Truth Jihad Radio

Anthony Hall, Professor Emeritus of Globalization Studies at the University of Lethbridge, discusses his new article “Thousands of Israeli Jews Responded to the ICJ Ruling on Israeli Genocide By Dancing and Chanting ‘Death to the Arabs’.” Hall notes that just days after the ICJ ordered Israel to stop committing genocide, and to prevent and punish incitements to genocide, what amounted to a “Genocide Incitement Conference” was held last Sunday at the Jerusalem International Convention Center featuring 11 government ministers and 15 coalition lawmakers. Participants called for starving the Gazans (“don’t give them food…they will have to leave…”) and demanded the death penalty for “terrorists” (Gazans who remain in Gaza).

How will the ICJ respond? Will anyone, outside the Axis of Resistance, enforce its anti-genocide order?

Update: Prof. Hall just published a new article developing his criticism of the ICJ ruling. Compare it to the counter-arguments of Moon of Alabama and Craig Murray.

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

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

I remember learning in school that the flashpoint for World War I was the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand in Sarajevo. Like most people, I never quite understood how the first-ever World War, involving over 30 nations and leading to almost 20 million deaths, resulted from a gratuitous murder by a handful of radical students. Apparently universities should keep a very close eye on student organizations!

I later encountered the realist school of geopolitics, which argues that the Great War was a disaster waiting to happen. The actual cause of the war, according to realists, was not a random assassination, but the rise of German (and to a lesser extent Russian and American) economic and military power, which threatened the then-British-dominated world order.

Realists say this pattern is not uncommon. A number one power, alarmed at the rise of a number two challenger, allies itself with the number three power, but ultimately fails to maintain its position. The shifting power dynamics, in which the number one power no longer has the economic and military might to back up its top ranking, produces a major war, whose aftermath establishes the new international pecking order. In the case of the two World Wars, which were really one war with two major episodes, the thalassocratic British empire exhausted itself fighting Germany, allowing the US to seize the number one spot.

Today, the US empire is in a position not unlike Britain’s circa 1914. Having industrialized first, built a huge navy, and developed the necessary skills to “rule the waves” and colonize the wogs, the Brits had benefitted from a huge head start; but by 1914 the Germans, Russians, and Americans were catching up, and the Brits no longer had enough relative power to enforce unipolar world domination.

Likewise, 2024 America is still coasting on the fumes of its gigantic post-World War II head start on the rest of the world. The US emerged from World War II with roughly 50% of global GDP. In 1960 it was still 40%. But the decline since then has been steady. Today the US only controls 13% of global GDP. But it still imagines itself as the global Goliath it was in 1960—or maybe even bigger, since the Soviet ideological challenger has disappeared, and the grandiosely narcissistic neocons have seized the helm of the ship of state.

A major war that will reset power relations and take the US down several notches seems almost inevitable.* The question remains, where will the flashpoint be?

The neocons, in their infinite wisdom, have made it difficult to guess, having alienated so much of the world that the coming take-down-the-US World War could break out practically anywhere. Russia and its borderlands…China and its southern sea and/or its errant province of Taiwan…and now, with the genocide of Palestine making the Islamic world even angrier than Russia and China, the whole middle belt of Eurasia and North Africa is equally hostile territory.

But before we start globetrotting in search of flashpoints, why not begin imagining the transforming event a bit closer to home? If the assassination of heir-presumptive Archduke Ferdinand, attributed to allegedly state-supported radical fanatics, could set off World War I, could an assassination of presumptive 2024 president Donald Trump, attributed to radical Iran-supported fanatics, unleash World War III?

Flashpoint Florida

Imagine: It’s October 2024. Trump is leading in the polls 55%-45% nationwide, with a clear edge in all the swing states. Suddenly, out of nowhere, a drone swoops down on Mar-a-Lago, smashes through a plate glass window like a supermosquito on steroids, and stings Trump with its explosive charge just as he’s breaking open his seventh can of diet coke. (Cinematographically, we cut from a close-up of the pssssssst as Trump opens the can to a medium shot of the almost simultaneous explosion.)

Fortunately, almost before what is left of Trump is declared dead, the media tells us who did it. A radical Iranian-Palestinian terrorist named Lee Harvey Atta is arrested on the seventh floor of the Palm Beach School Book Depository and accidentally defenestrated before he can be questioned. Luckily, on the floor of the book storeroom, authorities discover an Iranian-made Manlicher-Carcano drone control rig complete with instructions written in Farsi, signed by the Supreme Leader of Iran.

President Biden, whose cognition has been revived to functionality thanks to an Elon Musk (TM) brain implant, appears on television extravagantly praising the late and much-lamented Trump, canceling the election, declaring that all Americans are united in their thirst for vengeance, and calling for an all-out war on Iran to be personally commanded by a certain Bibi Netanyahu, who will be Lear-Jetted and then helicoptered in from Tel Aviv to take charge in the White House Situation Room. With the mutterings of conspiracy theorists silenced by the new AI-driven censorship algorithms, the US and the world are off to the races.

Other Potential Flashpoints

The above scenario, or some only slightly-less-ludicrous variation, may not be quite as unlikely as it sounds. Removing Trump, inciting Trump supporters to war hysteria, and blaming Iran—a plausible patsy given its stated desire for revenge for the assassination of General Soleimani—would kill three birds with one drone. The neocons may even have thought ahead to such a scenario when they conned Trump into approving the murder of Gen. Soleimani.

But don’t bet on Flashpoint Florida. It’s a big world out there, and—thanks to the neocons—most of it hates the US empire with a passion. The list of war-trigger possibilities is so long that guessing right would be like winning the lottery.

In our new “Flashpoints for War” episode of False Flag Weekly News, Cat McGuire and I began with the latest crisis: more than 85 US attacks on Iraq and Syria, threats of more to come, and counterattacks from the Resistance. With geriatric Biden under pressure from his right to act tough, it isn’t hard to see how a miscalculation, and/or a false flag by Israel, could set the dominoes falling in the direction of global war.

Another Mideast flashpoint, of course, is the Red Sea, especially the Bab al-Mandab. Yemen’s Houthi-led government, backed by everyone in the region, is continuing to attack Israel-bound ships in an effort to enforce the World Court’s anti-genocide order, despite the presence of a US armada unofficially known as Operation Genocide Guardian.

US ships are sitting ducks due to the proliferation of advanced anti-ship missiles. Instead of the long-awaited Persian Gulf of Tonkin incident, one iteration of which was thwarted in 2007 by US 5th Fleet advisor Gwenyth Todd, we could see a Red Sea Gulf of Tonkin incident…only it might involve an actual attack, albeit a false flag one, as in “remember the Maine.”

Another escalatory flashpoint could involve Lebanon’s Hezbollah, which has demonstrated an ability to penetrate Israeli defenses to hit heavily-guarded military targets even under conditions of highest alert. The Israelis clearly want all-out war with Hezbollah, in order to drag the US into the ensuing war with Iran. Only a very firm “no” from the American side prevented Israel from going to all-out war with Hezbollah after October 7. Given subsequent US ineffectuality at restraining the mad-dog Zionists, it isn’t hard to imagine Israel getting its wish and setting off World War III via an all-out war with Hezbollah and the rest of the Resistance Axis and Muslim world.

Flashpoint Palestine

As the above examples suggest, there are many ways that the continuing Israeli genocide of Palestine could indirectly lead to World War III. But could Palestine become a direct flashpoint? The Palestinians don’t seem to have enough military power. But if the war goes badly enough for the Palestinian Resistance, other branches of the Axis of Resistance will escalate their support, with unpredictable consequences. Additionally, there is massive covert support for Palestine among wealthy and powerful elements of regional nations, in some cases among high-ranking members of the state apparatus who wouldn’t be caught dead—or rather would be caught dead—if they uttered their real feelings about the Zionists in public.

One nightmarish potential flashpoint is the specter of a no-return-address WMD attack on Israel. The technology of WMD—micronukes, bioweapons, and the like—has been advancing since the days of the Davy Crockett backpack nukes of the 1950s, and even since the US-developed COVID bioweapon attack on China and Iran of a few years ago (which turned out to be a pretty good proof-of-concept for deniable, no-return-address bioattacks in general). Anger at Israel, in light of the current genocide, has reached the point that it’s virtually inevitable that people will try such things within the next few decades, assuming Israel is still around, and barring unforeseen changes in Zionist behavior.

Flashpoint Ukraine

Zionist fanatics on the wrong side of history have made Palestine and its region a potential WW3 flashpoint. Likewise Ukrainian nationalist fanatics, also on the wrong side of history, have created a parallel danger.

Just as 10 million Zionist Jews cannot defeat two billion Muslims, 40 million Ukrainians cannot defeat 140 million Russians. But the fanatics insist on trying. They know that their only hope is to drag the US into their war in an ever-bigger way. The result would be the destruction of the US empire, which, as mentioned at the beginning of the article, is grossly overextended given its 13%-and-shrinking share of global GDP.

Currently the fanatic faction, led by Zelensky, is fighting the realist faction, led by Zaluzhny. If the fanatics win, their only hope is to false-flag the US into bringing NATO directly into the war. Which means, of course, World War III.

Flashpoint Taiwan

Though we didn’t talk about Taiwan in the latest FFWN broadcast, it’s clear that the anti-China faction of neocons is trying to turn Taiwan into China’s Ukraine, by stoking the forces of fanatical Chinese nationalism and trying to goad Beijing into direct hostilities. If they succeed, World War III could start in the “cleanest” possible way: An immediate, direct war between the sinking #1 power and the rising #2 power.

Other Flashpoints?

This brief discussion certainly doesn’t exhaust the list of potential WW3 flashpoints. I’m sure my readers can think of others. Feel free to drop some into the comments section.

*At least if you are a realist. Since I am an idealist, accepting as I do the arguments of Bernardo Kastrup and the Holy Qur’an, not necessarily in that order, I reserve the right to believe that with God’s help we can avert World War III.

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

I remember learning in school that the flashpoint for World War I was the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand in Sarajevo. Like most people, I never quite understood how the first-ever World War, involving over 30 nations and leading to almost 20 million deaths, resulted from a gratuitous murder by a handful of radical students. Apparently universities should keep a very close eye on student organizations!

I later encountered the realist school of geopolitics, which argues that the Great War was a disaster waiting to happen. The actual cause of the war, according to realists, was not a random assassination, but the rise of German (and to a lesser extent Russian and American) economic and military power, which threatened the then-British-dominated world order.

Realists say this pattern is not uncommon. A number one power, alarmed at the rise of a number two challenger, allies itself with the number three power, but ultimately fails to maintain its position. The shifting power dynamics, in which the number one power no longer has the economic and military might to back up its top ranking, produces a major war, whose aftermath establishes the new international pecking order. In the case of the two World Wars, which were really one war with two major episodes, the thalassocratic British empire exhausted itself fighting Germany, allowing the US to seize the number one spot.

Today, the US empire is in a position not unlike Britain’s circa 1914. Having industrialized first, built a huge navy, and developed the necessary skills to “rule the waves” and colonize the wogs, the Brits had benefitted from a huge head start; but by 1914 the Germans, Russians, and Americans were catching up, and the Brits no longer had enough relative power to enforce unipolar world domination.

Likewise, 2024 America is still coasting on the fumes of its gigantic post-World War II head start on the rest of the world. The US emerged from World War II with roughly 50% of global GDP. In 1960 it was still 40%. But the decline since then has been steady. Today the US only controls 13% of global GDP. But it still imagines itself as the global Goliath it was in 1960—or maybe even bigger, since the Soviet ideological challenger has disappeared, and the grandiosely narcissistic neocons have seized the helm of the ship of state.

A major war that will reset power relations and take the US down several notches seems almost inevitable.* The question remains, where will the flashpoint be?

The neocons, in their infinite wisdom, have made it difficult to guess, having alienated so much of the world that the coming take-down-the-US World War could break out practically anywhere. Russia and its borderlands…China and its southern sea and/or its errant province of Taiwan…and now, with the genocide of Palestine making the Islamic world even angrier than Russia and China, the whole middle belt of Eurasia and North Africa is equally hostile territory.

But before we start globetrotting in search of flashpoints, why not begin imagining the transforming event a bit closer to home? If the assassination of heir-presumptive Archduke Ferdinand, attributed to allegedly state-supported radical fanatics, could set off World War I, could an assassination of presumptive 2024 president Donald Trump, attributed to radical Iran-supported fanatics, unleash World War III?

Flashpoint Florida

Imagine: It’s October 2024. Trump is leading in the polls 55%-45% nationwide, with a clear edge in all the swing states. Suddenly, out of nowhere, a drone swoops down on Mar-a-Lago, smashes through a plate glass window like a supermosquito on steroids, and stings Trump with its explosive charge just as he’s breaking open his seventh can of diet coke. (Cinematographically, we cut from a close-up of the pssssssst as Trump opens the can to a medium shot of the almost simultaneous explosion.)

Fortunately, almost before what is left of Trump is declared dead, the media tells us who did it. A radical Iranian-Palestinian terrorist named Lee Harvey Atta is arrested on the seventh floor of the Palm Beach School Book Depository and accidentally defenestrated before he can be questioned. Luckily, on the floor of the book storeroom, authorities discover an Iranian-made Manlicher-Carcano drone control rig complete with instructions written in Farsi, signed by the Supreme Leader of Iran.

President Biden, whose cognition has been revived to functionality thanks to an Elon Musk (TM) brain implant, appears on television extravagantly praising the late and much-lamented Trump, canceling the election, declaring that all Americans are united in their thirst for vengeance, and calling for an all-out war on Iran to be personally commanded by a certain Bibi Netanyahu, who will be Lear-Jetted and then helicoptered in from Tel Aviv to take charge in the White House Situation Room. With the mutterings of conspiracy theorists silenced by the new AI-driven censorship algorithms, the US and the world are off to the races.

Other Potential Flashpoints

The above scenario, or some only slightly-less-ludicrous variation, may not be quite as unlikely as it sounds. Removing Trump, inciting Trump supporters to war hysteria, and blaming Iran—a plausible patsy given its stated desire for revenge for the assassination of General Soleimani—would kill three birds with one drone. The neocons may even have thought ahead to such a scenario when they conned Trump into approving the murder of Gen. Soleimani.

But don’t bet on Flashpoint Florida. It’s a big world out there, and—thanks to the neocons—most of it hates the US empire with a passion. The list of war-trigger possibilities is so long that guessing right would be like winning the lottery.

In our new “Flashpoints for War” episode of False Flag Weekly News, Cat McGuire and I began with the latest crisis: more than 85 US attacks on Iraq and Syria, threats of more to come, and counterattacks from the Resistance. With geriatric Biden under pressure from his right to act tough, it isn’t hard to see how a miscalculation, and/or a false flag by Israel, could set the dominoes falling in the direction of global war.

Another Mideast flashpoint, of course, is the Red Sea, especially the Bab al-Mandab. Yemen’s Houthi-led government, backed by everyone in the region, is continuing to attack Israel-bound ships in an effort to enforce the World Court’s anti-genocide order, despite the presence of a US armada unofficially known as Operation Genocide Guardian.

US ships are sitting ducks due to the proliferation of advanced anti-ship missiles. Instead of the long-awaited Persian Gulf of Tonkin incident, one iteration of which was thwarted in 2007 by US 5th Fleet advisor Gwenyth Todd, we could see a Red Sea Gulf of Tonkin incident…only it might involve an actual attack, albeit a false flag one, as in “remember the Maine.”

Another escalatory flashpoint could involve Lebanon’s Hezbollah, which has demonstrated an ability to penetrate Israeli defenses to hit heavily-guarded military targets even under conditions of highest alert. The Israelis clearly want all-out war with Hezbollah, in order to drag the US into the ensuing war with Iran. Only a very firm “no” from the American side prevented Israel from going to all-out war with Hezbollah after October 7. Given subsequent US ineffectuality at restraining the mad-dog Zionists, it isn’t hard to imagine Israel getting its wish and setting off World War III via an all-out war with Hezbollah and the rest of the Resistance Axis and Muslim world.

Flashpoint Palestine

As the above examples suggest, there are many ways that the continuing Israeli genocide of Palestine could indirectly lead to World War III. But could Palestine become a direct flashpoint? The Palestinians don’t seem to have enough military power. But if the war goes badly enough for the Palestinian Resistance, other branches of the Axis of Resistance will escalate their support, with unpredictable consequences. Additionally, there is massive covert support for Palestine among wealthy and powerful elements of regional nations, in some cases among high-ranking members of the state apparatus who wouldn’t be caught dead—or rather would be caught dead—if they uttered their real feelings about the Zionists in public.

One nightmarish potential flashpoint is the specter of a no-return-address WMD attack on Israel. The technology of WMD—micronukes, bioweapons, and the like—has been advancing since the days of the Davy Crockett backpack nukes of the 1950s, and even since the US-developed COVID bioweapon attack on China and Iran of a few years ago (which turned out to be a pretty good proof-of-concept for deniable, no-return-address bioattacks in general). Anger at Israel, in light of the current genocide, has reached the point that it’s virtually inevitable that people will try such things within the next few decades, assuming Israel is still around, and barring unforeseen changes in Zionist behavior.

Flashpoint Ukraine

Zionist fanatics on the wrong side of history have made Palestine and its region a potential WW3 flashpoint. Likewise Ukrainian nationalist fanatics, also on the wrong side of history, have created a parallel danger.

Just as 10 million Zionist Jews cannot defeat two billion Muslims, 40 million Ukrainians cannot defeat 140 million Russians. But the fanatics insist on trying. They know that their only hope is to drag the US into their war in an ever-bigger way. The result would be the destruction of the US empire, which, as mentioned at the beginning of the article, is grossly overextended given its 13%-and-shrinking share of global GDP.

Currently the fanatic faction, led by Zelensky, is fighting the realist faction, led by Zaluzhny. If the fanatics win, their only hope is to false-flag the US into bringing NATO directly into the war. Which means, of course, World War III.

Flashpoint Taiwan

Though we didn’t talk about Taiwan in the latest FFWN broadcast, it’s clear that the anti-China faction of neocons is trying to turn Taiwan into China’s Ukraine, by stoking the forces of fanatical Chinese nationalism and trying to goad Beijing into direct hostilities. If they succeed, World War III could start in the “cleanest” possible way: An immediate, direct war between the sinking #1 power and the rising #2 power.

Other Flashpoints?

This brief discussion certainly doesn’t exhaust the list of potential WW3 flashpoints. I’m sure my readers can think of others. Feel free to drop some into the comments section.

*At least if you are a realist. Since I am an idealist, accepting as I do the arguments of Bernardo Kastrup and the Holy Qur’an, not necessarily in that order, I reserve the right to believe that with God’s help we can avert World War III.

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

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

Joining us on this edition of the News Review we have writer and political columnist Saeed al-Shehabi who's joining us from the British capital London and also joining us from Saidia, Morocco, we have editor of Veterans Today, Mr. Kevin Barrett. Gentlemen, welcome to the program.

Let's jump right in, Mr. Shahabi, and give us your thoughts on the recent comments coming from the Iranian president. President Raisi said that there will be a strong response to any possible bullying against Tehran.

Saeed al-Shehabi: Thank you very much. The situation in the Middle East generally is very tense at this moment because of the Israeli aggression on Gaza, the killing, the maiming. And of course, its extraterritorial attacks on other countries, on Syria, on some parts of Iraq.

So all this has put Israel in the limelight of the crisis. It seems to me that the Israelis believe that they can only survive in an atmosphere of war. So as long as there is war, they will survive. If there is peace, they cannot survive. So they are threatening to strike and supported by America. But America also, American involvement in the region is destabilizing the region….

Mr. Kevin Barrett, the Iranian President said that the adversaries and enemies, in his own words to the Islamic Republic, used to resort to language of threat against Iran, even stating on multiple occasions that the military option was on the table, but he also said that they're not seeking a confrontation with the Islamic Republic. Do you think that the United States was ever at a point where it was contemplating any form of military action against Iran, most notably recently?

Kevin Barrett: Well, I think the American side is undoubtedly contemplating some form of escalation in its relatively low level back-and-forth—it’s not a war, but there has definitely been pressure put on the American occupation of the region by various Axis of Resistance groups. In the wake of the (Tower 22) attack that killed three American servicemen and wounded a lot more, the Americans were probably doomed to escalate to some extent. But then the question became: Would they try an actual attack within Iran’s borders, and how big would it be if they did? This would of course threaten to escalate into a regional war, because obviously Iran would retaliate, as President Raisi made clear. Or will they continue with the tit-for-tat exchanges with various resistance groups?

The Americans are operating illegally in Iraq. The Iraqi parliament has voted to expel the US and the US hasn’t left, so it is an illegal occupying power. And it’s an even more blatantly illegal occupying power in Syria. The recent attacks on Americans (at Tower 22 in Jordan) happened right next to the Syrian border. And one could argue that Jordan is also occupied and that decisions for Jordan are made from within the gigantic American embassy compound there.

So the US occupation of the region, which is not popular in the region, especially now that the Zionist genocide of Palestine has gone into high gear, has led to the situation where the local resistance groups are much more likely to want to target American shipping in the Red Sea, American occupying forces in Iraq and Syria, and put pressure on the Americans.

The thought would be that perhaps the U.S. would dial back its support for the genocide of Gaza. And so in this confrontation, the Axis of Resistance is on the side of enforcing international law and the judgment of the World Court that just found probable cause that Israel is engaged in genocide in Gaza. Whereas the Americans are genocidal global outlaws.

I don’t think the Americans want to escalate the war in the region (especially) in this situation in which they are the outlaws and are hated by the vast majority of people in the region.

The Iranian President said that Iran's military might poses no threat to the West Asian region and that regional countries can rely on Iran's military power. Is he once again hinting to comments the Iranian President specifically has made in the past stating that, listen, we can take care of security in our region, ourselves, regional countries, and basically foreign forces, they need to pack up their bags and leave?

Saeed al-Shehabi: Look, number one, the security of the Persian Gulf should be left to the people of the region. It shouldn't be secured through the presence of international or western or American and British warships there. If the security of that important place is left to the people, then the likelihood of flare-up of tension and wars will be much less. This is number one.

Number two, the Iranians are known for their tit-for-tat policy. I still remember what happened I think in 1986 in a meeting in Switzerland when some Kurdish people were there and they had attacked some Iranian installations and the Iranians went also and attacked them. All in all, the Iranians will not keep quiet if they are subjected to an attack. And this is what the Iranian president said, that Iran will not remain silent if it is attacked.

Number three, the various groups that are working within the region, mostly they are independent. They are left to their own decisions. They take their own decisions. If the Americans, as my colleague said, choose to attack Iran, then that will be a declaration of war, which is not going to benefit anyone.

And Israel is not going to benefit from war because its hated policy in Gaza has exposed a lot of shortcomings and inhumane treatment to the extent that they wanted to impose, and they did impose, some form of preventing food and medicine. So I think the situation is very tense and I hope that it will pass without major incidents.

Kevin Barrett, one last question for you before we wrap up this segment. With all the years of the U.S. and its allies basically trying to exert their hegemony in the region, a point has now been reached where the people of the region are quite unified in their demand that the U.S. and foreign forces should leave the region. How important and significant is this point that the region has reached right now?

Kevin Barrett: It's critically important. It's also important to underline that it's not only the people of the region that want the American imperialists to leave. It’s even the governments in Iraq and Syria—well obviously Syria, which has been on the outs with the U.S. for quite some time—but even in Iraq, which was invaded, occupied, and put under heavy American pressure all of these years, the Iraqi Parliament voted to expel American forces. And the Americans refused to leave.

So I think the American empire is already getting very shaky with its loss in Afghanistan, its impending loss in Ukraine, and now its totally doomed support for the genocide of Gaza. And it would be very wise for the US to think about how to withdraw from the region and from its role as the supposed unipolar world empire, and start minding its own business and taking care of its own people and its own infrastructure.

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

Joining us on this edition of the News Review we have writer and political columnist Saeed al-Shehabi who's joining us from the British capital London and also joining us from Saidia, Morocco, we have editor of Veterans Today, Mr. Kevin Barrett. Gentlemen, welcome to the program.

Let's jump right in, Mr. Shahabi, and give us your thoughts on the recent comments coming from the Iranian president. President Raisi said that there will be a strong response to any possible bullying against Tehran.

Saeed al-Shehabi: Thank you very much. The situation in the Middle East generally is very tense at this moment because of the Israeli aggression on Gaza, the killing, the maiming. And of course, its extraterritorial attacks on other countries, on Syria, on some parts of Iraq.

So all this has put Israel in the limelight of the crisis. It seems to me that the Israelis believe that they can only survive in an atmosphere of war. So as long as there is war, they will survive. If there is peace, they cannot survive. So they are threatening to strike and supported by America. But America also, American involvement in the region is destabilizing the region….

Mr. Kevin Barrett, the Iranian President said that the adversaries and enemies, in his own words to the Islamic Republic, used to resort to language of threat against Iran, even stating on multiple occasions that the military option was on the table, but he also said that they're not seeking a confrontation with the Islamic Republic. Do you think that the United States was ever at a point where it was contemplating any form of military action against Iran, most notably recently?

Kevin Barrett: Well, I think the American side is undoubtedly contemplating some form of escalation in its relatively low level back-and-forth—it’s not a war, but there has definitely been pressure put on the American occupation of the region by various Axis of Resistance groups. In the wake of the (Tower 22) attack that killed three American servicemen and wounded a lot more, the Americans were probably doomed to escalate to some extent. But then the question became: Would they try an actual attack within Iran’s borders, and how big would it be if they did? This would of course threaten to escalate into a regional war, because obviously Iran would retaliate, as President Raisi made clear. Or will they continue with the tit-for-tat exchanges with various resistance groups?

The Americans are operating illegally in Iraq. The Iraqi parliament has voted to expel the US and the US hasn’t left, so it is an illegal occupying power. And it’s an even more blatantly illegal occupying power in Syria. The recent attacks on Americans (at Tower 22 in Jordan) happened right next to the Syrian border. And one could argue that Jordan is also occupied and that decisions for Jordan are made from within the gigantic American embassy compound there.

So the US occupation of the region, which is not popular in the region, especially now that the Zionist genocide of Palestine has gone into high gear, has led to the situation where the local resistance groups are much more likely to want to target American shipping in the Red Sea, American occupying forces in Iraq and Syria, and put pressure on the Americans.

The thought would be that perhaps the U.S. would dial back its support for the genocide of Gaza. And so in this confrontation, the Axis of Resistance is on the side of enforcing international law and the judgment of the World Court that just found probable cause that Israel is engaged in genocide in Gaza. Whereas the Americans are genocidal global outlaws.

I don’t think the Americans want to escalate the war in the region (especially) in this situation in which they are the outlaws and are hated by the vast majority of people in the region.

The Iranian President said that Iran's military might poses no threat to the West Asian region and that regional countries can rely on Iran's military power. Is he once again hinting to comments the Iranian President specifically has made in the past stating that, listen, we can take care of security in our region, ourselves, regional countries, and basically foreign forces, they need to pack up their bags and leave?

Saeed al-Shehabi: Look, number one, the security of the Persian Gulf should be left to the people of the region. It shouldn't be secured through the presence of international or western or American and British warships there. If the security of that important place is left to the people, then the likelihood of flare-up of tension and wars will be much less. This is number one.

Number two, the Iranians are known for their tit-for-tat policy. I still remember what happened I think in 1986 in a meeting in Switzerland when some Kurdish people were there and they had attacked some Iranian installations and the Iranians went also and attacked them. All in all, the Iranians will not keep quiet if they are subjected to an attack. And this is what the Iranian president said, that Iran will not remain silent if it is attacked.

Number three, the various groups that are working within the region, mostly they are independent. They are left to their own decisions. They take their own decisions. If the Americans, as my colleague said, choose to attack Iran, then that will be a declaration of war, which is not going to benefit anyone.

And Israel is not going to benefit from war because its hated policy in Gaza has exposed a lot of shortcomings and inhumane treatment to the extent that they wanted to impose, and they did impose, some form of preventing food and medicine. So I think the situation is very tense and I hope that it will pass without major incidents.

Kevin Barrett, one last question for you before we wrap up this segment. With all the years of the U.S. and its allies basically trying to exert their hegemony in the region, a point has now been reached where the people of the region are quite unified in their demand that the U.S. and foreign forces should leave the region. How important and significant is this point that the region has reached right now?

Kevin Barrett: It's critically important. It's also important to underline that it's not only the people of the region that want the American imperialists to leave. It’s even the governments in Iraq and Syria—well obviously Syria, which has been on the outs with the U.S. for quite some time—but even in Iraq, which was invaded, occupied, and put under heavy American pressure all of these years, the Iraqi Parliament voted to expel American forces. And the Americans refused to leave.

So I think the American empire is already getting very shaky with its loss in Afghanistan, its impending loss in Ukraine, and now its totally doomed support for the genocide of Gaza. And it would be very wise for the US to think about how to withdraw from the region and from its role as the supposed unipolar world empire, and start minding its own business and taking care of its own people and its own infrastructure.

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

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

Alan Sabrosky, former Head of Strategic Studies at the US Army War College, joins this show on the first Friday of each month. Unfortunately his connection dropped off at the 20’30” mark so the rest of this show features my monologues and conversations with producer Mr. Rho, interspersed with attempts to re-establish the connection.

During our 20 minutes of conversation “Doc” Sabrosky raises the usual issues—wars in West Asia and Ukraine, prospects for civil war in light of Biden’s border crisis, will there even be a 2024 election, the Israeli genocide of Palestinians—and disagrees with Ron Unz’s latest article, which posits (echoing HG Wells) that today’s Jews are not the descendants of Khazars or Judeans, but instead may trace much of their ancestry to ethnically Phoenician/Carthaginian elements of the Roman Empire.

Did the Romans’ “final solution to the Cathaginian question” that involved “encouraging voluntary migration” from Carthage ultimately fail? Did surviving Carthaginians and others of Phoenician ethnicity persist among the dregs of the Empire, with some of them converting to Judaism and becoming ancestors of today’s Jews? Sounds plausible to me—but not to Alan Sabrosky.

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

Alan Sabrosky, former Head of Strategic Studies at the US Army War College, joins this show on the first Friday of each month. Unfortunately his connection dropped off at the 20’30” mark so the rest of this show features my monologues and conversations with producer Mr. Rho, interspersed with attempts to re-establish the connection.

During our 20 minutes of conversation “Doc” Sabrosky raises the usual issues—wars in West Asia and Ukraine, prospects for civil war in light of Biden’s border crisis, will there even be a 2024 election, the Israeli genocide of Palestinians—and disagrees with Ron Unz’s latest article, which posits (echoing HG Wells) that today’s Jews are not the descendants of Khazars or Judeans, but instead may trace much of their ancestry to ethnically Phoenician/Carthaginian elements of the Roman Empire.

Did the Romans’ “final solution to the Cathaginian question” that involved “encouraging voluntary migration” from Carthage ultimately fail? Did surviving Carthaginians and others of Phoenician ethnicity persist among the dregs of the Empire, with some of them converting to Judaism and becoming ancestors of today’s Jews? Sounds plausible to me—but not to Alan Sabrosky.

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

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

Posting an article headlined “Damn the Jews!”—even in quotation marks—is asking for trouble. An old friend emailed me with the subject header: “IN REGARD TO DAMN THE JEWS—sad to see you descend into dehumanized hatred.” She pointed out: “There are good Jews ....and bad Jews....good Muslims and bad muslims....good Christians and bad....Good Hindus and bad... Don't you think, Kevin, we are also individually each a mixture of good and evil?”

A colleague and occasional radio guest wrote: “Conflating Jews with Zionists is what Zionists do best. How could you?!!! You are, effectively, on THEIR side when you repeat their most important fundamental lie.” Other commentators made similar points, arguing for “damn the ZIONISTS!” instead.

My initial response was: “Did you read the article? The title is in quotes! It is a translation of the Houthi slogan! The article is (dark) humor!!!” My old friend admitted she hadn’t read the article and was just reacting to the headline. Others had read it but still found it offensive. I asked whether I should engage in some “literary self-criticism.” Several said “yes!” So here we go.

Literary Self-Criticism

Some writers, like Joyce, Kafka, and Pynchon, have whole industries of scholars interpreting their oeuvres. Others, like me, are condemned to self-exegesis, which I suppose is better than having no exegetes at all.

As Mikhail Bakhtin might say if he were alive and employed by a university that paid him to interpret the works of Kevin Barrett, “Damn the Jews!” is polyphonic. That means that the same phrase (“damn the Jews!”) includes echoes of different, opposing voices that impose different meanings on those words. In the title of my article, I put that phrase in quotation marks, a sign that someone else is saying them, to help readers figure that out.

From a Houthi perspective, and indeed from an Arab and Muslim perspective generally, “damn the Jews” or “a curse upon the Jews” or however you want to translate اللعنة على اليهود isn’t shocking or controversial, any more than a circa-1944 American saying “damn the Germans” would have been to American ears of that era. The Arab and Muslim worlds have effectively been at war with Israel and organized Jewry ever since the Jewish State’s genocide of Palestine began in earnest in 1947-1948—just like the American state was at war with the German state in 1944.

If you were an American who said “damn the Germans” in 1944, would anyone have taken offense? Would they have insisted “you should damn the Nazis, not all Germans! After all, there are good Germans and bad Germans…” I doubt it. Though there was and is a theoretical distinction between the German nation, consisting of all ethnically-German people, and the German state, few Americans cared much about that distinction in 1944, any more than most Arabs and Muslims care about the distinction between “the Jews” and the Jewish State today. That’s why saying “damn the Jews” in an Arab or Muslim context is uncontroversial.

Though I’m living in Morocco, where few are bothered by the Houthi anti-Jewish slogan, I write for an international anglophone audience dominated by Americans, but including a fair number of Arabs and Muslims from around the world. So I am hyper-aware that a phrase like “damn the Jews” is going to sound very different to different ears.

Americans, whose government underwrites the genocidal Jewish State, and who get their views from the Jewish-dominated media, have been trained to be hypersensitive to mythical “anti-Semitism.” In the USA, say anything remotely negative about Jews and your career and reputation will be destroyed. Americans internalize this taboo against “anti-Semitism” and start sweating bullets when they hear something like “damn the Jews.” It’s a Pavlovian, emotionally-driven reaction. (Oddly, the same people who freak out about “damn the Jews” are muttering “damn the Russians” at cocktail parties. Don’t they know that it isn’t all Russians?!)

Polyphony, specifically the tension between conflicting understandings of the same words, easily shades into humor. It’s darkly funny, when you think about it, that Americans and Arabs/Muslims react to “damn the Jews” in such radically different ways. (It’s also rather hilarious that Americans have been so completely and utterly brainwashed by the Jewish cowboys running herd on their goyim cattle, in the immortal words of Revilo P. Oliver—but that joke is on the Americans…and the Jews, sorry, I mean the cowboys, are laughing all the way to the bank.)

So to recap: My article “Damn the Jews!” playfully addresses the humorous incongruity between the way two cultures “hear” the Houthi slogan in general, and its fourth line in particular. The standard translation “A curse upon the Jews” is hilarious, as my article attempts to convey, because it is simultaneously so clunkily archaic and so “anti-Semitically” transgressive. That’s why I offered the Houthis tongue-in-cheek PR advice, and solicited my readers to offer more.

The Moral of the Story

So my article did not damn all Jews. It skewered Americans and Westerners for their complicity in Zionist genocide, sought to help them become conscious of the pro-Jewish brainwashing that has led them to complicity in genocide, gently teased the Houthis and their translators, and generally sought higher awareness through laughter, sort of like Swami Beyondanonda does, but in a darker key.

Excerpt from Yesterday’s Richie Allen Interview (whole show archived above)

Richie Allen: You converted to Islam, you're a Muslim. What does it mean to you knowing, does it mean anything, that so many Jewish people completely condemn and abhor this and say not in their name and yet they never get a chance when talk TV shows here in the UK and radio shows want to discuss it. As far as people are concerned Jewish people are all for this (genocide) but they're not Kevin, not the Jewish people I know.

Kevin Barrett: Not the Jewish people I know either. I have probably a disproportionate share of Jewish radio guests. People who are always concerned about issues related to Jewish power often harp on the disproportionate presence of Jews in this or that sector, with of course the media being the number one focus. But hey, my radio show is part of the media, and I'm pretty sure that more than 2% of my guests have some kind of Jewish background.

And I suppose that's just because I look for the most interesting people who have something worthwhile to say that's outside the box. And there are probably, it's just going to be a little bit disproportionately people of Jewish background. And that's cool with me. And the vast majority of those people are pretty much as horrified as I am, if not more so.

I think this does illustrate, Richie, the way that Jewish tribal power has always had a kind of an inner layer as well as an outer layer that kind of bleeds off into the surrounding communities. And the inner layer is fanatically tribal and utterly brainwashed. That's “our Uncle Mortimer who reads the New York Times every morning and the only thing he cares about is, is it good for the Jews?” And then there's somebody else in the family that is a much more critical thinker and much more open-minded and probably is going to go off and marry a non-Jewish person. And in another couple of generations, their descendants may not even count themselves as Jewish anymore, but the descendants of Mortimer certainly will.

And so you've had this tribal power configuration passed down through the centuries. And today let's face the fact, Richie, that yes, if we poll Jewish people in the West, we're going to find a very large number that are against this genocide. Not so in Israel, of course. But at the same time, the powerful part of the Jewish tribe, let's say Jewish tribal power, is pro-genocide. That is, the Biden administration, as liberal and democratic as it's supposed to be, is pro-genocide. They have power. And on the other side, the Republican Jews, who are getting vast amounts of (Jewish-Zionist) money, are even more rabidly pro-genocide. So the Jews with power are largely pro-genocide, and the Jews without power are largely anti-genocide.

Check out the stories False Flag Weekly News will cover, then watch the show after 1 pm Eastern tomorrow, HERE. Cat McGuire will be the commentator.

—-

Poll Result: No Paywall Wins!

The comments and emails were overwhelmingly anti-paywall. I was moved by the people whose financial circumstances make it hard for them to support my work. Here is one example:

Hi Kevin, we have met on a number of occasions and events but not for some time. I live in Seattle. I was at an event on Mercer Island  and later at a Methodist church in the university district the last time. It has been at least 10 plus years. Before that I saw you at a couple of 9/11 events. I gave you some cash at those times.  I agree you should earn an income. Now I live on a pension and savings so I'm stingy with my money. So what's the solution.

The best solution I can think of is to go no-paywall, and trust the honor and generosity of the people who can afford to subscribe. If you’re one of my paid subscribers, from now on you’ll be a patron, not a customer, and your subscription fee will be a gift, not a purchase. You’ll be helping me reach a larger audience, and you’ll be helping those among my audience who are hard-up to read and spread my work. So…thank you! May your kindness and generosity be rewarded.

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

Posting an article headlined “Damn the Jews!”—even in quotation marks—is asking for trouble. An old friend emailed me with the subject header: “IN REGARD TO DAMN THE JEWS—sad to see you descend into dehumanized hatred.” She pointed out: “There are good Jews ....and bad Jews....good Muslims and bad muslims....good Christians and bad....Good Hindus and bad... Don't you think, Kevin, we are also individually each a mixture of good and evil?”

A colleague and occasional radio guest wrote: “Conflating Jews with Zionists is what Zionists do best. How could you?!!! You are, effectively, on THEIR side when you repeat their most important fundamental lie.” Other commentators made similar points, arguing for “damn the ZIONISTS!” instead.

My initial response was: “Did you read the article? The title is in quotes! It is a translation of the Houthi slogan! The article is (dark) humor!!!” My old friend admitted she hadn’t read the article and was just reacting to the headline. Others had read it but still found it offensive. I asked whether I should engage in some “literary self-criticism.” Several said “yes!” So here we go.

Literary Self-Criticism

Some writers, like Joyce, Kafka, and Pynchon, have whole industries of scholars interpreting their oeuvres. Others, like me, are condemned to self-exegesis, which I suppose is better than having no exegetes at all.

As Mikhail Bakhtin might say if he were alive and employed by a university that paid him to interpret the works of Kevin Barrett, “Damn the Jews!” is polyphonic. That means that the same phrase (“damn the Jews!”) includes echoes of different, opposing voices that impose different meanings on those words. In the title of my article, I put that phrase in quotation marks, a sign that someone else is saying them, to help readers figure that out.

From a Houthi perspective, and indeed from an Arab and Muslim perspective generally, “damn the Jews” or “a curse upon the Jews” or however you want to translate اللعنة على اليهود isn’t shocking or controversial, any more than a circa-1944 American saying “damn the Germans” would have been to American ears of that era. The Arab and Muslim worlds have effectively been at war with Israel and organized Jewry ever since the Jewish State’s genocide of Palestine began in earnest in 1947-1948—just like the American state was at war with the German state in 1944.

If you were an American who said “damn the Germans” in 1944, would anyone have taken offense? Would they have insisted “you should damn the Nazis, not all Germans! After all, there are good Germans and bad Germans…” I doubt it. Though there was and is a theoretical distinction between the German nation, consisting of all ethnically-German people, and the German state, few Americans cared much about that distinction in 1944, any more than most Arabs and Muslims care about the distinction between “the Jews” and the Jewish State today. That’s why saying “damn the Jews” in an Arab or Muslim context is uncontroversial.

Though I’m living in Morocco, where few are bothered by the Houthi anti-Jewish slogan, I write for an international anglophone audience dominated by Americans, but including a fair number of Arabs and Muslims from around the world. So I am hyper-aware that a phrase like “damn the Jews” is going to sound very different to different ears.

Americans, whose government underwrites the genocidal Jewish State, and who get their views from the Jewish-dominated media, have been trained to be hypersensitive to mythical “anti-Semitism.” In the USA, say anything remotely negative about Jews and your career and reputation will be destroyed. Americans internalize this taboo against “anti-Semitism” and start sweating bullets when they hear something like “damn the Jews.” It’s a Pavlovian, emotionally-driven reaction. (Oddly, the same people who freak out about “damn the Jews” are muttering “damn the Russians” at cocktail parties. Don’t they know that it isn’t all Russians?!)

Polyphony, specifically the tension between conflicting understandings of the same words, easily shades into humor. It’s darkly funny, when you think about it, that Americans and Arabs/Muslims react to “damn the Jews” in such radically different ways. (It’s also rather hilarious that Americans have been so completely and utterly brainwashed by the Jewish cowboys running herd on their goyim cattle, in the immortal words of Revilo P. Oliver—but that joke is on the Americans…and the Jews, sorry, I mean the cowboys, are laughing all the way to the bank.)

So to recap: My article “Damn the Jews!” playfully addresses the humorous incongruity between the way two cultures “hear” the Houthi slogan in general, and its fourth line in particular. The standard translation “A curse upon the Jews” is hilarious, as my article attempts to convey, because it is simultaneously so clunkily archaic and so “anti-Semitically” transgressive. That’s why I offered the Houthis tongue-in-cheek PR advice, and solicited my readers to offer more.

The Moral of the Story

So my article did not damn all Jews. It skewered Americans and Westerners for their complicity in Zionist genocide, sought to help them become conscious of the pro-Jewish brainwashing that has led them to complicity in genocide, gently teased the Houthis and their translators, and generally sought higher awareness through laughter, sort of like Swami Beyondanonda does, but in a darker key.

Excerpt from Yesterday’s Richie Allen Interview (whole show archived above)

Richie Allen: You converted to Islam, you're a Muslim. What does it mean to you knowing, does it mean anything, that so many Jewish people completely condemn and abhor this and say not in their name and yet they never get a chance when talk TV shows here in the UK and radio shows want to discuss it. As far as people are concerned Jewish people are all for this (genocide) but they're not Kevin, not the Jewish people I know.

Kevin Barrett: Not the Jewish people I know either. I have probably a disproportionate share of Jewish radio guests. People who are always concerned about issues related to Jewish power often harp on the disproportionate presence of Jews in this or that sector, with of course the media being the number one focus. But hey, my radio show is part of the media, and I'm pretty sure that more than 2% of my guests have some kind of Jewish background.

And I suppose that's just because I look for the most interesting people who have something worthwhile to say that's outside the box. And there are probably, it's just going to be a little bit disproportionately people of Jewish background. And that's cool with me. And the vast majority of those people are pretty much as horrified as I am, if not more so.

I think this does illustrate, Richie, the way that Jewish tribal power has always had a kind of an inner layer as well as an outer layer that kind of bleeds off into the surrounding communities. And the inner layer is fanatically tribal and utterly brainwashed. That's “our Uncle Mortimer who reads the New York Times every morning and the only thing he cares about is, is it good for the Jews?” And then there's somebody else in the family that is a much more critical thinker and much more open-minded and probably is going to go off and marry a non-Jewish person. And in another couple of generations, their descendants may not even count themselves as Jewish anymore, but the descendants of Mortimer certainly will.

And so you've had this tribal power configuration passed down through the centuries. And today let's face the fact, Richie, that yes, if we poll Jewish people in the West, we're going to find a very large number that are against this genocide. Not so in Israel, of course. But at the same time, the powerful part of the Jewish tribe, let's say Jewish tribal power, is pro-genocide. That is, the Biden administration, as liberal and democratic as it's supposed to be, is pro-genocide. They have power. And on the other side, the Republican Jews, who are getting vast amounts of (Jewish-Zionist) money, are even more rabidly pro-genocide. So the Jews with power are largely pro-genocide, and the Jews without power are largely anti-genocide.

Check out the stories False Flag Weekly News will cover, then watch the show after 1 pm Eastern tomorrow, HERE. Cat McGuire will be the commentator.

—-

Poll Result: No Paywall Wins!

The comments and emails were overwhelmingly anti-paywall. I was moved by the people whose financial circumstances make it hard for them to support my work. Here is one example:

Hi Kevin, we have met on a number of occasions and events but not for some time. I live in Seattle. I was at an event on Mercer Island  and later at a Methodist church in the university district the last time. It has been at least 10 plus years. Before that I saw you at a couple of 9/11 events. I gave you some cash at those times.  I agree you should earn an income. Now I live on a pension and savings so I'm stingy with my money. So what's the solution.

The best solution I can think of is to go no-paywall, and trust the honor and generosity of the people who can afford to subscribe. If you’re one of my paid subscribers, from now on you’ll be a patron, not a customer, and your subscription fee will be a gift, not a purchase. You’ll be helping me reach a larger audience, and you’ll be helping those among my audience who are hard-up to read and spread my work. So…thank you! May your kindness and generosity be rewarded.

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

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 yesterday’s False Flag Weekly News, E. Michael Jones and I cringingly marveled at the pathos of Elon Musk’s visit to Auschwitz. The horror!

Whatever you think of gas chambers, there is no denying that Israel is slaughtering civilians, most of them women and children, by the tens of thousands. And as Dr. Jones pointed out, the Holocaust is the get-out-of-jail-free card endlessly played by the #GazaGenocide perps. By making a pilgrimage to Auschwitz, Holy of Holies of the Holocaust Religion, on the eve of the World Court’s decision in favor of South Africa’s genocide case against Israel, Musk was implicitly endorsing the genocide of Gaza.

What makes Elon “I am aspirationally Jewish” Musk’s Auschwitz rollover even sadder is that the Holy Holocaust is at the absolute epicenter of the ongoing war on free speech. Across-the-board, censorship on nearly every issue is being led by powerful elements of the Jewish community, whose hysterical attempts to suppress speech they disagree with is driven, consciously or unconsciously, by fears that free and fearless debate might ultimately lead to the collapse of the official sacred narrative of the Nazi Holocaust and subsequent loss of the get-out-of-jail-free card that has enabled the post-World War II Jewish takeover of America and the West.

Long before the current censorship epidemic broke out around 2016, historians who questioned the canonical version of the Holocaust narrative were being persecuted and imprisoned. The sacred Holocaust story, with its holy trinity (gas chambers, six million dead Jews, and an official total-extermination plan) and its resurrection miracle (Israel) was the one and only exception to Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights:

“Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.”

Since 2016, exceptions to Article 19 have been proliferating. The list of things you are no longer allowed to talk about on major internet platforms has expanded to include COVID, vaccines, election integrity or lack thereof, and whatever else the self-appointed censors happen to feel like suppressing at any given moment.

Elon Musk bought Twitter in part to push back against this war on free speech. He famously said that he didn’t think internet censorship should get too far ahead of the law, meaning the history of First Amendment jurisprudence in the US as well as the various legal requirements of other nations. In other words, if it isn’t illegal, you probably should be allowed to post it on Twitter.

The censorship lobby, dominated by powerful Jewish interests, pushed back. The Anti-Defamation League, spear-tip of organized Jewish power in North America, pilloried Musk and organized a boycott that threatened Twitter’s, and Musk’s, economic viability. Driven to paroxysms of outrage by Musk’s endorsement of the Great Replacement “conspiracy theory,” according to which Jews are behind the systematic replacement of white majorities through excessive immigration, the ADL and friends convinced hundreds of America’s biggest companies to stop advertising on Twitter/X. Musk responded by uttering a couple of shrill little “f-you” barks, then whimperingly scurried off to Auschwitz to display his bright-yellow belly.

So when Musk says he aspires to be Jewish, what he is really saying is that he wishes that he, too, had that kind of power. As long as he remains a goy, even Musk’s 200-billion dollar fortune can’t save him from second-class-citizen status. As a rich but still subhuman goy, he is not allowed to speak his mind. And because he is non-Jewish, he doesn’t have the right to permit certain kinds of speech—speech that Jews don’t like—on his platform. So who can blame him for his “aspirations”? Plenty of people were “aspirationally Medici” during the Medici dynasty, “aspirationally Tudor” under the Tudors, and “aspirationally Romanov” in 19th-century Russia. Today, such brown-nosers are “aspirationally Jewish.”

E. Michael Jones, that notable Catholic, and yours truly, a proud lapsed-Unitarian-turned-Muslim, clearly do not harbor any such Jewish aspirations. Below is the section of our conversation that turned on Elon’s canine submission ritual.

Let's move on to the title of our show, Elon Goes to Auschwitz. This was quite the bizarre, surreal scenario this week, as Elon Musk, who has been harassed by the ADL constantly, is maybe trying to get them off his back by going and kissing the gas chambers. I guess they don't still have gas chambers there, if they ever did, which I kind of doubt, having looked into it a little bit. But maybe he's kissing the walls where there would be Prussian blue or hydrogen cyanide residue if there indeed had been any gas chambers. Although actually they wouldn't, because those “gas chambers” were actually rebuilt by the Russians after the war. So there shouldn't be any hydrogen cyanide on the walls anyway, which indeed there isn't. In any case, Musk is kissing whatever he's being asked to kiss over there, and it's kind of bizarre. He's also saying he's aspirationally Jewish. What does that mean, Mike?

I don't know. I think it's an important concept because I think I became a Jew when I was a teenager. And it took me a while….It was only after I got to Germany that I realized I wasn't a Jew. And this was when I was in college and I started working. A priest introduced me to the art world in Philadelphia, and I worked for a Jewish artist, I worked for a Jewish gallery, I hung shows in a synagogue, the famous Frank Lloyd Wright synagogue there. I had a creative writing teacher who was a Jew, and also, when I got to Temple, a lot of the teachers were Jewish. It's something that can happen to you, and you don't know it happens because of the way they control their discourse. You simply adopt their categories. Once you do that, you start thinking like a Jew, and then maybe you wake up one morning and want to be aspirationally Jewish. It makes perfect sense to me.

And I guess by going to Auschwitz and kissing the gas chambers, that's almost like going to the Wailing Wall and putting on a beanie and kissing the wall. Either way, it is a sort of act of abject surrender, sort of like the way a dog might roll over and show its belly in a ritual of submission.

Yeah, you're right. But I think the religion has shifted now. The Holocaust is the established religion of the United States of America. Government money builds Holocaust museums all across the country. I think it has shifted from the Wailing Wall. I think this is a significant event. And Ben Shapiro is doing his job, getting the world's richest goy to offer up incense to an idol, the idol of the Holocaust, which is the real religion of the Jews at this point, and it's the established religion of the United States of America and Europe as well.

Okay. Well, apparently they're even showing fake footage, supposed Holocaust footage, which of course is all reenacted. And Elon is watching it pretending it's real, I suppose.

So let's let's move on to our music video of the week. Elon goes to Auschwitz. This is a take off on the Ramones’ classic Bonzo Goes to Bitburg. That takes us back to the days of Jewey Ramone, or that other Ramone…Bennie Ramone? I don't think so. [Ed. note: Jewish Joey Ramone and goy Reagan supporter Johnny Ramone had a spat over Joey’s Jewish anthem Bonzo Goes to Bitburg. See Rock History 101.]

Ah, never listened to him.

I don't know whether you saw Ben Shapiro did a rap song with some Canadian white rapper, a classic case of cultural appropriation. I'm going to claim credit for this. I know it sounds crazy, but I think it's in response to my interview with Jason Whitlock, where I talked to him and I started talking about the NAACP as a Jewish organization designed to stop, to destroy Marcus Garvey. And he's nodding in approval. He got a lot of pushback for that. And this video came out. I'm just saying he made it. They didn't have time to make it.

It's been in the works a lot, but they released it right after the Jason Whitlock thing to break up what looked like to be blacks and whites getting together and identifying Jews as the common enemy.

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