and almost psychopathic way, and that the democratic process such as it is, and the official institutions under the constitutional arrangements, don't really have a whole lot of effect?

Yes, I think there is a considerable element of seeking to exclude the citizenry from the conduct of foreign policy. And you notice, especially in the Gaza-Israel context, that if you repeated the views of citizens, policy would be much different and more balanced. I had highlighted the invitation to Netanyahu as a way of illustrating the extremity of the alienation of the government from the public. And it's correlated with a Supreme Court that has violated some of the most fundamental principles of what was thought to be a constitutional republic, placing the head of state above the law and freeing private sector interests from substantial regulation.

So you have a kind of new new hidden plutocracy of the wealthy that extends to the private sector and is very well represented, overrepresented in bureaucracy and drives the country toward exaggerating foreign threats and trying to maintain through militarist policies, the world as it was after the collapse of the Soviet Union, back in 1991. And putting in effect, the US as in charge of managing global power, and excluding any shared management of the sort that existed during the Cold War. The US wants to have sole authority to act outside its borders with impunity while holding Russia and China fully accountable to the supposed principles of international law. So it's an imperial foreign policy that is sustained by the weakness of the UN and the fact that the UN was actually designed to be weak. The most powerful countries being givena veto power, which in effect tells them they don't have to obey international law or the UN Charter. The primacy of geopolitics, in other words, when strategic interests get in the way, has made it possible but not tenable for the US and the other liberal democracies to support genocide in Gaza and to at the same time condemn Russia for a very provoked attack on Ukraine, and a continuation of war without any kind of diplomatic receptivity to some sort of political compromise. The result being that NATO powers are showing their willingness to continue the war until the last Ukrainian. And it's basically a geopolitical war against Russia and a warning to China that it will confront a similar reaction from the West if it dares to pursue its interests within its own region.

It's interesting, isn't it, that what we used to call the war party in various historical contexts—there's a group of people who are pushing for a more militaristic policy and for war, and then the rest of the society is not particularly interested in that—it seems that the neoconservative war party in the United States has taken over.

There used to be a distinction between the “crazies in the basement,” Wolfowitz and his friends, and the establishment including a lot of realist thinkers. But today whether they present themselves as liberals or progressives, etc., it seems that all of the relevant players are essentially neocons on board with the radical Wolfowitz doctrine, and willing to roll over for the most outrageous acceleration of the genocide in Palestine. How did the neocons take over the country when they made such a botch of it after 9/11—which you, being a David Ray Griffin reader, know very well was likely arranged by the neocons. That doesn't really reflect very well to their credit. And then the wars that they orchestrated through that false flag event went south and turned into disasters. And one would think that the neocons would be ridden out of town on a proverbial rail. And yet somehow the opposite happened, and they're completely in charge. Now there's nobody but the neocons. How did that happen?

It's a very good and difficult question. I think the media certainly played a role in validating this kind of post-Cold War military, the opportunity that both political parties saw to essentially create the first global state, not a territorial state, but a dominant political presence throughout the world which required a continuous over-investment in the military and was tied to the emergence of this absurdly one-sided distribution of wealth and income, what we talk about mainly in terms of inequality, which has never existed to this degree. A middle-class family could live a very comfortable life when I was a child. But now it's pressed by increasing costs of ordinary living, despite the fact that the economy has expanded maybe 10 or 12 times. That hasn't reached the people. And it hasn't reached the people because of this insidious relationship between private sector wealth and militarism and the deep state bureaucracy that has been so influential with both parties in the last three decades.

So you see inequality of wealth as very much tied in to this neocon takeover in foreign policy. That raises the issue of why Biden is taking credit for supposedly improving that problem on the domestic front while at the same time pursuing neocon policies abroad. That seems like a contradiction, doesn't it?

You can think of it as a contradiction, but you can also think of it as mystifying the citizenry, that you tell them one thing, but you actually do quite a different thing. And Biden, of all recent presidents, including Trump, exaggerates the security threats to the US throughout the world and engages in wars that don't have any legitimate national security foundation. But the defense industry and related sectors of the economy flourish under conditions of exaggerated threats. And the beauty of this kind of militarist foreign policy is that it doesn't produce many American casualties. The thing that they learned in Vietnam was not to stop intervening around the world, but to stop sacrificing American lives in these very costly and, in the end, unsuccessful interventions.

And so this, in a way, is a kind of dream come true for the military industrial interests sustained by the media, of having the profitability of a wartime economy, without having the political backlash and cost.

And when you say you're pessimistic about the direction this is taking, and I think many of us have to agree, then the alternative would be coming presumably not so much from within the United States and the West. I'm going to talk with Philip Kraske in the second hour about RFK Jr.'s prospects, which Phil argues may not be quite as completely hopeless as they would appear. That does seem to be a bit of a long shot. But maybe a less of a long shot, in terms of what's actually going to change this situation in reality, is that the United States is eventually going to be defeated in war, or strategically defeated in a Sun Tzu-style war without a shot being fired. People like Andrei Martinov are well known for writing about the US military being a bit of a paper tiger, precisely because, as you said, it's all about profiteering for the military-industrial complex. And that means that a slightly leaner and meaner machine like the Russian and Chinese military production folks have can actually beat the US. That's Martinov's thesis anyway.

So there's this one school of thought that says the US empire is heading down. My former colleague at University of Wisconsin, Alfred McCoy, wrote a book predicting that the US empire would lose a war with China in based on Chinese superiority in quantum computing, which would allow them to take out the satellites and blind America, take down America's command control communications. Do you think that Martinov and the others who think that the U.S. empire has doomed itself to lose militarily are right?

Well, I think one of the characteristics of declining empires historically has first been to exaggerate their own capabilities to conquer, to reach out and control things that are beyond their control. In other words, an overreaching. And I think we, as an American state, have been doing this at least since the Vietnam War. The Vietnam War should have taught us that in the age of decolonization, you can have military superiority and yet lose the war. And in that context, that should have been the lesson, that the resilience of a mobilized nationalism has more sustaining power than does an intervening imperial act. And this was proved true in the other anti-colonial wars, where the colonial powers had the battlefield superiority, but lost all the war. And that was not a lesson that could be learned if the overriding goal was to keep this meretricious relationship between the state and the private sector in terms of escalating militarism all over the world. And this has been the, you can call it a kind of infernal social contract between the state and society that is only understood by a very small sector of the society. And it persists. It doesn't even mind so much losing these wars or being unsuccessful because it continues to to require weaponry and to emphasize the importance of military approaches to foreign policy and to negate diplomatic cooperative relationships in international society. So it's a win-win for the militarists and their ideological infrastructure.

And then that, in the Gaza context, that's reinforced by a civilizational encounter between the racist Western liberal democracies, the former European colonial powers, and the breakaway British colonies of US, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand. Those developments are what I've called the second coming of Samuel Huntington and the clash of civilizations. You notice that all the supporters of Israel come from this supposedly liberal democratic West, and all the militant opposition comes from mobilized movements in the Islamic world. And so you do have this civilizational confrontation, which is part of the wider struggle going on in the world. And Ukraine fits into that because it's part of the white seen as part of the White West and needs to be defended, just as Israel needs to be helped to become victorious.

Do you think that there's a chance that the cracks opening up, the fissures in public opinion and in political leadership in the West will change any of this, specifically Gaza? We've just seen some governments quite unsympathetic to Israel here in Europe, where I am right now. The Spanish government—I'm actually in Tarragona, Spain right now—the Spanish government is much less sympathetic to Israel than the American government, of course, and somewhat pro-Palestinian. The Irish government likewise. And now we have Mélenchon threatening to become the Prime Minister of France. Mélenchon and his people, are significantly more pro-Palestine than Macron.

Plus the Labour Party in the UK, which is now back in power. It isn't the Labour Party of Jeremy Corbyn, but they have to appease some of the people in that party who are less pro-genocide than many of the others. So given all of this, we've seen a kind of a shift in European politics towards the pro-Palestine position. So maybe it isn't just the Islamic world versus the White West here. Maybe that the fissures are opening up in the White West and that might actually bode well in the long term, at least, for Palestine.

Yes, but of course Palestine can't afford the long term. The rate and degree of destruction is so severe that Palestinians themselves are saying “we can't last much longer.” And so whether these development translate into genuine fissures or are just internally significant political developments…See, Ireland is a special case because it identifies as an anti-colonial power in Europe. It was victimized by British imperialism and colonialism. Spain is an interesting case that no one anticipated. And the French elections, I think you have to wait to see how that plays out, because it was a juggling of positions partly based on giving priority to defeating the far right, and whether it really represents a significant turn to the left is something that has to be shown rather than assumed. But I would add to what you said, the strengthening of the BRICS, and the degree to which the global south is beginning to challenge the dollarization of international trade and the way economic order is sustained, could have quite dire effects on the whole stability of this arrangement in the US, where a fragile balance is maintained between what is done in domestic society and what's done in the world.

And as I said earlier, it's really quite astonishing that given the prominence of these engagements in Ukraine and Gaza that the Democratic Party has run away from defending or justifying these such initiatives. Somehow it thinks it can defeat Trump by looking at the domestic political scene and the threats he poses to constitutional democracy.

I actually don't find that all that surprising, given that the Democrats are pretty much locked in to the neocon line on foreign policy. And Trump, is a little harder to pin down. But I think he articulates much better than any of the competition, except arguably RFK Jr., who's too smart for the room, this sort of “America first” vision that resonates with ordinary people and that sort of hints at things like, why do we even have NATO anymore? We won the Cold War. What's the point of NATO? We should be getting out of all these places. And Trump's always saying, “hey, if I were in charge, we would solve all these problems. There would be peace everywhere. I would be friends with all of these leaders. And I'd solve these problems in a heartbeat. We don't need to have wars in any of these places. Let's bring our troops home.”

Of course, when he was president, he massively increased the military budget and kept arming the Nazis in Ukraine and practically started World War III by killing General Soleimani. But in any case, Trump, for all of the incoherence of his actions and his words, does seem to articulate this kind of common sense position of ordinary Americans on foreign policy. So I don't think the Democrats can beat that unless they want to be truthful. And we all know you're not allowed to be truthful in politics.

Yes. I sort of made the same point, that Trump at least opposes so-called forever wars and is fearful of policies that will lead to what he calls World War III. And Biden is silent about all those kinds of issues. And the Democratic Party is silent, and the congressional candidates are silent. And so you have this peculiar situation that I can't recall a precedent where the party in power doesn't defend its most controversial policies, but sort of hopes that no one will notice. No one will see that the elephant is in the room, and it's so far well-behaved in the room, so it doesn't have to be in any way addressed as a present. And I can't remember any situation comparable to that.

And there's also this uniqueness of the situation that U.S. inherited after the collapse of the Soviet Union and mishandled from the point of view of human interests. It could have pushed at that point for nuclear disarmament, for a really viable multilateral system at the UN, and even a constrained veto. It could have done a lot of things that would have made the world safer and better and more cooperative, more able to address challenges like climate change, migration.

And the question is, why was that not done or even seriously proposed? And I would go back to the analysis that I think we share of the neocon distorted ideology becoming the national bipartisan ideology. And therefore, there was no occasion to discuss it because everyone was in agreement that this was the way to take advantage of what Krauthammer called the unipolar moment, by which he meant that the U.S. could dominate the world without having to address geopolitical rivals.

The Ukraine War, in addition to its civilizational dimension, was the first major challenge to this unipolarity. And it was, in my view, a geopolitical war to keep others out of the geopolitical game and keep it as a way of perpetuating Western dominance in a post-colonial world.

But was it really effective? There's one analysis according to which the real purpose of provoking this Russian war in Ukraine was to try to bleed the Russian economy and thereby eventually or even fairly quickly cause economic collapse, political collapse and break up Russia. And then the US could move in and surround China and stop China's meteoric rise. And that has obviously failed. The Russian economy is as strong or stronger than ever. And they're not doing too badly militarily either, although they're not getting any quick victories. But the question would be, is this a failure from the American perspective, or are they happy to have a long war, imagining that they're somehow bleeding Russia, even though the Russian economy is doing fine? There's no real evidence that they are going to defeat Russia and then be able to stop China. So I actually lean towards the analysis that says this isn't going so well for the American empire. But what say you?

In some ways, I share that view, but I think it is in other ways going rather well because it's sustaining this militarism without casualties. And I think that's the foundation of this post-Vietnam adjustment. And it's also a technological adjustment using drones and missiles rather than boots on the ground. It represents an effort to wage war in a way that is helpful to the inequality-oriented domestic economy and has the grudging but consistent support of the mainstream media. which pacifies the American public and sort of broke down in the last couple of months because the government was so out of keeping with the conscience of America, especially youth in America, including Jewish (youth)m and which had been very patient about a staging protest in the first month of the Gaza event. But when it saw the all the branches of government supportive of a set of policies that invited a fascist takeover, combined with this open complicity with an ongoing transparent genocide, that became too much and produced this popular surge, which is completely rejected by the formal government with its calls of deporting any foreign student who takes part in this, ending lots of vulnerable faculty appointments, compelling university presidents and other high officials to resign because they're “too soft on anti-Semitism.” A whole bunch of policies that were an affront to people of conscience who had been quiet for a long time, but somehow rose up in view of the sustained horror that was shown to them every night on TV, especially if they had access to Al Jazeera.

And so it's a different kind of political...that we've never known before, where the global south is more actively challenging the dominance of the global north, where China has its own network of institutions, its own style of exerting influence, and where Russia wants to get back in the game of geopolitics. And we should remember that the Cold War, for all its problematic aspects, respected spheres of influence of the Soviet Union as a way of defusing the sort of encounters that could have led to World War III. In other words, there was no interventions, counter-interventions in Eastern Europe when there were uprisings, and no efforts to offset the CIA role in destroying Communist Party influence in Western Europe. In other words, there were these spheres of influence that really acted as buffer zones between these geopolitical actors and contributed at any rate to maintaining a kind of hot-cold war.

Yeah. The refusal to allow Ukraine to be neutral and to be still something of a buffer zone really seems to be the key factor behind that conflict. Getting back to the students protesting the genocide of Gaza, that's been a very interesting development. You find it strange that the censoring of voices coming from America's campuses is so lopsidedly always about Israel, this little country of 15 million people. And somehow that's the thing that you're not allowed to talk about. When I was chased out of the University of Wisconsin and my career was basically ended because I was championing David Ray Griffin's work on 9/11, like you did, I was being attacked mainly, most viciously, by pro-Israel partisans who just kind of assumed that I was I hated Jews, was anti-Semitic and anti-Israel, because I was blaming 9/11 on Cheney and Rumsfeld. Which struck me as very bizarre: somebody doth protest too much here. And the more I discovered that I was being mobbed by Zionists for talking about the American government doing 9/11 the more curious I got about what was really going on behind the scenes. That eventually led me to this view I have today, that the Israel lobby, which is largely a function of Jewish ethnic tribalism and massive ethnic nepotism that's coalesced around Israel as the project, has a death grip on America. That's why Netanyahu is being brought to address joint sessions of Congress. This is the third time. He’s now tied with uh with Winston Churchill in that regard. But he's way ahead of Winston Churchill in standing ovations. The congress, American congresspeople, are falling all over themselves to scream hallelujah to this guy. And American professors and college people are being shut down and brutally beat up by police on the orders of Jewish Zionist billionaires. And you can't talk about this. Why is there such a lopsided attack on American democracy and free speech and it’s all about this one little country over there occupying Palestine?

Well, I think it's the fact that the Zionist diaspora is very well organized and funded by wealthy Jews living outside of Israel and by Israel itself. And it has learned from the South African collapse of the apartheid regime, that it's extremely important to control the public discourse around a conflict of this sort that has a moral core. It still is surprising the degree of specific vindictive influence that is exercised and effective in the most respected universities in America that you would have thought would be able to stand their ground in support of academic freedom and not give way as often as they have ,with very few examples of courageous independence being demonstrated. So this kind of Zionist network has to be seen as a way of shaping anti-democratic policies in a supposedly democratic country.

The other factor I think that's very important is that the Palestinians, despite having law and morality basically on their side, have not been able to organize in a way that's politically relevant in the U.S. and European context. So politicians have nothing to gain by taking even a balanced position. And they have a lot to lose because AIPAC and kindred organizations spend lots of money to make their campaigns fail. So it's a mixture of pragmatic politics and very sophisticated control of the discourse and the atmosphere, weaponizing anti-Semitism, all kinds of tactics that I've been victimized by.

Exactly. Yeah, just for talking to me, they witch hunted you—pretty ineptly, in my opinion.

So another interesting thing about this current election is that RFK Jr. is running. I actually voted for him, wrote him in for president, as a protest vote, in 2020. Here's a guy who's on record saying that the CIA killed his father and his uncle. He's a total enemy of the deep state. He makes Trump's ramblings about the deep state seem stupid. RFK Jr. is actually speaking relatively accurately about it and attacking it very openly. And so I thought that was a good protest vote in 2020.

And then suddenly here he is 2024 actually running for president. In the second hour of his show, Philip Kraske is going to come on and say “it's not quite as hopeless for him as it might seem.” And so I'll see how Phil manages to defend that position.

But my question, Richard, is that RFK Jr. seems to be pretty well informed and relatively intelligent and articulate, certainly compared to the competition. And yet, despite his seeming rather intelligent and sensible on a long list of positions, when it comes to Israel and Zionism, he's to the right of Trump. Miriam Adelson doesn't even need to give him $100 million. Rabbi Schmuley just holds his hand for free. How do you explain that? I mean, the Zionist very likely killed his father. Who's going to hypnotize a Palestinian patsy to take the blame for a political assassination? I wonder! Three guesses. So, how can he not know that? Is he faking it? Is he going to try and take power and bite them back? Or is he crazy? What's wrong with RFK Jr. on Palestine?

Yes, I've thought about that myself. I think it's partly that he wants to show that on this issue, that he must believe is important to a majority of the people that would potentially support him, that he knows what's going on in the world, that he's not kind of naively critical and that Israel has proved itself a valuable geopolitical ally in the Middle East where the energy dependence exists. I mean, I'm not sure that's much of an explanation, but it seems to me to be there's something there, because it does depart from his general...

Let me question that, because it seems to me that he's very sensible on Ukraine. And it seems to me that the Ukraine conflict is more of a U.S. geopolitical interest. But it seems to me that, on the contrary, U.S. support for Israel is massively counterproductive for U.S. imperial geostrategic interest, given that it's essentially made it really hard for the U.S. to govern that region. So if RFK Jr. were trying to show that he was savvy about U.S. imperial interest, you would expect him to be hawkish on Ukraine and dovish on Palestine. But it's the opposite.

Yes, that's a reasonable point, although I think that a lot of people that thought of themselves as anti-system, as he does, were persuaded that Israel was an important, indispensable ally in the Middle East, and that the Middle East was crucial to the future of the West. And that came with the outcome of the 1967 war, where a lot of people that previously were somewhat ambivalent and not committed, including in the government, were persuaded that Israel was not just a burden for the U.S., but it was really an asset, and particularly after the Shah of Iran had fallen and a hostile Islamic government had replaced the Shah.

So I don't know. It still doesn't make sense to me. I mean, he also is, you know, probably much better than I, a radical anti-vaxxer. And obviously takes positions that most intelligent Americans don't take.

Wait a minute, Richard. I question that. First, I would say he's a moderate anti-vax person, not a radical one. If you read his book, you'll find out why. And secondly, well, we'll have to do a whole new show on that because I... Anyway... That's another issue, but I would argue that most of his work on vaccines is actually correct. I had family tragedies back in the day, did the research and came to the same conclusion. So I actually, my family and I have never been vaccinated. I believe that there has been a systematic overestimation of the benefits of vaccines in general and a systematic willful ignorance of the harms. So I think he's actually got that issue pretty close to exactly right. But then maybe I'm crazy, too. I don't know.

Unless you spend a great deal of time, which I haven't done, these are very hard issues to penetrate and to have an informed point of view one way or the other.

Yeah, I actually did take the time because I had reason to. So more than years ago, I was persuaded of these things long before RFK Jr. actually ever got around to it. That's one of the reasons I wrote him in for president in 2020.

Most people also would think his statements about the CIA killing his father and uncle and many other things are way off the reservation. I happen to think that almost everywhere he's off the reservation he's basically right, or closer to being right than the mainstream is, except his bizarre statements on Palestine. So for you, I suppose it's not that surprising because he's a little goofy. For me, no, I think he's actually shockingly well-informed and intelligent on everything except Palestine, where he's equally shockingly foolish.

I've had people who've worked with him, including Zoey O'Toole, who's edited some of his work, on the show. She might have been involved in his book. She's also, if you're interested in the vaccine issue—and I assume you probably have other things to do—she put out a book by a couple of Israeli scientists who had to be anonymous or they would lose their jobs, called Turtles All the Way Down, which is really the best extant introduction to the other side of the vaccine issue.

In any case, Richard, I know you've made so many contributions in so many areas, I'm not going to ask you to flip on that one. Well, we only have a couple of minutes left. What can ordinary people do to try to stop this genocide in Palestine? What's the first thing we should be doing? Supporting the demonstrators on campuses? What can we do?

Well, I think that's one thing we can do. Strongly supporting the campus protests and protecting faculty who've turned out to be vulnerable. I think we can also support activist initiatives that show solidarity with the Palestinians. I know there's this weekend a People's Tribunal on Gaza out in the Bay Area, organized by Code Pink. And I don't know how well it will be orchestrated and enacted, but I think it's time when the official institutional structure has proven inept or wrongful. So we need people power here and in so many other areas.

Thank you so much, Professor Richard Falk, Princeton Emeritus Professor of International Law. I appreciate your great work over the years on such important issues. And I hope that someday the world will wake up to your approach to things. Keep up the good work and God bless.

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

Europe is going anti-Semitic. What's with that? Let's start with Britain. That's the latest election. So many elections happening, it's hard to keep them all straight. Sir Keir Starmerstein, or whatever his name is, just won a historic victory. And the historic victory was basically the Jewish oligarchs', who destroyed the UK's Labour Party over so-called anti-Semitism and are now returning to support genocide. But Jeremy Corbyn somehow still won a seat. So what's your take on this, Mike?

Well, it's a cautionary tale. The upshot of the Washington Post piece is if you obliterate your own culture or your political party, we will reward you by getting you elected. So it's a huge step backward. And it seems to be the opposite of what's happening in the rest of Europe at this time.

Everywhere else, everything's up for grabs. The so-called far right is menacing us! But in Britain, this totally Zionist “centerist” faction that recaptured Labour from the real Labour Party of Jeremy Corbyn has engineered a landslide victory for the Jewish right to commit genocide against non-Jews.

This poll showed the pro-Jew genocide candidates won vastly more seats than the anti-genocide candidates:

There are only five winning anti-genocide candidates, but one of them was Jeremy Corbyn. So he's back, but he would be the prime minister if it weren't for the Jewish oligarchs.

It's been England's fatal embrace. Barbara Tuchman wrote a book called The Bible and the Sword about how England became Jewish somewhere along the line. This has been the curse of England. With the Reformation, the ruling elite became the people who treated the English people like Palestinians or Goyim or however you want to talk about it. And they've been this kind of crypto-Jewish elite for a long time now. The clearest example of this was Puritanism.

When you turn against the church, as the Church of England did, there's only one place to go. So you go to the Old Testament and you become a crypto-Jew. And these are the people that founded our country. So we have inherited this curse, if you want to call it that.

I think you're onto something with that analysis, Mike. And of course, they're accusing Starmer of taking time off from his busy job on Friday evenings to keep the Sabbath and visit his Jewish friends. Apparently his wife is Jewish and he's sort of quasi-Jewish himself. He goes to the synagogue. So there's this big hysteria about anti-Semitism because Tories were saying that maybe we can't trust this guy to be on the job Friday night. What if Putin attacks us while Starmer’s off keeping the Sabbath? That’s an anti-Semitism scandal there, just like there was when they got rid of Corbyn.

Yeah, they can't get away from it and they can't understand it either. That's the whole problem because England is the most anti-Catholic country in the world. It has always been the most anti-Catholic country in the world, because the creation of the new England called the Reformation was basically the theft of church property. And the oligarchs never wanted to give that property back. It was that simple.

So you had the same families like the Russell family, all these families that go back to that theft. Cromwell lived in a house that was stolen from the Dominicans, and he's never going to give it back. And so when you have this negative identity, you're naturally going to be moved in this direction. And as I said, the tragedy is that we speak English, and we have a congenital weakness when it comes to this type of thinking.

I'm afraid so. So Jeremy Corbyn was really swimming against the tide when he tried to run as a British Labour candidate rather than a Jewish oligarch backed Labour candidate. And the majority of the Labour voters, if they weren't being totally brainwashed by vast piles of Jewish billionaire money, might have different views.

Here's a piece from the Times of Israel pointing out that a whole lot of labor supporters are alienated by this “centrism” on Gaza, meaning tolerance of genocide.

Right. I love that word, centrism. I love that word. Center of what? Of course, the Jewish newspaper gets to define the center, which is invariably in their interest. Classic, classic. The English are now in a battle. They have this guy, Tommy Robinson, who is a total Muslim basher in the pay of the Jewish oligarchs to basically steer the working class, the soccer hooligans, the yabos.

Did you say the sucker hooligans?

Yeah. (Steer them) into the Israel camp by demonizing Muslims. And we know people over there. I know a guy interviewed me, Nick Cotton. He goes to Speaker's Corner, which is a venerable institution where they try to claim they have freedom of speech. And he tries to wake the people up to the fact that this anti-Muslim campaign is basically the oligarch campaign to keep you on the Jewish reservation.

Last week we talked about this latest Tommy Robinson scandal in Canada. Tommy ran out of money for his cocaine and sex worker fund. And so he he let it slip that he was “going to get nicked in Calgary.” And sure enough, when he got to Calgary, there was a staged arrest. And within about two microseconds, out went his big fundraising plea to the sucker hooligans and all those nice little old ladies who want to preserve Britain, who have been suckered into supporting Tommy Robinson.

Britain is a sad case. Let's move on to someplace a little bit less depressing, hopefully. How about France?

La France. C'est un grand pays. And they're getting into an interesting runoff election. The fool, Macron, called for new elections at kind of what looks like just the wrong time for him.

And now here's the anti-Semitism scandal in France. The usual suspects are not happy that Macron is blocking the Marine Le Pen National Front victory by playing games with the Mélenchon “extreme pro-Hamas left.” Well, frankly, I might vote for Mélenchon and the “extreme pro-Hamas left” if I were in France and able to vote. What's your take on all this, Mike?

I think the real issue is NATO. I think that that's the fear is that they're going to revert to de Gaulle, and de Gaulle will pull the French out of NATO. I think that's what's driving this right now. And I think Macron’s desperate. They've got a huge Muslim population there. Dieu Donne and Alain Soral tried to come up with a group called Égalité et Réconciliation that would basically be an alliance between the Muslims and the French nationalists. And I think that's precisely what they fear.

Same thing in England. It's waiting to happen. George Galloway is an example in England.

And this is Macron’s desperate attempt to get in front of that parade because, there are so many of them.

But I still think that the main issue here is NATO. I think that we're seeing the collapse of NATO right now, and France may be one of the main pillars in that collapse.

Yeah, I agree. They're pulling out all the stops to try to keep propping up NATO and prevent the Gaullists from winning. And that's what's kind of shocking, actually, about this whole thing: the way that the Gaullists actually are not performing very well in these elections. There's like a Gaullist party, the RPR or whatever it is, that's getting like 10%. If I were in France, I think I would want a return to power of the Gaullists who always stood up for the actual interests of the French more than anybody else there.

Yeah, I think that's what's going on. It's happening across the board. So it's exactly the Robinson manifestation where as soon as there's a significant nationalist movement, the Jews rush in and co-opt it. And that's what they've done with every nationalist movement in Europe.

And they've done it over here. That's what neoconservatism is, basically. When Pat Buchanan gets serious about America first or resurrecting America first, the neoconservatives rush in and take over the conservative movement. They're doing the same thing in Europe. So you can be pro-nationalist as long as you're pro-Israel. That's a contradiction in terms. But that's the way it is.

And that's Meloni. She's a colossal disappointment in this regard. The Dutch guy as well, Geert Wilders. It's all across the board.

That's the deal. And either you go along with it or you don't go along with it.

Yeah, well, some are going along with it, others are not. But the latest Je Suis Charlie propaganda stunt that is being used to try to steer this election back into a more pro-Zionist direction is the big story about an alleged anti-Semitic rape of a Jewish girl. So it's funny, it's like if anybody else of any other ethnicity happens to be victimized by a violent crime like a rape, it’s not usually considered a racial (or political) incident. But if the alleged victim is Jewish, then it is. How does that work?

Well, they roasted her in an oven, too. They didn't tell you that before they raped her…

Oh, by the way, we don't know the name of this girl. We have no details whatsoever. Oh, and by the way, it just happened in time for the election.

So if you're asking me, I'm a little bit cynical here. When they find the corpses of the decapitated babies and the babies that Hamas roasted in the oven, maybe I'll be willing to entertain the story of the Jewish girl who got raped.

Yeah, you have to wonder whether they printed up all those signs before the news of the rape, or before there even was a rape. With Je Suis Charlie, they had those signs printed up almost instantly after the shooting of the cartoonists.

So who knows? Maybe they're just really, really good at PR and they can just whip these things off of these print shops like almost instantly.

So how about over in Germany—more anti-semitic incidents in Germany! Here's the unintentional comedy piece of the week by this sports journalist Barney Ronay who goes to Germany to cover the the Euro football tournament. And everywhere he goes, he's terrified because…well, because it's Germany. His own family “was Jewish enough and communist enough to meet the criteria for extermination.” They fled into hiding. “And then, of course, there are the inevitable improbable stories.” Like the uncle, who got pulled off the train and got shot and a bullet passed through his neck. He lay down for a bit, took a little nap and got up and rejoined the resistance.

(laughter)

At least he wasn't raised by wolves.

Is that improbable?

It's one more Holocaust story. This is the Holocaust narrative gone berserk. I said in my book, The Holocaust Narrative, that the turning point came in the early 1980s when they put Ernst Zundel on trial in Canada.

And suddenly the Holocaust crowd had to testify under oath. And suddenly they couldn't document anything. The great Jewish historian, Raoul Hilberg— he was the guy, the leader of German historical memory—he couldn't testify to anything.

And at that point, it all broke down and they switched horses in midstream. And then came 1992 with Schindler's List. Which is Holocaust denial, if you watch it, because when they put the naked ladies in the shower, water comes out, not gas.

That's Holocaust denial.

And Debbie Lipstadt then created this deli called Holocaust denial. At that point, Spielberg created the Shoah Foundation. And at that point, they threw any type of accuracy or truth to the winds and anybody could show up and tell you anything. You could testify, and they would record it and put it in the archives.

And that's when these other stories started to proliferate. As you said, Misha and the wolves: Misha traveled 900 miles across Europe with a pack of wolves to liberate her parents in Auschwitz. It's a great story. It didn't happen. It blew up in her face and so on and so forth. And so there's no holds barred anymore. None of this has to be true anymore. You can make it up as you go along.

It's terrifying, though. That's the whole point of this article. He's terrified by his own lies. He's brainwashed himself by his own lies. The lady laughing on the train….

Yeah, that's the next quote here: “I had begun my first day at the Euros when a happy German woman was laughing uncontrollably on a train passing through woodland outside Munich. And I realized that happy, uncontrollable German laughter is terrifying.”

You know what, Kevin? Every time I get on the Indiana toll road, I'm terrified. Because Hitler built the Autobahn in Germany. Did you know that?

Well, the Autobahn is kind of terrifying. They drive pretty fast there.

Yeah, I know. I've driven fast there myself.

So this is the type of thing where the Jews are whipping up this hysteria of their own creation. They are creating these crazy stories and they believe them and they're becoming terrified. And when the Jew becomes terrified, you better watch out. He's going to kill somebody.

He's going to kill somebody. And Gaza is proof of that.

That’s partly what makes this piece so bizarre is that this guy has his head up his own whatever. The level of tribal narcissism during this genocide in Gaza, right? I mean, there's a real genocide. There actually is a mass killing, wiping out civilians happening as a matter of policy. And he's part of the tribe that's doing it. But he goes to Germany and he talks about his family myth that his uncle was shot through the neck and took a little nap, got up and rejoined the resistance and was raised by wolves. He probably has a family myth that somebody went into some gas chamber. So therefore he has the right to go to Germany, show us all these pictures of these alleged death camps and so on (of course, there weren't any death camps in Germany, even according to the orthodox historians, but they don't care about that either) and be terrified by happy Germans, laughing Germans, German trains, German railway sidings, German forests, German forest clearings, empty German parks at dusk, and any German village square.

He's being terrified by all this stuff as this mass slaughter is going on in Gaza. Do you think these people need psychoanalysis or something?

Yes, they do. Anthony Blinken said his stepfather went into the gas chamber. There were all these dead bodies lying on the floor. Zyklon B would have killed him simply by opening the door, if that is what happened. And he got out because he walked backwards. So it was like Michael Jackson doing the moonwalk. You thought he was going forward, but he was really going backward. And this is the Secretary of State of the United States of America, who is incapable of negotiating with the Russians at this critical point in human history.

And so he goes to Kiev and covers a Neil Young song. instead of doing what he's paid to do.

This is toxic. It's gone beyond funny. It's not funny anymore because too many people are dying because of these people's psychosis.

Yeah, I can't really disagree. Well, Germany is trying to fix this terrible problem of being so terrifying, having their laughing people being terrifying, their parks being terrifying, their trains being terrifying, and so on, by having a new anti-Semitism clause in their citizenship law. So if you want to be a German citizen, you have to swear undying allegiance to Israel?

That's right.

You have to swear that you support, quote-unquote, “Israel's right to exist,”meaning to keep committing genocide, I suppose. So you think that'll solve the problem? Will the British sports journalists be able to go to Germany without being terrified by happy Germans laughing after this new law passes?

No, there's no end to this. And the tragedy is that there's a whole class of people in Germany who would take that ridiculous story seriously and feel that they needed to do something.

When I was there years ago, that was a generation that had fought in World War II and had been raised before the war, educated before the war, and so on and so forth. It's only gotten worse since that time because there's a whole class of people who have to identify with oligarchic control in order to get into positions of power.

It's that simple. And they're doing it. And the Germans can't seem to wake up from this bad dream.

Even their right-wing populist party AFD is afraid to cross some of those lines.

On a side note, I met Germar Rudolph. He's written a book called the Holocaust encyclopedia. He spent four years in prison for Holocaust denial, which is what can happen to you in Germany. So he sent that book to the AfD, fhe Alternative for Deutschland, because this is supposed to be the alternative to the whole thing.

Of the 15 states in Germany, 14 of those states (that he sent his book to) indicted him for Holocaust denial. This is the AfD doing this, the Alternative for Deutschland doing this. They have to do this because they're constantly under a cloud that they're all crypto-Nazis. This shows you how bad the situation is and how this whole IFDA nonsense that they’re some type of reform party is simply not true. They have internalized the commands of their oppressors just as much as every other party has. And the heart of that internalization is the Holocaust narrative.

Some alternative. AFD, right. I had Germar Rudolph on my show not too far back, and he's doing good work. So Germar Rudolph's Holocaust Encyclopedia is a very interesting compilation. But apparently even the so-called Alternative for Deutschland isn't ready for it.

But let's get on to a real genocide, the one that's happening right now. Gaza is getting it a lot worse than Hiroshima did. It's a much smaller area, 36 square kilometers compared to over 900, and has gotten six times as much explosive power. Basically, they're taking down every building there.

Here's a WikiLeaks document showing that the plan to basically depopulate Gaza was there from the very beginning, right after the October th Al-Aqsa storm operation. And the New York Times, reporting on the ongoing seizure of West Bank land, is using all kinds of circumlocutions to avoid saying the obvious. It's being stolen. And meanwhile, the IDF is bragging about its inhumanity. Apparently, there are these violent killing porn-type channels on Israeli social media where the Israeli soldiers are sharing all these hideous, horrific things that they're doing, like blowing up a whole block of residents to celebrate his daughter's birthday and playing around with what's left of the children that they've murdered or expelled, and all kinds of weird, violent,  pornographic-type stuff.

Again, it seems like there's some kind of psychological issue here.

Yes, there is. It's it's guilt. The Marquis de Sade said, if you feel guilty, then commit a crime that's even greater than the one that made you feel guilty in the first place. I think that's what's at work here. So they have to up the ante. They have to become more and more outrageous, more and more dehumanized in order to maintain their position, in order to keep their conscience from plaguing them in the middle of the night. Because they are committing crimes against humanity.

So they basically lied about being genocide victims, or at least grossly exaggerated, and now they have to commit a real genocide to try to get rid of the guilt of that lie. I hate to imagine what they're going to try next.

That's why it gets worse by the day. You have to exceed, in order to calm your conscience, you have to do something worse than what led to the guilt in the first place. The Marquis de Sade, was a diabolical psychologist. He's St. Augustine turned upside down. Because he comes to many of the same conclusions as St. Augustine, but from a completely opposite point of view. Whatever St. Augustine said was bad, he says is good. But it's the same soul that they're talking about.

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. Peter McCullough, author of Courage to Face Covid-19 and CEO of The Wellness Company, returns to Truth Jihad Radio to update us on current research on whether those mRNA vaccines were really “safe and effective.” We’ll start out by discussing Dr. McCullough’s new article “Association Between COVID-19 Vaccination and Development of Alzheimer’s Disease.” It seems a Korean study just found “an increased incidence of Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI) and Alzheimer’s Disease (AD) in vaccinated individuals, particularly those receiving mRNA vaccines, within three months post-vaccination.” (Maybe Biden shouldn’t have gotten boosted before that debate…)

I wrote to Dr. McCullough: “If the vaccines were remotely ‘safe and effective’ we would expect the vaxxed to be doing significantly better than the unvaxxed. If the opposite is the case, as this study suggests, something is obviously badly wrong. The same problem seems to be cropping up in other vaxxed-vs.-unvaxxed comparisons. If you could offer an overview for my audience, that would be great.”

Coincidentally, on the day of our interview, the New York Times published what may be its most upfront acknowledgment of vaccine injuries yet: “Darrell Currie’s life-changing illness: ‘It felt like a bomb went off in my brain.’” From the NYT:

As he has gone deeper into the investigation and more tests have been done, the belief his illness is related to the virus or the subsequent three vaccines he took has grown stronger.

“After the first vaccine I got terrible tinnitus in my ears within 12 hours, so it was definitely a side-effect,” he says. “I went to see my GP and they said there weren’t any (known side-effects) at the time, as it was so new. The media were some of the first to get the vaccines as we were allowed to travel and work. I questioned whether I should take another but I did, as I had to work.

“This is possibly the start of the story. After the second and third vaccines I had weird feelings — pins and needles up my arms, across my face, it felt like my tongue was vibrating, my jaw was hardly moving and I had headaches. Now doctors say those are signs of mild allergic reactions.

“Did the Covid vaccines potentially affect my immune system and so, when I then got Covid, could my body not react? Was it immune failure, attacking itself? A lot of doctors I am seeing now feel that is what happened.”

Currie has waited to speak about his suffering partly because he was concerned about the tone of the conversation around Covid vaccines and the attention it could attract.

Here is an uncharitable interpretation of “waiting to speak out due to concerns about tone etc.”

Will the New York Times eventually apologize to people like Peter McCullough, who has been highlighting vaccine risks ever since the rollout? Don’t hold your breath.

Selection from my interview with Peter McCullough:

Thanks for having me, and it's great to join.

Yeah, great to have you back. It's been, I think, like a year and a half or something. And during that time, I think your position on these COVID issues has been confirmed by more and more information, scientific studies and other things. The truth about COVID now is leaking out even into the mainstream. The “safe and effective” thing, which we were all skeptical of from the get-go (is on its last legs). You had more information than I did, but even I was skeptical enough to not get vaxxed. It was experimental, new technology they couldn't possibly have tested properly. There were a lot of reasons to want to wait and be in the control group. And I'm so glad I did, partly because I listened to people like you.

Now we look back at the “safe and effective” rhetoric from the COVID era, and we have studies coming in like this Korean one that you just wrote about showing links between COVID-vaccination and the development of Alzheimer's. Peter, correct me if I'm wrong here, but if these vaccines are safe and effective, they should be mitigating COVID infections, meaning that the harms associated from COVID infections should be less. And therefore, if you run this vaxxed-versus-unvaxxed study, you should find that the vaxxed people should be doing better. They should have less Alzheimer's, less cognitive impairment. But in fact, it looks like the opposite is the case. That's really concerning. Is the mainstream going to have to face up to this, and if so, when?

The mainstream media—there is a tsunami of adverse data reports that are coming in. Remember, at the time the mainstream media proclaimed the vaccines were safe and effective, when they were released December 10th, 2020, there was only one month for the primary series to be administered—this was Pfizer—and two months of observation. No one knew at month four or five or six what was going to happen. No one could have known.

Think about this. How could they possibly say that they were safe and effective when there was no time to understand if they were safe and effective? And then before we knew what was going on, we were told that boosters were going be needed every six months. But there's been no studies of the cumulative effect of taking shot one and shot two, and then shots three and four and five. And currently the CDC is going to be recommending shot number 10 for people our age. But the cumulative toxicity of the shots has never been studied. It would be impossible to study in a prospective randomized fashion.

So you and I are in the 25% of Americans who did not take a shot. And the COVID States program has reported that. Rasmussen surveys and now adjusted CDC data are all cohesive. Thank goodness 25% did not take a shot. And we fared fine through COVID. A paper from Cleveland Clinic by Shwetha and colleagues showed that we actually did better through COVID than the vaccinated.

Let me quickly ask about that, because usually there's a healthy vaccinee bias, since normally people concerned about their health tend to be more educated and they get more propagandized. So they go out and get lots of vaccines. But they were already healthier. And so when you compare vaxxed to unvaxxed you have to adjust for the fact that the people who get vaxxed are baseline healthier. So you're saying that here the bad effects are so bad that they're actually overcoming that healthy vaccinee bias?

Yes, it's true. And in fact, the vaccinated were more likely to call me for early treatment. They were paranoid about COVID-19. So think about this: the vaccinated, when they got vaccines, were healthier than the unvaccinated. They were more likely to seek early treatment. Many of them already had COVID before. We have a paper by Daniels and colleagues from the NCAA. Young people, 60% of college kids, already had COVID in 2020. And then on top of that, when the vaccines rolled out, the virus was much milder. It quickly mutated to milder forms.

So the vaccinated were more likely to seek early treatment, and already had natural immunity. The vaccinated should have looked better. But in most studies that have fairly ascertained vaccine stats, they look worse. In the Cleveland Clinic study, they got more and more COVID. Data from the Office of National Statistics in Scotland showed that the vaccinated had higher rates of hospitalization and death than the unvaccinated.

No randomized trials have ever shown a hospitalization or mortality benefit with the vaccines. Yet the official statement from COVID select committee member, Brad Wenstrip, the chair, as well as Anthony Fauci, is that the vaccines saved millions of lives. I can tell you as an epidemiologist and a clinician, it's impossible for the vaccines to have saved millions of lives. In fact, it's just the opposite. The vaccine has cost the lives of millions of people across the globe.

And how about the comparative mortality studies of vaxxed and unvaxxed overall, the overall mortality? You would think that that would be a good way of ascertaining whether there was anything serious going on one way or the other. What are some of the studies there and what are they showing?

It's not looking good. Dennis Rancourt from Montreal Epidemiologist about a year ago published an estimate, an ecological analysis, that a million people had lost their lives due to the vaccine. Now we have data coming in from Mostert in the Netherlands, Alessandria from Italy, and now Buchender in Germany, all showing that as the vaccines rolled out in 2021 and 2022, instead of mortality getting better with vaccination and the culling effect of the infection, it got worse.

We haven't seen the 2023 data, but this is terrible.

Immediately, there should be a merging of the vaccine administration data and the mortality data in these countries that have, complete reporting. But not a single country on Earth will merge the vaccine records with the death records. That should tell you something.

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

First hour: Dr. Alan Sabrosky returns for another “first Friday of the month” appearance. Today's topic menu, borrowed from this week's False Flag Weekly News stories: (1) DNC campaign to oust Biden has failed. (2) Candace Owens questions 9/11 official story—and points finger at Israel. (3) Panicking MSM says RFK Jr. groped dog and ate babysitter (or was it the other way around?) . We'll also discuss "Doc" Sabrosky's latest article: "Deadly Delusions: When the Plans Work All Too Well."

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.

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

Last week the MSM reported on the public release of videos linking Omar al-Bayoumi, “a Saudi national who FBI officials believe worked for Saudi Arabia’s intelligence service,” to 9/11. As NBC News reported:

The Saudi national, Omar Al-Bayoumi, was the focus of years of investigation by the FBI's San Diego field office because of his association with two of the 9/11 hijackers, Khalid al-Mihdhar and Nawaf al-Hazmi, prior to the attack. 

The video, which was unsealed in federal court last week, was a self-narrated video that shows Al-Bayoumi giving a tour of landmarks in Washington, D.C. The video was shot over several days in 1999 and included videos of entrances, exits and security checkpoints in the U.S. Capitol.

The FBI, or elements thereof, have allegedly been trying to nail al-Bayoumi and the Saudi government for the past 23 years, but have been prevented from doing so by Saudi power, money, and influence. If that’s true, then Saudi Arabia basically owns America. It can blow up buildings full of thousands of people, attack the Pentagon, and tell the FBI to get stuffed, and everybody from the president (four of them so far) to the CIA to the military to Congress will cover up the truth. Because Saudis totally own us. They dominate the financial sector. They own Hollywood. They own the media. They own Congress. And only Alex Jones has the courage to say so.

The notion that Saudi Arabia has that kind of power, and would use it to blow up the World Trade Center and attack the Pentagon, is obviously absurd. But there is a foreign power that does. And would. And did. (And would want to distract us with a “blame the Saudis” canard.)

Below is a transcript of most of my interview with Ehaab Bayoumi, a relative of “Uncle Omar,” recorded in July 2016.

Ehaab Bayoumi on Truth Jihad Radio

We're going to have an interesting show today dealing with the alleged 9/11 hijackers. My first-hour guest is Ehaab Bayoumi. Ehaab Bayoumi is a Muslim for 9/11 Truth. Of course, I'm the guy who is currently running that website, Muslims for 9/11 Truth. My past colleagues there include A.K. Dewdney, one of our greatest polymath genius scientists—he's done Ph.D. computer science work, all sorts of interesting ecology stuff, and was the genius columnist after Martin Gardner at Scientific American.

Anyway, Ehaab Bayoumi is a Muslim. He's for 9/11 truth. And so by default, I'm going to call him a member of my group. It's actually a pretty big group, because the polls show that of the world's almost two billion Muslims, about 75% know that 9/11 was an inside job. So that would be almost a billion and a half Muslims that belong to my group, Muslims for 9/11 Truth. And if every one of them would just send me a dollar, I'd be able to do a lot more than I'm doing now.

We had a great event for Christopher Bollyn last night here in Madison, Wisconsin. We had a good turnout, pretty well filled the room, thanks to an ad in the Isthmus local alternative weekly, which cost us 900 bucks. So once again, if anybody wants to help pay for that kind of stuff— If every one of you Muslims listening, all 1.5 billion of you, would all just go to TruthJihad.com and send me a dollar, I'd be able to buy a much better ad than the one we had for Christopher Bollyn, so we can keep this message going.

I think it's really important to just not give up. This is an issue where if we don't give up, we win. The truth has its own power, its own barakah, spiritual energy, its own momentum, and ultimately it prevails. And so we stay with it, and then we prevail. So we just have to keep plugging away. And we're making some progress.

We're going to be talking about various kinds of progress in the 9/11 investigation. We're going to hear some new information from Ehaab Bayoumi, who knows some of the families of the alleged 9/11 hijackers, or so I'm told. And he's not really happy with the way these people let themselves get set up as patsies to be falsely blamed for the crime of the century. Most of these people, maybe all of them, were not remotely close to being even particularly religious, much less radical fundamentalists or followers of bin Laden or anything like that.

The 15 Saudis, out of alleged 19 hijackers, came over here to the U.S. on CIA snitch visas, meaning they were CIA assets and were in the U.S. on CIA-business visas. I wonder what that could have been.

Anyway, they were repeatedly impersonated, apparently in some cases by Israeli Mossad agents. We have two cases where we have evidence of that. One is the case of Mohammed Atta. The original Mohammed Atta was Egyptian. He never learned Hebrew. Why would an Egyptian learn Hebrew unless he was working for Mossad, of course? Anyway, the supposed so-called Mohammed Atta in Florida, who was dating a stripper and visiting all kinds of houses of ill repute, snorting cocaine, drinking whiskey like a fish, gambling, going on junkets to Las Vegas, hanging out with Jack Abramoff, the notorious Jewish gangster, on his casino boats.

The guy pretending to be Muhammad Atta was actually a fluent speaker of Hebrew. We've been told that by his stripper girlfriend, Amanda Keller. So that's very interesting. We know that the quote-unquote "Atta" in Florida, the psychopath who disemboweled a kitten because he was angry at Amanda Keller, was not the original Muhammad Atta. He was an Israeli Mossad agent, a fluent speaker of Hebrew, who was impersonating Muhammad Atta.

Likewise, there's another alleged hijacker from Lebanon, Ziad Jarrah, whose family all works for the Mossad. They're heroin smugglers, you know, opium smugglers. And this whole family—go ahead and sue me if you don't like this, but it's the truth, and besides, they're all over in Lebanon anyway—they all work for the Mossad, and they smuggle heroin or, you know, opiates. They're involved in that trade with the Israeli Mossad and the "Khazarian Mafia," the Zionist Jewish crime syndicate. They've actually had family members busted by the Lebanese government for being Mossad agents.

So Ziad Jarrah was here in the United States, and he was impersonated by two people who don't even look very much like him. If you just Google this and look for Google images of Ziad Jarrah, the three different Ziad Jarrahs: Look at these pictures on the Ziad Jarah ID that the government tells us was the same guy. Obviously, two of those people are impersonators, maybe all three for all I know.

So in those two cases, we have very strong evidence that both of those two alleged 9/11 hijackers were impersonated by Israeli Mossad agents. And I think we can assume that the same is true for many, if not most, if not all of the other alleged 9/11 hijackers as well.

Yet there were actual Arabs who got roped into the plot. And these guys from Saudi Arabia were probably working the CIA. Who knows precisely what story they were told? That's the kind of thing I'd like to clear up by talking to people like my guest tonight, Ehaab Bayoumi, who has an inside scoop.

Hello, Ehab Biyumi. Are you there?

Yes, sir.

Assalamu alaikum.

Wa alaikum assalam.

Eid Mubarak to you and yours. Hope you had a blessed Ramadan.

Likewise.

Okay. So, hey, how about this? We're talking tonight about issues relating to the alleged 9/11 hijackers. In the second hour, we're going to bring on Cheryl Curtis and a couple of her compadres who don't accept the notion that these 28 pages that were part of the Joint Congressional Inquiry on 9/11 that supposedly show Saudi government financing for a couple of the hijackers or alleged hijackers—that it really means very much.

I've had guests on here who are leaders of the Reveal the 28 Pages movement, people like Les Jamieson, Barry Kissin, Sander Hicks. They're all pushing really hard to reveal those pages. And now we're stalled. Obama promised he was going to make that decision. He had earlier promised that he was going to reveal those pages. The deadline was a couple of weeks ago, but it passed. It's come and gone. No 28 pages. So we're going to talk about that in the second hour.

The first hour, I understand that you, Ehab, have some inside information on some of the families of these alleged 9/11 hijackers, these people who ended up getting framed. They're totally innocent. They obviously were not on these planes. They got framed for the crime of the century. The question is, how did this happen? I wondered if you can help shed any light on this.

On which particular part?

Well, precisely how these guys were set up, precisely how the setting up of the patsies worked. It's always very complex when we look at these intelligence operations. For instance, how Lee Harvey Oswald was set up as the Patsy in the JFK assassination. He was an FBI informant. He'd been on a CIA mission in Russia. He thought he was working for FBI, investigating the CIA-connected people who were plotting to kill Kennedy. He thought he was helping save Kennedy, and he ended up being the patsy—which is, of course, what he said when he was arrested.

That's a very complex subject. How did they set this guy up? Well, the same issues arise for these alleged 9/11 hijackers who were not even on the planes. How did they get set up for this? What do you think?

Khalid al-Mihdhar and Nazmi al-Ghamdi (Nawaf al-Hazmi?) they're pilots. The manipulation was (from) Omar (al-)Bayoumi, who's actually in the family blood. He was the guider. He was here to make sure while they were in flight school to really get pilot licenses to go become pilots. And they're now working as pilots in the Middle East, maybe (flying for) Americans…

So you're saying that these these guys who are blamed for flying planes into the World Trade Center are still flying around in the skies over America?

Yes, that was the manipulation. They were in flight school. But you can also go to flight school for good things like to become a pilot and earn a living. And it's well known that the Saudi government and the United States government work in a lot of industries (together) whether it be medicine, radiology, manufacturing, airlines. They exchange students to work and learn in one another's country.

So Saudi Arabians coming here to go to flight school is nothing new. Actually, it still goes on to this day.

So this was your cousin Omar al-Bayoumi who was responsible for helping set these guys up as pilots in training?

He's a lot older than me. He's not a cousin. He's in the pipeline family blood. A great uncle. He's older than I am, much older than I am.  But he was the guider. He was sort of the babysitter for the situation.

Because when Khalid and Nazmi (came to America) they didn't know English too well. Omar speaks English like—you couldn't even tell the difference between him or a regular American speaking English. And he knew Arabic, too. And he's been all over the world doing a lot of things, different occupations. He’s been in Britain from what I know. I mean, he's probably done things that I don't know about, because I'm not saying I do know everything that he's done. It's not like he's a relative I speak to every single day by any chance.

But these things, for sure, that part of the story is without a doubt a scam. They did not fly any planes. Nazmi El Ghamdi, he probably couldn't even steal a pen from WalMart, let alone fly planes into World Trade Centers in one shot.

Part of the story that is factual is, yeah, they were in flight school. That's why there is real evidence about that. But they were here to become pilots, not fly planes into the World Trade Center. Khalid and Nazmi were training.

Did they train at those bogus flight schools run by the Magic Dutch Boys in Florida? Daniel Hopsicker went down there and investigated Hoffman Aviation. These mafiosi guys from the Netherlands that I guess Hopsicker calls “the magic Dutch boys.” One of them was named Rudy Dekkers, as I recall.

And those two guys, these (alleged) organized crime figures who'd worked smuggling drugs for the CIA, set up these supposed flight schools in Florida. And the main role of these so-called flight schools was actually to bring in CIA heroin and cocaine. And the biggest heroin bust in the history of Central Florida happened not that long before 9/11, at the same airstrip run by Rudy Dekkers, where Mohammed Atta was pretending to learn to fly.

According to research from Daniel Hopsicker, Mohammed Atta was already a qualified pilot. So he was just going through the motions there at that particular airstrip. And he was involved in drug smuggling with the CIA-linked people and hanging out with other organized crime figures, including going on these gambling junkets on the Jack Abramoff's casino boats.

So I was wondering, did Khalid and Nazmi, were they involved in those so-called flight schools in Florida? I'm assuming not because they were based in San Diego.

Maybe they went to a real flight school. It was on the opposite end of the country. So, you know, I like to speak on the things I know. Could be maybe somewhere down the line, they met. They had meetings or conferences there, et cetera. I don't know about that. I'm sure they probably all did meet up to get their story together once or twice. But from what I know, they were based in California on the opposite end of the country.

And so I think it's better to keep them separated. So that way, they're not all bunched up. Things can go wrong a lot more when you've got a lot more guys in one area. When you separate them, when you have them scattered doing one plan, I know from intelligence that things go a lot smoother. You don't want too many people talking, too many voices type philosophy. So you don't want all the hijackers in Florida or in Minnesota or in Illinois. A good strategy to get these things off was it's better off keeping them separated.

Yeah, that makes sense. So if you talk to your great uncle-twice-removed Omar, whatever he exactly is, what specifically has he told you about this?

To be honest with you, nothing since then. I think part of the plan was, uh, to not speak to nobody. If you're going to get paid, I'm sure they signed some documents and somewhere in there…I guess he's living up to the contract or something.

So you heard this from him way back, like shortly after 9/11?

It was about...say about, almost close to five, six months when I seen Omar Bayoumi in a lot of documents. And there was some family concern about, hey, ruining our names here, yada, yada, yada. And he wasn't answering for a while until there was some pressure. And then it was a brief period of speaking and then no one's heard from him.

Interesting. So when he was speaking, he basically admitted that he was kind of the handler and the babysitter for Khalid and Nazmi?

Well, you know what? Let's take it a step further than that. Family members knew the stuff he was getting into. He would be open about it in previous reunions when they would occur. Like kind of, oh, something big. I'm getting involved in something big. And he would like talking in Arabic or be like flamboyant about it. “Yeah, I'm doing worldly stuff.” You know, when family reunions gather and everybody's talking about what the other person's doing and stuff like that. So there was kind of some pre-existing things that were already known through the pipeline, through the family pipeline. Because I’ve got other aspects of my family who fought in the Egyptian-Israeli wars. They fought Israel head-on. And stuff was said during these times that when I was growing up, when I was real young. It really didn't hit me until these things started happening. I used to think when my uncle would tell me stories—you know when you're a kid and youhear your old relative’s stories and you're just sitting there and you just listen to pay respect but they lose you and you lose them about two minutes into the story. It was kind of one of those things. But you remember loud and clear some things they say. And as time goes by, you're like, “wow, they were right. They were right. Oh, this is right. Oh, and this is right.” So there were pre-existing conditions with them.

Interesting. So did Omar give you any sense of who he might have been working for when he was babysitting these guys who then became alleged hijackers?

He would—no names specifically, I'm pretty sure so you don't get killed and (he) was protecting us and whatnot. But without a doubt, the United States government intelligence, Britain intelligence, and the Israeli Mossad.

That's what I would have guessed, too.

Yep.

Interesting. There's one theory that the Mossad might have hijacked or upgraded the 9/11 thing. They have a history of either hijacking other agencies operations and turning it to their own advantage, or sometimes they'll do a joint operation, but then they'll pull the rug up from under the other agency or, add on to it or do something to it.

Various examples of that include the Mohamed Merah affair in France, analyzed quite brilliantly by Laurent Guyénot in my book, We Are Not Charlie Hebdo. Apparently the French government had set up a false flag shooting of a French soldier, and this was supposed to discredit the National Front in order to influence the outcome of the election. But the Israeli Mossad then came along, and right after this French soldier was shot by a blue eyed white guy with a Nazi tattoo—before the French could blame the right wing and gain their electoral advantage, the Israelis came along and did a fake shooting at a Jewish school. They claimed that a bunch of people got killed, but nobody ever saw any bodies, and they were “immediately taken back to Israel to be buried in the Holy Land of Israel.” And then the Israelis said the same guy, Mohammed Merah, did both shootings. And, of course, the witness who saw the blue eyes and the Nazi tattoos was like, “what?!”

So what happened was the Mossad just stepped in there, and they probably had blackmail material. They could have blown the whistle on the French guys who set up the original shooting of the French military guys. So they had blackmail material.They hijacked it. They turned it into a much bigger thing, and they used it to sort of make themselves out as victims. And, of course, they're always using this stuff to demonize Arabs and Muslims.

That's one clear example of an Israeli hijacked false flag from another agency. Now, the theory with 9/11 is that some of the American actors may not have known just how murderous it was going to be. For instance, we have testimony from Susan Lindauer, who was a CIA asset involved in pretty high-level negotiations with Iraq, that she and her CIA case officer, Richard Fuisz, knew that there was going to be a huge terror attack in central Manhattan in late August or early September. And they didn't really know exactly what was behind it, just that everybody in the CIA, or at least high-level people like Fuisz, apparently knew this. And he shared it with Lindauer.

But then on 9/11 itself, they were on the phone as they were watching television, and they saw the Twin Towers just blowing up with thousands of people inside. Richard Fuisz, then a CIA case officer, started screaming over the phone, “The goddamn Israelis! The goddamn Israelis!” I bet there were a lot of CIA people yelling that.

It's my hypothesis that this was basically a Mossad job that was sold as an American job to a bunch of American idiots who didn't really know quite how big and ugly it was going to be. That's kind of how I think it went down. Do you think that's plausible?

Oh, absolutely. Yeah. The Mossad is known as—they're totally ruthless. I mean, if you ever look them up now on Google, one of their latest definitions is “the most efficient killing machine.” Oh, there is nothing, nothing, nothing out of (the bounds of) possibility with them. Absolutely nothing. They’ve got the hottest women working for them, their fingertips on the banks, law, finance, military, NASA, anything. You name it, it's plausible with them that they are one ruthless, God-unfearing, lack-of-human-empathy organization. I mean, they... You’ve got to credit to them because they've done a hell of a job, man, up until this day. They've done one hell of a job the way they got things going. The beauty of it is that still most Americans, you still hear them, (though) it’s a lot better (than) the 1990s or early 2000s. Remember the era of “I stand with Israel”?

“I stand with Israel.”

Like right there, it's like, wow, they've done a phenomenal job when you can do all that, and you still got the people saying that. That's one hell of a job, right?

And, of course, they're partly doing that through false flags. They've got this concept of the War on Terror, which was invented at the Jerusalem Conference on International Terrorism in 1979 by Benjamin Netanyahu and colleagues in Israel who summoned George H.W. Bush, Henry “Scoop” Jackson, and other heavy hitters in the American policy-making establishment over to Jerusalem to participate in this conference. And Netanyahu basically read out the script for the coming War on Terror.

He said, we're going to unite the West in a struggle against terrorism. The next big enemy is going to be terrorism. And then the Israelis went and—they were actually the main force, apparently, behind U.S. support for the extreme elements of the Afghan Mujahideen, which then became Al-Qaeda. And they've been ginning up this illusory enemy, this monster that we're fighting, this radical Islam, and all of this “clash of civilizations”—this was all created at that Jerusalem conference in 1979.

And as Christopher Bollyn pointed out in his talk here in Madison last night, 9/11 was done in order to to launch the war on terror which had actually been created in 1979, but the public wasn't really brought in on board until they went and did 9/11, which was a PR stunt. It was a PR launch like with any product. If you want to get people's attention you have to stage a big product launch. Maybe you're going to buy ad time or maybe you're going to create a news story that the networks will be tricked into reporting. Like Trump always does. He's gotten so much free publicity. Well, the Israelis, boy, did they ever get free publicity for their concept of roping the entire West into their eternal war against all of their neighbors and enemies by this PR stunt on 9/11.

And you're right. They've done a very, very efficient job. And one of the reasons that they can hit so far above their weight—this is a country of like a little over 9 million people and only 80 percent of them are even Jewish at all—so this is not that many people, but they can pull off this stuff. Their intelligence agency is able to do this stuff because not only are they utterly ruthless and very competent, but they also have access to sayanim: Jews, many in very high level positions in all agencies, in all corporations, in all banks everywhere around the world. They have hundreds of thousands of sayanim, these Jewish helpers who are citizens technically of the United States or Britain or Russia or China or whatever, but who are actually loyal not to their country that they're living in, but to the state of Israel. They offer free services to the Israeli Mossad, and they help the Mossad do things like killing Americans on 9/11. And if the American people knew this, I don't know what they would do.

Unbelievable. I'd like to tell you a story that preluded all this. I'm sure you heard about the war of 1967 when Israel officially took over Gaza. They fought Egypt—part of my family is also from Egypt. I'm a good chunk Egyptian now, and I had an uncle, had two of them. One got killed in the Egyptian-Israeli war and one survived the Egyptian-Israeli war. And this particular uncle, I've had a lot of talks with him. It was kind of a little backtracking to what I was telling you before about when you hear stories of older family members and something sticking your head through time, yada, yada, yada.

Well, in 1967 the Jewish race didn't have the stranglehold (it does now). They were kind of like a cocoon in the world. You know how a butterfly is first a cocoon before it breaks out and flies away?

They hadn't metastasized yet.

Exactly. And he had Israeli prisoners telling him that, “oh, it doesn't matter that you've captured us. We're going to rule the world someday. Someday we’ll just take over Egypt and the West Bank and (we’ll be) controlling you and the Palestinians. We're about to rule the world.”

And what do you know? 55% of the world's billionaires are Jewish. Now, mind you, there's only about 15 million Jews in the whole world (versus) 1.6 billion Muslims and (even more) Christians. And the majority, 55%, of billionaires (are Jewish). They have got all the top lawyer jobs. They're commissioners of sports leagues. They run the plastic surgeon industry. They run the Hollywood. Obviously, they control the media. They run Lockheed Martin, which is one of the biggest weapons and war equipment manufacturing. They run the world's intelligence agencies. They run the United Nations. It's all true, man. It's amazing. And now, in 2016, roughly 50 years later, everything’s hitting on all cylinders.

Wow. Well, they got away with that war of aggression in 1967 by way of their stranglehold on world media, which they already had then, maybe not quite as much as now. But that was just a preplanned war of aggression. They suckered Nasser into moving troops up towards the front. But Nasser was not going to attack. He never attacked Israel. He was not planning to attack Israel. But the Israelis suckered him into moving some troops in the general direction of Israel in such a way that Israel could then wage a war of aggression and seize all of this land, which the whole world ever since has admitted is occupied.

That's why he got assassinated. That's where the hardcore Muslims come in because this is what they feared. They're like, “if Israel sets up base here, it's over.” So they knew what they were doing. The people did not want Israel gaining.

And that was the turning point for the whole world. Had Egypt taken down Israel and not let that happen, we wouldn't be where we are today because he got assassinated. So that part's right. He didn't want to fight them, but the people wanted to fight Israel. The people, the Muslims, the true Muslims know: “No, we cannot let Israel and Jews settle there. This is Palestinian land.”

There's a spiritual dimension to this. People like Sheikh Imran Hussain talk about this in terms of eschatology. And it's not just a Muslim thing either. Muslims were at the receiving end of this because Palestine has been Islamically-administered Holy Land pretty much ever since Islam existed, except for a couple of periods where crusaders came in and slaughtered everybody and then got chased out.

But basically Palestine has always been run by Muslims. And all of the faiths have been welcome to come in and spend some tourist money and worship and all of that. So it's a Muslim holy land. And when the Zionists said “we're going to come in and steal it, turn it into a Jewish supremacist state,” obviously the world's Muslims are not going to accept this, any more than if a bunch of Arab Muslims invaded southern Italy and occupied Rome and ethnically cleansed it and set up an Arab-supremacist Muslim state in  occupied Rome, that's not exactly going to go over too well with the world's Catholics.

But the spiritual dimension goes beyond just Islam. Christopher Bollyn, who is a Christian, didn't say this during his talk, but in the Q&A, he gave a very beautiful answer about this being a spiritual struggle, that Israel is really dominated by evil. There's a reason for that. It's founded by people—if they're people—who are basically heretics from Judaism. They're not normal, traditional Jews. They're followers of the false messiahs, Sabbatai Zevi and Jacob Frank, the demonic, satanic Kabbalists.

And these people believe that you can't wait for God to come back with the Messiah and let the Jews go back to the promised land. You've got to force God's hand, satanically rising up and spilling blood in the Holy Land and committing abominations. And this Sabbatean-Frankist heresy says “do all the things that are forbidden. Since the Ten Commandments say don't kill, you should murder people. Since it says “don't commit adultery,” you should have orgies. “Don't sacrifice children,” like the story of Abraham says, means “commit ritual sacrifice of children and summon up demonic entities.” That's what these people do. And that's what Zionism is. It's a spiritual plan, a satanic spiritual plan, to bring people to the Holy Land that against God to and do unholy things there.

And then that war (in 1967) people always have this question: why are you Arabs fighting one another? Why are you angry at one another? Look at the country right next door (to Egypt). I sit right in the middle. I’ve been seeing it my whole life because of my Saudi Arabian ancestry and my Egyptian ancestry. Why do they hate one another? Because the whole friction started with “how can there be a government like Saudi Arabia in God's holy land with the Kaaba, Mecca, Medina, all the money in the world,

and they just sat around watching it (the 1967 war). I think among the biggest people who are going to be questioned is Saudi Arabia and its royal family. They had all the power to do something, man. And they did nothing. Had Saudi Arabia stood up and helped the Egyptians fight that war, I'm telling you, Americans today would have been better off. I swear to God, man. The billionaires would be more spread out. The millionaires would be more spread out. Hollywood might have been run by multiple races and multiple people instead of just one race controlling every sector. Maybe they wouldn't have had this world-dominating power. That's (the source of) those tensions and those feelings from the war that was lost. When Israel gained sovereignty and was starting to break through that cocoon and Saudi Arabia just sat around watching it. That's where it all started. Because no one to this day can believe and understand how they got all the money in the world. They're a big country, too. You can store a lot of military equipment. You can house a lot of refugees. You can do a lot. That family, they can do a lot in this world. But they're still corrupt. They gave Hillary Clinton now another $25 million for campaigning. Muslims are like, what the hell is going on here? They're getting more corrupt by the day.

But that's where it all started, man. (The 1967 war.) There's still the deep hatred.

How is Saudi Arabia sitting there with all this Muslim stuff, all this bismillahirrahmanirrahim and this and that. And they just sat there and watched this unfold. The Saudi leadership is so bad, you almost have to credit some of these interpretations of where they come from that suggest that that family spent a long time before they emerged into becoming sort of the warlords who used the Wahhabi extremist movement to take over the Arabian Peninsula. Even before that, who were these people? They were these Nejdi desert midwives. The modern-day term is selective Islam. Wahhabi is what? Strict Islam. Okay, you're so strict. Why didn't you stand up for Egypt against Israel? God told you that. The Prophet sent that down. You're supposed to stick together. What happened to this part?

—

I got a visit from the Homeland Security and the FBI….I was just honest with them. I was under oath and all that. They knew everything, so we had to speak the truth. They just left us alone after that. I don't know if they're geeking or what they're doing now. You can't lie to them. I didn't tell them anything different than what I'm telling you now. They know it's a scam. We went deeper. They actually ate…We made some rice, cooked them…it was a friendly meeting, honestly.nAnd they just came in and wrote what they had to write down and interviewed is and got to know us better,  I guess. It was like... why is this going on? Why do we need to do this? What's this going to prove? This ain't the way to get the world better. And we don't do this stuff. And, you know, come search.

Search my house. You caught us cold. You came in here. That's what I literally was telling him. You want to go look at my underwear drawer? I don't own a gun. You know, I work out. Anyone wants to fight me, let's fight. So we live another day. We don't got to shoot. Come see. We don't got no chemicals here for bombs. That's the way I was talking to him. Go search my car, man. Do whatever you want.

When I was talking with with some of my Muslim friends in Madison, Wisconsin, shortly after 9/11, everybody I knew in the Muslim community in Madison seemed to be pretty suspicious or think 9/11 was an inside job. And I was still waiting for more evidence to come in—which, of course, it did once I started paying attention.

But anyway, my Muslim friends, a lot of them, actually got interrogated. They had these FBI visits. And some of the FBI agents that did this were apparently really hostile. And they would say “you can't tell anybody that you were interrogated. You can't tell anybody that we were here. If you tell anybody, even your spouse or your children or parents or anybody, we're going to arrest you. You might get sent to Guantanamo.” So there were some hard-ass FBI agents that did that kind of stuff. But there were also people in Madison who who had friendly interrogations where the FBI agents would basically say,

“we know you guys didn't do this, but we just have to go through the motions.”

That's what I was just about to say. I'm just about to say they have to show they did some work on paper. And log in some hours, you know. Honestly, it was a very friendly meeting. They actually caught us when we were about to eat. I let him eat (with 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 this special supplement to our recent False Flag Weekly News broadcast, Professor Anthony Hall discusses his essay The Influential Role of Jewish Theocracy in the Zionist Governance of the West.

Excerpt:

It seems to me that maybe Iran has an advantage because the theocratic nature of the country is up front. It's clear to people how decisions are made. There's transparency. But then when I look at my own society, Western society, I think, well, that's become very theocratic as well. There are inheritances from the Old Testament, the Torah, having to do with this concept that there is a chosen people—that going back to Abraham and his son Isaac and Isaac's son Jacob, there is a covenant with a chosen people who represent the seed of Abraham.

And this Chosenite ethos seems to have become very powerful in the West. And it is now being expressed even to the point where one Chosenite people, the Jewish people and their state—their state is becoming like a chosen state. It has a different set of rules. It's not bound by the same limitations as the rule of law, equality, and the universal nature of laws and the understanding that everybody be treated equally. It's even reached the extent that one people is claiming the right to kill another people, to eliminate another people, in what's being called a genocide.

And the people perpetrating the genocide are the victims, they tell us.

That raises the whole issue of the Holocaustianity and another approach to theocracy. The story of World War II creates the context out of which Israel emerges after World War II as a kind of phoenix rising.

So it seemed to me that it would be useful to think about the Western governance as saying there is a uniform rule of law, as saying we're all equal before the law, but the reality is it's not at all like that. And Israel itself is becoming a kind of theocracy with the likes of these settlers, the Ben-Gavirs and Smotriches and all they embody. It's becoming a messianic, very religious country where people are obsessed with ideas of a third temple and ruling the world from Jerusalem.

And a bunch of Americans support that, including Christians. Do you want to talk about John Hagee and Christian Zionism?

I don't know that much about John Hagee, but as far as I know, he's a typical example of these dispensationalist-type Christians, the Christians that got waylaid by the Scofield Bible and went down the path of becoming extremist Christian Zionists who have the bizarre idea that we should force God's hand by encouraging the Jews to commit abominations in the Holy Land, which will then somehow bring Jesus back, and Jesus will save the elect, the few, and damn almost everybody else. And somehow that's good. And then they'll take credit for making Jesus come back and do that. It’s one of the dumbest theologies that I've ever heard of.

Well, there is this phenomena called Christian Zionism.And we'll look at the deeper historical roots of it. But these days, Pastor John Hagee is kind of the dominant figure because of his group that has over 11 million members, Christians for Israel. And so he is running a major empire. He's a multi-billionaire by now.

This is an extremely lucrative approach to Christianity. The big evangelical churches are all to some extent Christian Zionists. There's the odd Christian critique of Christian Zionism, like Rick Wiles, but the big commercial audiences, the big television audiences, are dominated by this obsession now with something called the rapture and the second coming of Jesus and somehow Israel becoming the center of world governance for a golden millennium. And the Christians think that Jesus will be in control. And then the Jews haven't had their Messiah yet, but they're still waiting for their Messiah. And how is this going to work out?

So Mike Pence or other people who want to get into high office have to go through John Hagee. And John Hagee can harness millions of people to electoral campaigns. And you've got to play with big money to be part of this system. It is forming a national church in the United States, Christian Zionism.

So we're living in a society which definitely has a powerful theocracy which is not really noticed. So my effort in this essay was to say, let's notice it.

It's not only about Christian Zionism. It's about largely the fact that we have this thing called the rule of law, but then we have an understanding that some people are exempt.

The Chosenites are exempt. So now it's seen as strange that they're being held to some kind of account by these UN courts, the International Court of Justice on the one hand, and now the ICC, the International Criminal Court, which is being infiltrated.

And now Britain has intervened to say, you can't charge Netanyahu and Gallant and probably others. Why? Well, hey, come on. They're the chosen people. They're doing a noble task. It's not genocide. They're simply defending themselves from the sins of the real genociders who came out on October. And Hamas are charged along with the Israelis. It's sort of like the real damage was done to Israel, which now has to defend itself.

So I'm trying to look at all of these developments through the lens of this theocracy that we don't acknowledge, but we now have to acknowledge because it's hitting us in the face: the disparity of conduct and the disparity of wealth and the disparity of power. The fact that it's not an egalitarian system and people are not subject to the same rules. There is a Chosenite category, which is highly theocratic in its roots, and it's becoming the obvious defining principle in how our world is unfolding.

Yeah, I would have to pretty much agree with most of that, Tony. One thing I think I would add, though, is that I think that the theocracy in the West is not so much the pastor John Hagee’s, though he is one wing of it. But I think the dominant official religion in the West is secular, progressivist, materialist humanism. Now, that actually gets tied in with Judaism because Judaism is very materialistic. It doesn't believe in an afterlife. There are only very vague allusions to an afterlife in Judaism and not much attention is paid to it. What's important in Judaism is this life: having a good life materially and getting power and the Jewish tribe having power and pleasure and prospering. And they don't worry about the next life.

And so this secular materialist progressivist humanism is also very much like Judaism because Judaism is narcissistic. It worships itself, the “chosen people.” Sandra Lubarsky, who co-edited with me the book 9/11 and American Empire: Christians, Jews, and Muslims Speak Out, said it directly to me that today the Jewish people has replaced God as the object of worship of the Jews.

So I said, that's very bizarre, Sandra. That's totally cosmically narcissistic.

But it's true. And just as humanism is humans worshiping humans, which is cosmic narcissism, likewise, Jews worshiping Jews is cosmic narcissism.

So we have these materialists, narcissists, humanists, whatever. And then progressivists. The Jews are trying to get closer and closer and closer to this utopia on earth that they believe will happen when their Messiah comes and conquers and subjugates all of the non-Jews. That's the traditional Jewish eschatology. So things are supposed to get better and get really good in the end. Progressivism is also like that.

So this seemingly non-religious faith of the elites of the West, which has been around for more than a century, which is basically atheistic—secular, progressivist, materialist humanism— is very much a kind of a spinoff on millenarian messianic Judaism.

And so for me, Pastor John Hagee is just some whack job representing a bunch of very low IQ, relatively low income people. That's why they give a lot of their what little income they have to John Hagee, because they're so low IQ Those people don't matter (in terms of exercising power). They're just smart enough to figure out how to find their way to the voting booth and pull the lever that their Jewish billionaire masters tell them to pull.

But the real religion of the West, the real theocracy is secular, materialist, progressivist humanism. And that is a spinoff on Jewish millenarian messianic thought. So that's my take…

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

State Department whistleblower J. Michael Springmann and I discussed the Axis of Resistance’s defeat of Israel on the new False Flag Weekly News. Below is my new essay on a related topic, scheduled for translation and publication in Iran... -KB

Ibraham Raisi and the Politics of Martyrdom

By Kevin Barrett

On May 19, Iran lost one of its all-time greatest leaders—which is saying something, since that proud ancient nation has had plenty of leaders since it was first unified in 625 BC. President Ibrahim Raisi’s death in a helicopter crash shocked the world and evoked massive outpourings of mourning across the country. Millions of people poured into the streets of Tabriz, Qom, Jamkaran, Birjand, and Mashhad, and millions more followed the funeral demonstrations on social media.

President Raisi had assumed the presidency at a difficult time for Iran. He took office in June, 2021, almost a year and a half after the great general and likely future president, Qasem Soleimani, was martyred by a US military drone. Raisi’s predecessor, Hassan Rouhani, had devoted his presidency to fruitlessly striving to improve relations with the United States. Rouhani’s thanks was to have the JCPOA nuclear deal, the signature achievement of the Iran’s West-leaning reformist faction, rudely shredded by Donald Trump and the Netanyahu-loyalist faction of the American deep state, which subsequently murdered Gen. Soleimani under Zionist orders.

So by June 2021, the Iranian people understood that the USA is, as Putin puts it, “non-agreement-capable.” They elected President Raisi to put an end to the Rouhani era of pointless appeasement, and inaugurate a new era in which Iran would calmly but firmly stand up for its own interests, and for the interests of oppressed people in the region and across the world.

President Raisi did not disappoint. On the contrary, he wildly exceeded expectations. Under his leadership, Iran became a full member of the BRICS alliance and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization. By deepening ties with Russia, China, and other relatively independent world powers, Raisi’s Iran not only improved its economic prospects, but also strengthened its defenses.

While deepening Iranian integration into BRICS, President Raisi had the wisdom to seek improved relations with Iran’s Persian Gulf neighbors, including the often-problematic Saudi Arabia and Bahrain. By working with Russia and China to gradually wean the region from US hegemony, the Iranian president helped create a blueprint for regional peace “without America and Israel.” That project, while it remains a work in progress, is clearly en route to full realization.

The Raisi administration managed to improve ties with former adversaries even as it strengthened the so-called Axis of Resistance nations and groups. It accelerated military support and technology transfer to Iran’s allies in the region, including sending rapidly-advancing drone and missile technologies to Yemen’s Ansarallah movement, Iraq’s Katā’ib Hezbollah, and Lebanon’s Hezbollah, while increasing military support for Hamas and Islamic Jihad in occupied Palestine.

President Raisi’s two-pronged approach of healing Iran’s breach with the Gulf states while strengthening the Axis of Resistance might sound like a contradiction. After all, Bahrain and Saudi Arabia, and to lesser extent the other Gulf satrapies, feared the Axis of Resistance because they saw it as directed against them. That’s why Saudi Arabia launched its disastrous war on Yemen in 2015.

But President Raisi, with the strong support of Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, and the cooperation of Russia and China, successfully conveyed to the leaders of the Gulf countries that the Axis of Resistance was primarily focused on freeing the region from Zionist-American occupation, and that there would still be a place for those countries, and their leaders, in post-Zionist, post-American West Asia.

President Raisi’s efforts to bring the region together in the transition to a post-Zionist post-imperialist world were greatly strengthened after the successful Al-Aqsa Storm operation on October 7, 2023. The Zionist regime’s genocidal reaction to Hamas’s courageous defense of Palestine and its holy places has proven, once and for all, that Islamic Iran’s position has always been correct: The Zionists are evil, genocidal lunatics who have no future in West Asia. Iran’s championing of the Palestinian Resistance, which has always had broad support across the region, has won the fervent and near-unanimous (if sometimes clandestine) accolades of the whole Arab and Islamic worlds, as well as the Global South and the younger generation in the Global North. So the wise policies of President Raisi have played a key role in the way the events of the region have unfolded since October 7th 2023, contributing to Israel’s humiliation and to its substantial weakening militarily, economically, diplomatically, and in its public relations and soft power.

Internally, President Raisi faced down yet another US-Zionist color revolution attempt. The CIA, with its tentacles in NGOs, propaganda networks, and astroturfed faux-populist organizations, manipulated the death of Mahsa Amini, who collapsed and died in a courtroom for reasons definitely related to her underlying medical conditions, and allegedly to an altercation with police, to try to foment fractiousness in Iran. Amini’s death was all-too-convenient for the enemies of Iran, who used it to try to balkanize the Iranian public along the faultlines of ethnicity, gender, and religion.

The CIA’s color revolution recipe involved getting relatively small numbers of people into the streets to protest Amini’s death. Professional provocateurs would attack police and encourage others to do likewise. Concealed CIA snipers and gunmen then shot people, including random pedestrians blocks or miles away from the protests. Taking advantage of the chaos, the CIA’s media and social media assets would broadcast false stories about nonexistent “huge protests” (with no supporting evidence like pictures of crowds) along with false claims that the victims of Western mercenary shooters had been killed by police. The result was a media bubble, completely unrelated to reality, purveying the fantasy that some sort of massive uprising was happening in Iran and police were shooting down demonstrators.

Unlike the CIA’s Maidan Square color revolution coup in Ukraine in February 2014, which was created by exactly the same formula—including CIA snipings falsely attributed to security forces—the Mahsa Amini coup attempt fell flat. The Raisi Administration, backed by the Supreme Leader, helped enough of the public understand enough of the truth to stop the chaos from snowballing. Additionally, Iran’s central authorities insisted on a more relaxed approach to its traditional Islamic dress code, and strongly forbade any abusive behavior on the part of police. So the 2022 CIA coup plot against Iran became one of the agency’s many failures rather than one of its perhaps equally many successes.

The CIA’s failed coup attempt included a concerted attack on the Iranian economy. The centerpiece of that effort was currency manipulation of the kind that brought down the former Soviet Union, economic-miracle Japan, the Asian Tigers, and other “problems” for US empire. Sanctions and sabotage also played a role. President Raisi’s administration weathered the shocks imposed by that round of economic warfare, managed to stabilize and begin reducing the 40% inflation rate, and increased economic growth to around 4%.

President Raisi and his leadership team were able to maintain social and economic stability even while defying US-Zionist pressure, and unprecedented sanctions, by forging ahead with the Iranian nuclear program. Despite unrelenting pressure including Zionist murder sprees against scientists and reckless sabotage of nuclear installations, Iran has succeeded in becoming, for all intents and purposes, a nuclear threshhold state with a potentially lucrative and sustainable civilian nuclear sector. The Netanyahu-sponsored Trump Administration shredding of the JCPOA has blown up in the Americans’ and Zionists’ faces.

Given President Raisi’s many successes, and his status as leading candidate to one day succeed Iran’s Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, it is understandable that many Iranians suspect a Zionist or Zio-American hand in his fatal helicopter crash. Though Iranian authorities did not find bullet holes or other overt signs of sabotage in the helicopter wreckage, it is well known that the Zionists and their American backers use “deniable” plane crashes as an assassination technique. John Perkins, author of Confessions of an Economic Hit Man, has described his personal acquaintance with CIA-related “asteroids” who arranged deniable plane crashes designed to kill heads of state. Since bombs or bullets are not necessary to bring down planes, as evidenced by the van-based directed energy weapon used to kill Senator Paul Wellstone and his wife, daughter, and campaign staff in 2002, the “absence of evidence” that Raisi’s foreign enemies were behind his death is not “evidence of absence.”

The timing of the crash was certainly suspicious. Raisi’s death on May 19 came just a little over a month after Iran’s unprecedented April 13 drone-and-rocket blitz against Israel—retaliation for the Zionists’ murderous and criminal attack on Iran’s embassy in Damascus. According to independent analyses, including Pepe Escobar’s alarming but unverified account of Russia shooting down an Israeli plane heading for Tehran to launch a high-altitude nuclear EMP burst, the Zionists wanted to respond to Iran’s April 13 attack with massive escalation, but were restrained by from doing so by the US. In such context, a deniable assassination of Iran’s president would be typical of the lying, sniveling, cowardly Israelis. If Iran’s leaders know or suspect that such was the case, they are holding that knowledge close to their vests—and preparing for the day when revenge will best be served cold.

Any great leader who champions resistance against the Zionist-driven US occupation of West Asia, and the accompanying Zionist genocide of Palestine, automatically risks his life. Like Gen. Qassem Soleimani, Iranian President Ibrahim Raisi knew that standing up for his country, and for the genocide victims in Palestine, might impact his life expectancy. But that didn’t stop him. God willing, he is now among the martyrs in the highest station of paradise.

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