Truth Jihad Radio

In an interview with Newsmax last night, US president Donald Trump seemingly endorsed the conspiracy theory that Lindsey Graham was killed when “a certain part of his body” exploded due to contact with a booby-trapped LEGO child android.Trump, alerted to the danger, will presumably guard his “certain body part” against potential attacks by Laura Loomer LEGO androids.Loomer (the real one, not the exploding LEGO replica) has been blaming Russia rather than Iran for causing Graham’s “certain body part” to explode. 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 False Flag Weekly News linkBreaking! Iranian mullahs killed Lindsey Graham! Read all about it! We now return to our regular programming. -Ed.Americans who have heard of Sun Tzu identify him with deception, like they identify Machievelli with immorality. The US leadership class has taken to heart the Chinese sage’s dictum “All warfare is based on deception.” They have weaponized their self-granted license to lie against their own people, feeding us outrageous whoppers about Iran being supposedly primitive, fanatical, and full of people who hate their own government and can’t wait to overthrow it and welcome invading Americans and Israelis with proverbial flowers and candy. Iranians, we are told, are royalists who want the US puppet Shah back on his Peacock Throne. They are also Pol Pot style communists who would love to be governed by the US-backed MEK terror cult. Not only that, but they probably also yearn to be ruled by an army of invading Zionist Kurds. Anything so the girls can go half-naked again like they did before 1979.At some point American leaders started believing their own propaganda. High on their own supply, they have been making an endless succession of strategic blunders.Iran, for its part, prioritizes another of Sun Tzu’s observations: "If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles." Extending the Socratic imperative to know thyself to the enemy provides a sound basis for truth-based strategic communication. And sometimes the simple truth can defeat an army of lies.Iranians live there, so they know what is really happening in their country. They are also heavily exposed to Western media, including its massive Farsi language propaganda apparatus, so they’ve heard both sides of the story. They can’t possibly miss the grotesque levels of deception and self-deception that pervade Western discourse about Iran.Just as the October 7 concentration camp breakout unveiled the truth about the ongoing genocide of Palestine, the current Israeli-American war on Iran has cut through legions of Western/Zionist lies to reveal stark geopolitical realities. First and most obviously, the Islamic Republic commands immense popular support. As with Bush’s war on Iraq only more so, the “flowers and candy” predictions were preposterous.Actually that comparison is deceptive. Saddam Hussein never enjoyed much popular legitimacy. Most Iraqis tolerated him, and preferred him to a Zionist-orchestrated US invasion, but certainly did not love him. (What was there to love?) By contrast, the late Supreme Leader of Iran, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, was genuinely loved by his people. Even the disaffected, including the small minority of Iranians who would prefer to live under a secular system, for the most part loved the Rehbar. When he was criticized, it was almost always because he was seen as being too kind and gentle and lenient and forgiving…in other words, lovable…but sometimes not harsh enough on corrupt individuals and enemies. Iranians, including the minority of disaffected ones, always knew that the Khamenei family was squeaky-clean. The late Rehbar insisted on that. Since everyone knew that he and his family were totally free from any whiff of corruption, the propaganda lies to the contrary spread by US-taxpayer-funded Persian language media simply discredited the source. “Know yourself and your enemy” triumphed over “deception.”Likewise, Western propaganda claims that the Rehbar was a brutal dictator like Saddam Hussein were belied by the experience of ordinary Iranians who could see with their own eyes what was going on in their country. For example, during one of my eight visits to Iran I spoke to someone whose friend was involved in a land dispute. Though clearly in the right, and after years of court cases having finally obtained the Supreme Leader’s official decision to that effect, the plaintiff was still unable to take possession of his property, because lower-level officials were in no hurry to enforce the Leader’s edict. Far from enjoying dictatorial powers, the Leader’s authority was mostly moral and motivational, and stemmed more from love than from fear. That approach had drawbacks as well as advantages, but the latter outweighed the former, and the ultimate triumph of the loving approach to governance was eternalized by his martyrdom and the reaction it sparked.Iranians’ love for their martyred Leader was demonstrated at last week’s funeral commemorations, in which an estimated 43 million Iranians participated. That’s almost half of Iran’s total population, making it the equivalent of 150 million Americans turning out for a leader’s funeral. (That’s about how many Americans would line up at Trump’s grave to piss on it; he’d be lucky to get one-thousandth of that to pay their respects.)The Leader’s funeral was not just the biggest funeral in human history, but also the most-attended event in history. Ex-CNN host Rick Sanchez, fired from the MSM plantation for noticing who the owners and overseers were, had this to say:Video linkMore than 12 million people turned out for Ali Khamenei's (Tehran) funeral — one of the largest funeral processions in modern history... and it's still not over.That's more than Lenin's funeral. More than JFK's. More than Churchill's. More than Queen Elizabeth's. More than any British monarch's funeral.So much for the "Iran is on the brink of regime change" narrative.When you’re high on your own lie supply, trapped inside your self-inflated bubble of masturbatory fantasy, you can be blind to the most blindingly obvious realities…such as the obvious fact that murdering Iran’s Supreme Leader would lead to Iran’s shutting down, and seizing permanent control over, the Strait of Hormuz, where 20% of the world’s energy must pass. Sun Tzu’s claim that deception wins wars was never meant as a recipe for random, outrageous, pointless lying that deceives the liar not the target and blows up in the liar’s face. If Sun Tzu heard people like Karl Rove chortling “we’re an empire now, we create our own reality” as their pathological mendacity triggers ever-bigger explosive chain reactions, he would certainly want to distance himself from such grotesque distortions of his own prescriptions for the modest and judicious use of strategic deceptions.Iran, a lynchpin of the reality-based community, knows that geographical reality has favored it with mountains for self defense and a dominant position overlooking the world’s most important Strait. Military reality, too, now favors the side that keeps its drones and rockets deep underground. These realities cannot be overcome by any number of lying Trump tweets brandishing fantastic and obscene threats. Trump’s crazed imagination, which swings wildly between fantasies of nuking Iran one day and equally improbable fantasies of peace the next, may hold temporary power over the stock market, but it can’t determine the outcome of the military conflict. Trump may be able to bend FIFA’s soccer rules, but such demented moves, like his erratic war tweets, just make him look weak, stupid, desperate, and totally out of control. As a war propagandist, Trump is an epic failure: His war on Iran is the most unpopular war ever begun, and it plumbs new depths of unpopularity every time a new poll is taken. When economic crunch time comes, Trump will be lucky to escape the guillotine. Iranian strategic communicators, like Trump, can be quite imaginative. But they are honest enough to frame their Lego videos as fiction. My literary journalism professor Wilmot Ragsdale was fond of quoting Camus’s “fiction is the lie through which we tell the truth.” That’s what Iranian LEGO filmmakers excel at. Iranian communicators enjoy a huge advantage over Trump’s Fox News crew: they are defending the defensible, and the defensive. Nobody likes aggression, least of all God. And the Iranian advantage goes even deeper: They are metaphysically grounded in Truth a.k.a. Reality (al-Haqq, one of the 99 Most Beautiful Names of God). The late Supreme Leader, like other leading Iranian philosophers, was never undone by Westoxified deviations of hyper-skeptical materialism and nihilism. There is essentially no Western philosophy left, because the West has abandoned God, and with Him, Reality. Trying to fight an information war on groundless ground is a hopeless assignment. Might as well sink into the quicksand and be done with it.So it’s a war of truth versus lies, reality versus fantasy. Lies may prevail for a time. But, like evil, they are ultimately undone by their lack of metaphysical grounding and ontological heft.“Know your enemy and yourself”—and the truth—defeats (self-)deception in the end.Stripe is Substack’s only processor and they debanked me, so you can no longer pay me through Substack. Now I am posting everything on Substack free and asking people to sign up for recurring donations at my Paypal donation page…or better yet, the free speech platform SPdonate. Alternately you can Paypal or Zelle to truthjihad[at]gmail(dot)com. Note that Zelle, unlike other methods, doesn’t charge any fees. 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 Telegram Short VideoOver 40 million Iranians came out for the funeral of their martyred Leader. Meanwhile, the cowardly narcissist murderer Trump is literally as well as figuratively defecating himself, whimpering fearfully as Israel feeds him stories about Iranians wanting to kill him. Well, guess what: they do! They want revenge for the 160 schoolgirls of Minab as well as the other murders. But the Iranian people aren’t alone. The whole world, and a likely plurality of Americans, would wildly celebrate should anything untoward happen to Trump. Iran, in stark contrast, stands courageously united behind its Islamic Republican leadership.This interview was broadcast live around 9:30 pm Tehran time Friday, July 10.Transcript:Marzieh Hashemi (Anchor): Thanks so much for staying with us right here at Press TV. Of course, throughout this week we have been covering the various processions of the martyred leader of the Islamic Revolution, Ayatollah Khamenei, from Tehran, then to Qom, and to Iraq to Najaf and Karbala, and of course yesterday to Mashhad. By this morning, we can say that it took time for millions and millions of people to turn out. We are looking at over 15 million, and some reports say over 43 million people participated in this funeral across both countries. It is an unbelievable event and a transforming situation taking place in the region.I’d like to welcome my guests to this part of the program: joining us from Morocco is Kevin Barrett, editor of Veterans Today, and here in the studio with me is my colleague, Maryam. Thanks to both of you for being with me. I’ll start us off with Kevin. What are your overarching thoughts about the number of people that turned out for the various processions? What type of message does it send, considering this is the man that the U.S. said did not have any support and was a dictator?Kevin Barrett: Yes, this was the biggest funeral in human history and one of the very biggest gatherings of people. It sent a very, very powerful message. It completely annihilated and obliterated the Western propaganda that has been going on for years, claiming that the leadership in Iran in general, and the late martyred Supreme Leader in particular, didn’t have any support. People now can see for themselves that there has really been no political leadership in history that has had this kind of backing.When someone like Trump—whose poll numbers are ridiculously low and falling all the time as he blunders into another forever war—sees this, it triggers intense cognitive dissonance. This was the most obviously immoral as well as strategically stupid war in American history, which is saying a lot. Then Trump himself, and the Americans, see this kind of turnout and think, “Wait a minute, I thought he didn’t have any support. I thought nobody liked him.”There’s just this huge cognitive dissonance that’s slapping awake everybody in the West who has been subjected to all of this propaganda over the years and decades. It’s very inspiring as well because there’s a spiritual dimension to this principled resistance—a resistance to aggression, to imperialism, and to genocide.Marzieh Hashemi: The message overall that was sent, as Kevin ended his thoughts, is a sign of resistance to imperialism. I’m going to talk about that aspect because we know even inside of Iraq, the United States has continually tried to manipulate Iraqi politics to make sure that it’s more aggressive towards Iran, or anti-Iran. Despite all of what they have been trying to do, we saw millions and millions of people turning out throughout the country, especially in the cities of Karbala and Najaf. Maryam, what are your thoughts about that and the message overall that this sends?Maryam Azarchehr: Despite everything the U.S. has tried, the numbers are reported to be 43 million and higher, and that’s not even taking into consideration everybody else who held a symbolic funeral. We know that in addition to the funeral processions that involved the martyred bodies of our leader and his family members, there were symbolic processions elsewhere because it couldn’t be arranged for the leader’s body to go to those places as well.We had various funeral processions in the Beqaa Valley where a lot of people showed up for the martyred leader, and this was immediately after his martyrdom. If you take that into consideration, along with gatherings in Pakistan, and even in Germany where a few hundred turned out—and we know how the fascist regimes of those countries operate, seeing how they beat up protesters when they were protesting against the genocide in Gaza—the numbers are even greater than what we know.By itself, this seems to be not only the biggest funeral procession in history, but also perhaps the biggest human gathering in history. That’s really something, especially as you and our guest mentioned, since the whole propaganda narrative has been that this guy does not have supporters. The whole excuse the U.S. constantly uses for interfering in the politics of different countries, and for overthrowing democratically elected leaders, is that they don’t have democracy and the people are under pressure.This turnout very much exposes the lie that has been spread about Iran, about our martyred leader Khamenei, and about the position of leadership. Every one of those individuals who participated clearly accepted and cared for Imam Khamenei himself, coming out to those massive processions in extremely high temperatures up to 100 degrees. In Europe, people die in much lower temperatures. Everyone who participated demonstrated that they have accepted the position of leadership and the jurisprudence of an Islamic scholar.The U.S. has said for a very long time that the Islamic Republic is not legitimate. Of course, they know that we have presidential elections, a parliament, and that people vote in all kinds of elections in this country and actually have a lot of say. What they try to use to criticize Iran is the claim that the leadership is in place for a long time—unless, of course, there’s mismanagement or Islamic misconduct on the side of the leader, which was not the case.With what actually happened during those massive rallies in support of the leader of the Islamic Revolution, it was very much a referendum for the Islamic Republic of Iran, proving its legitimacy once again. The same Islamic Republic that had come to power by the vote of about 98% of Iranians demonstrated, after the martyrdom of Sayyid Ali Khamenei, that millions are still supporting the leadership. That is major, and in many ways, it shows the legitimacy of the Islamic Republic.Marzieh Hashemi: That’s a very interesting point to make because we know the enemies of the Islamic Republic continually say it’s time for another referendum to be held. As Maryam said, these indeed were the biggest referendums that could have ever been held.Now back to you, Kevin. I see the Palestinian flag behind you and I want to touch on that. When we talk about the failing narrative that’s taking place, we go back to October of 2023, the beginning of this latest round of genocide in Gaza and the Palestinian territories in general. We see the continued support that the Islamic Republic of Iran has shown and given to the Palestinians, which continued right up until last night with this burial, once again breaking the narrative. Do you think that the world will ever go back to pre-October 7, 2023, in terms of not understanding who the main culprits of these massacres are?Kevin Barrett: Yeah, I think you’re onto something, Marwa. And I think you’re right that the October 7th, 2023 raid—the brilliant Al-Aqsa Storm, the Tufan Al-Aqsa raid by the coalition of Palestinian resistance groups—really changed history. I think they were courageous and willing to endure the suffering and martyrdom that came because they saw that this was the only way to create a situation in which the Zionist entity would take off its mask and reveal its true genocidal nature, stripping it of all legitimacy.For those of us who’ve been paying attention, we all knew that it didn’t have any legitimacy before that and that it was indeed committing genocide from the very first massacres. There were terrorist massacres even decades before the Nakba of 1948. The world really was hypnotized and put to sleep by the propaganda apparatus throughout all those decades, and it was awakened by the Al-Aqsa Storm operation.Of course, the narrative battle about that operation is still going on. The propaganda media keeps trying to tell us about terrible Hamas and resistance atrocities, whereas people who seek the truth discover that wasn’t the case. The resistance was very principled, targeting the Israeli military and taking civilian hostages as a fallback measure. These propaganda stories of atrocities are lies; in fact, it was the Israeli defense forces that massacred the vast majority of civilians.Look at the story of what happened to those kibbutzes. Everyone inside was killed, and all the cars at the music festival were flattened by helicopter gunships. Hamas didn’t have those kinds of weapons. Everybody interested in the truth has started to get that information now that it’s available. Even people who aren’t seeing that level of truth about October 7th are seeing that this is a brutal genocide. Tens of thousands of children have been deliberately murdered. As we saw in a headline by CNN just last week, “Israel is deliberately killing children in a genocide, says UN.” That was the headline on CNN.When it reaches that point, the world is forced to see what’s really going on. It’s been readjusted back towards a real, honest understanding of what’s happening in Occupied Palestine. The world changed that day, and it’s not going back anytime soon. The Islamic Republic of Iran is harvesting tremendous legitimacy based on its principled opposition to genocide.Marzieh Hashemi:: Indeed. With what Kevin just said about the Islamic Republic, we want to look at that aspect. When we talk about the issue of Palestine, we know its importance dates back to the very initiation of the Islamic Republic of Iran. From a political perspective, we have seen how the leader of the revolution continued to support the Palestinian cause and resistance to oppression in general, prioritizing it at a time when many inside the country and elsewhere would have thought other things should take priority. I want to talk about who he was from a strategic perspective and how effective his decisions were.Maryam Azarchehr: Standing with the oppressed, especially our Muslim brothers and sisters, is part of the very fabric of the Islamic Republic of Iran. Without that, in many ways, the Islamic Republic would cease to exist because that ideology is our core identity. The people who seek justice and truth support us because of that ideology. It’s not as though we’re a hegemonic power; we have a fraction of the military budget of the U.S.Very soon after the victory of the Islamic Republic of Iran, Imam Khomeini, the founder of the Islamic Republic, immediately separated our path from the Israeli regime. Under the Western-backed puppet regime of the Shah, Iran was actually the second Muslim-majority country to recognize the Israeli occupation as a country. Imagine how different it was when Iran shut down the Israeli embassy and gave that embassy to Palestine. At a time when Iran was an up-and-coming new revolution, it was very difficult. Even then, Imam Khomeini didn’t suggest bypassing difficult issues to slowly build up. Islamically, standing against oppression is the exact identity with which the Islamic Republic gained victory and amassed support.Islamically, we are not permitted to see the oppression of Muslim brothers and sisters and do absolutely nothing about it—let alone act like the Persian Gulf regimes that support the Zionist regime. We are not allowed to hear the cry of Muslims for help and do nothing. On the other hand, the Israeli regime could have been characterized in a lot of different ways, but Imam Khomeini called it a cancerous tumor. That was the best way to describe it because he noted that if the Israeli regime is not confined and targeted, it will not suffice with Palestine; it will take over more and more land.Now they are openly talking about the map of “Greater Israel” and saying Lebanon is theirs, while moving to occupy Lebanon, Syria, and other countries. Where they haven’t occupied, they have completely infiltrated the governance. Even in European countries, we have seen crackdowns on people rallying against the genocide in Gaza because of the influence of the Israeli regime.Our ideology is the very reason behind our power and ability to stand for some 50 years against every weapon the U.S. regime—the biggest hegemonic power—has thrown our way, from military aggression to coups, to the most difficult economic warfare. If we did not target the Israeli regime and protect the region, they would come after the whole region, which we see now more clearly than ever before.Marzieh Hashemi: Indeed. Kevin, looking back throughout the decades, we know there has been an extreme demonization of the Islamic Republic of Iran. I want to look at that aspect in the Muslim world and beyond because even many Muslims were quite skeptical of Iran and bought into the propaganda. Do you think that has transitioned, given Iran’s very obvious support of the Palestinian cause and the sacrifices Iran has made? Has that message broken through?Kevin Barrett: Yes, I think that the world has shifted profoundly in a pro-Iran direction in terms of global public opinion in general, and Islamic world public opinion in particular. I can see that not only by following the discussion online but also here in Morocco. Talking with cab drivers, sitting in cafes, watching the World Cup, and chatting, there’s been a real change.I think Moroccans were being successfully brainwashed against the Islamic Republic of Iran, increasingly so, right up until Tufan Al-Aqsa. We started to see a shift that has become profound in the wake of this war. Nobody can deny that this Zionist-American war on Iran, and the murder of Iran’s leaders—including their holy religious leaders—is shocking to everyone. It’s just naked, obvious aggression.It’s clear to everyone that this is being done in great part because Iran is standing against the genocide in Gaza. You can’t miss that, no matter how much your government leans on media outlets to try to temper the discussion and obfuscate. Unfortunately, that happens in many countries, including Arab and Muslim countries, but they can’t hide it. People see right through it. I’ve noticed a huge shift—a huge pro-Iran shift here in Morocco and across the world in the discussions among Sunni Muslim countries, and then beyond into the non-Muslim world as well. Iran is somehow winning this public relations battle despite being outspent by hundreds or thousands to one.Marzieh Hashemi: Now, we have about one minute left. I want to look at the way the Leader chose to stay in his home and office, completely unmoved by the threats. How much of that do you think played a role in working up the masses?Maryam Azarchehr: First of all, let me clarify one point. It is very wise for any leader to protect themselves when they are being targeted in order to be able to continue leading their people. What was different this time was that the leadership, and in fact the whole system, knew that the U.S. was going to bomb everywhere. It wasn’t as though only the leader was being targeted; we saw how they targeted children, schools, and everywhere else.Under these conditions, the Leader essentially said that since they are going to target everyone, he should not benefit from any special security conditions that are inaccessible to the rest of the 90 million population. That was why he chose not to go into hiding, though I believe he was still careful with security.On the other hand, as you mentioned, there has been a lot of propaganda by Israeli-funded or U.S.-funded Farsi-speaking media telling Iranians that their leader is in hiding, or that he escaped to Venezuela or Russia. His choice to stay completely disproved those lies.Marzieh Hashemi: That brings us to the end of this segment. I want to thank my guest in Morocco, Kevin Barrett, and my colleague here in the studio with me, Maryam. Thank you to our viewers for staying with us. I’ll be back in just a few minutes with the news bulletin. Please stay tuned. 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 linkThe largest funeral in human history just took place in Tehran. The Supreme Leader of the Islamic Revolution, the martyred Grand Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, was mourned during two days of services that were attended by somewhere between 15 million to well over 20 million people.More than 20 million attend funeral prayers for Iran’s martyred leader and his family- Zafar BangashThe previous “world’s largest funeral”* occurred in 1989, when 10.2 million people turned out for the funeral of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, the first leader of Iran’s Islamic Revolution and founder of the Islamic Republic.Ayatollah Khamenei’s murderer, US President Donald Trump, who wisely chose not to attend the event, was befuddled:Trump Shocked by Massive Turnout at Martyr Imam Khamenei’s Funeral: “I Thought People Hated Him”Trump apparently believes everything Netanyahu tells him, and is only gradually figuring out that the USA is being manipulated by a psychopathic liar.The funeral procession is now moving to Qom, Najaf, Karbala, and then to Mashhad for the burial.I recorded the video posted above (text below) at the request of an Iranian involved in the event. It was played at the funeral in Tehran yesterday.Funeral crowd video linkVideo transcript:His Eminence, the Supreme Leader of the Islamic Revolution, the Grand Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Allah yarhamu, was a kind, gentle, spiritual man, and a very intelligent man, who will be remembered as the greatest head of state of his time.The martyred Rahbar served as president of the Islamic Republic of Iran during the imposed war of the 1980s, then served as Supreme Leader for 36 years and eight months. He shepherded the Islamic Republic from its youth to its maturity, forging a nation dedicated to standing for justice against injustice, and willing to pay a price for doing so.I was privileged to attend one of the martyred Rahbar’s speeches in Tehran in 2017. I was impressed by his calm dignity and the light that shone from his eyes as he discussed the challenges faced by Iran and the world.I was tangientially involved in his efforts to convince Western young people to take another, deeper look at Islam. I published his letters to the youth of the West in two of my books that were published in 2015 and 2016. In the first letter, he asked:“Why does the power structure in the world want Islamic thought to be marginalized and remain latent? What concepts and values in Islam disturb the programs of the super powers and what interests are safeguarded in the shadow of distorting the image of Islam?”When Netanyahu and Trump martyred Grand Ayatollah Ali Khamenei along with his daughter, son-in-law, grandchild, and daughter-in-law, as well as the schoolgirls of Minab and so many others, they inadvertently helped promulgate that message. Millions of young people all over the world are now asking: “Why did these unbelievably evil people hate the Supreme Leader of Iran and the religion he represents? Why did the forces of genocide, the forces of Baal, the forces of Jeffrey Epstein, feel so threatened by this man and his religious principles and the country he guided according to those principles?”The Supreme Leader’s martyrdom is awakening millions of young people all over the world and stimulating them to ask the kinds of questions he urges them to ask in his letters.His martyrdom by the bombs of the modern Yazids was his last letter to the world and its youth, and God willing, it will be read and taken to heart.–—*Wiki(Zio)pedia claims some obscure Indian politician once had a bigger funeral, but I doubt anyone actually believes that. 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 False Flag Weekly News linkSince I began doing weekly news roundups in 2008 I’ve been striving to bring order, meaning, and raw, brutal honesty to the chaos of ongoing events. Every Sunday morning, while some go to church and others sleep off hangovers, I lounge around my Moroccan villa sipping green tea and writing up Saturday evening’s False Flag Weekly News. This week it wasn’t hard to find a theme.Mainstream media has finally started covering two monumentally gargantuan, insane stories: Trump’s unprecedented mega-corruption, and Israel’s deliberate mass-murder of tens of thousands of children in a certified genocide. Granted, these aren’t exactly breaking news. Sam Kaplan began tracking Trump’s gazillions of dollars worth of scams and crimes in January 2025, while people like Owen Jones have been covering the Gaza genocide since October 2023.If dog-bites-man is no news, while man-bite-dog is news, we can extrapolate that when the news actually covers the news that it normally is being paid not to cover…now THAT is news! As of this week, the genocide of Gazan children is officially a mainstream story, thanks to a UN report, while Trump’s scams are making headlines since he self-reported two billion dollars worth of them. Now even MSM consumers are starting to get a closeup view of the sickest, vilest, most decadent, corrupt, murderous, genocidal, evil regime in the history of the world. And presiding over it all, or at least fronting for it, is Donald J. “drain the swamp, no wars” Trump, the self-proclaimed “best president in the history of Israel,” a senile narcissist pervert and con artist. And now even Fox is reporting on “Trump family: biggest grift of all time.” (But why are they finally reporting this now? Are they pummeling Trump into following Bibi’s orders to re-ignite the war on Iran?)The treasonous billionaires who made Trump “red Caesar” (or was that “red Caligula”) should have invested their money in an AI remake of a vintage John Waters comedy starring Donatella Trumpella alongside Divine and Edith Massey. Here’s a preview: (video link)When Waters made his classic films Pink Flamingos (1972) and Female Trouble (1974) I was a naive high school kid who found them, like Philip Roth’s even more perverted Portnoy’s Complaint, transgressively hilarious. In those days, Jewish perverts and obese transsexual clowns were working the sideshow where they belonged. Today, they’ve taken over the whole circus. Autobiographical asideAt my high school graduation in 1976 I wore a red-white-and-blue “F* THE BICENTENNIAL” T-shirt under my graduation garb, which I removed at a semi-inappropriate moment to display the offensive message. I had a bad case of JFK assassination coup blues and identified with the “angry hippies,” as Waters called them, who were disgusted with both mainstream culture/politics and drug-fueled left-leaning idealism but couldn’t imagine a viable alternative. Still, we tried anyway, and launched punk rock. I spent August 1976 hitchhiking around Cornwall and Wales with side-trips to London, mooching off employed people and reading about the next big countercultural thing, the Sex Pistols, in the underground music press. Post-bicentennial, my alienation just got worse. From the seventies on, until reformed by Islam and marriage in 1993, I inhabited the overlapping fringes of the punk demimonde, second-tier academia, and literary-journalistic bohemia.Had I become a normal upstanding American, maybe I could have helped stop the USA’s decline from its horrible bicentennial of 1976 to its current semiquincentennial nadir. But that’s probably a grandiose, unrealistic fantasy. Decades of “trying to change the system from within” instead of yapping about JFK and 9/11 from the fringes might have led to a life sentence—not just 20 years—of boredom…culminating in acquiescence to the self-serving mediocrity that’s de rigueur in mainstream circles.F* the Bicentennial! Back to This Week’s Semiquincentennial NewsTrump’s 250 year birthday party for the USA didn’t exactly go off without a hitch. Where to begin? Well, there was the iconic American flag paraglider crash. There was Trump’s Great American State Flop on the Capitol Mall, which answered the question: What if Trump gave a Great American State Fair and nobody came? But those calamities were as nothing compared to Congress moving to officially put the US military under Israeli command. Admittedly there are some strong arguments in favor:*If Israel commanded the US military directly, it wouldn’t have to kill US presidents, as it did in 1963.*If Israel commanded the US military directly, it wouldn’t have to suborn US presidents in order to mass murder American servicemen in false flag naval attacks, as it did in 1967.*If Israel commanded the US military directly, it wouldn’t have to blow up skyscrapers in New York killing 3000 people in order to hijack the US military to wage war on Israel’s enemies, as it did in 2001.So we could avoid the tragedies of presidential assassinations, ship sinkings, and skyscraper demolitions simply by turning our military over to Israel lock, stock and barrel. What could go wrong?Maybe a disastrous ground invasion of Iran?And that leads us back to the question “How Much Money Can Trump Scam Before the Oil Runs Out?” The US is caught between the humiliating but least-worst alternative of surrendering to Iran by actually implementing the 14-point Memorandum of Understanding, and the most-worst alternative of sacrificing American lives in a pointless and doomed ground invasion. Everyone except Israel prefers the least-worst.Heretofore, the Trump regime has been wavering between “peace is at hand” announcements, 39 of them at last count, interspersed with roughly the same number of bloodcurdling threats. Every time Trump yells “peace” oil prices dive and markets stabilize. Every time he yells “war” the opposite occurs. This situation has created a gold mine for insider traders, including Trump’s own family (by Trump’s own admission!) So as long as Trump can keep the Iran situation wavering back and forth between not-quite-war but also not-quite-peace, his crime family can rake in billions.But all good things come to an end. Once oil hits tank bottom, and the global economy seizes up and melts down, the quintessentially Trumpian brand of market-manipulation consisting of screaming “peace” on Monday mornings and “war” on Friday evenings will be no longer viable. So the trillion dollar question is: When does the oil run out? Best available estimates suggest that crunch time will arrive during the next three to eight weeks. Based on those estimates, if I were licensed to give investment advice, which I am not, I would say: “Buy oil!” Futures, I mean. Oil prices are currently in the neighborhood of prewar levels, and it seems unlikely that they will not be significantly higher, possibly a lot higher, maybe even catastrophically higher, by this fall or, at the latest, early winter.But how will it play out politically? Fully surrendering to Iran and fully restoring Homuz traffic may be the least-worst option, but it still might be too-little-too-late to save the economy from shocks that will crater the Republicans in November. That could put Trump and his crime family on the fast track to prison.Not surrendering—i.e. not muzzling the Israeli mad dog—will just make the economic crunch, and Trump Inc.’s political crunch, that much worse. So the Administration can choose: It can surrender, take a hopefully modest economic and political hit, and possibly survive. Or it can embrace a full-scale catastrophe that will impact US allies in Europe and Asia the worst, while obeying Israel’s orders to plunge into a catastrophic ground war. A massive, losing war with plenty of American casualties, coupled with a global economic meltdown, sounds like a recipe for political disaster. The Trump regime is presumably trying to postpone any such disaster until after the November elections. That sounds like what JD Vance recently implied by saying the US wasn’t really surrendering to Iran but was instead “just buying time” (until the war starts again). Martin Jay, fellow Morocco-based journalist, recently expressed his suspicions that the Trump regime’s apparent break with Bibi is just for show, and that the war will resume when winter weather enables a ground invasion.The Iranian leadership isn’t falling for it. They are tightening the screws to ensure that Trump will face economic disaster in advance of the November elections…unless he actually muzzles Israel and releases a substantial chunk of Iran’s stolen money.So on the occasion of America’s ill-starred Semiquincentennial, the grotesquely corrupt, increasingly authoritarian Trump Clown Regime is impaled on a Morton’s fork. The only options—surrender to Iran (bye-bye Hormuz, petrodollar, and Israel) or surrender to Israel (disastrous mega-war and New Great Depression)—are both, from the US imperial perspective, almost unimaginably terrible…though some might argue that the loss of the Israeli albatross around America’s neck would be not just a silver lining, but, for those with eyes to see, the all-time greatest American victory, the salvific triumph we have all been waiting for. 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 linkIs material progress an illusion? Is the modern world a sham? And is AI exponentially intensifying the ersatz nature of modernity? Paul Cudenec, a notable voice of the freedom movement during the COVID lockdowns, discusses these and other questions, including “illegal” ones involving the Rothschild banking dynasty and Zionism.Excerpts:Modernity, AIKevin Barrett: Welcome to Truth Jihad Audiovisual. Kevin Barrett here, doing podcasts of one sort or another since 2006, when I got expelled from the academy for wrongthink, I guess it was. So I’ve been doing wrongthink ever since.And here to do some wrong thinking with me is Paul Cudenec. He’s a notable dissident from the UK, and he’s got a Substack which is highly recommended. He contributes to publications like Winter Oak and Organic Radicals, which I just discovered. It’s all very cool stuff and harks back to my deep history as a kind of left-leaning, anarchist-leaning troglodyte Luddite, thinking that the modern world and progress and all of that stuff is not so great. So I think we’re pretty much on the same page on a lot of things. Welcome, Paul Cudenec. How are you?Paul Cudenec: Thanks, Kevin. Nice to be able to speak to you. Kevin Barrett: Where should we start?…These days there are a lot of backwards-looking folks who, like us, are not enamored with the modern world…there is a right wing who want to expel all the immigrants from Europe and the West and go back to Conan the Barbarian land and be heroically militaristic and that sort of thing. And likewise there are others who are not enamored of progress and pseudo-equality and fake liberation movements who are skeptical of the right-wing approach. How do you situate yourself among those of us who are skeptical of material progress as the be-all end-all? Paul Cudenec: I come to this through anarchism. I was active in the anarchist movement in the UK for years. I live in France now, actually…I’ve never liked the modern world: consumerism, supermarkets, factories…the idea that it is a life-stifling force, that we are forced to live inside this great machine…I’ve got over that now. Actually, I think I’ve got a very particular role in the current time in pointing out what’s wrong with the system we live in, informed by what I know of how we used to live, but with the purpose of forging a future that is better than the present we live in now. It’s inspired in some ways by elements of the past, but only the elements that we like. It’s not possible to recreate the Middle Ages or the Bronze Age. It will be a different society…Kevin Barrett: So today people are telling us that AI will make us all elite. AI, these robots, will do all the work, and theoretically they could create great beauty, just like great civilizations created great beauty in the past. But you and I, I think, are a bit skeptical of turning the world over to AI and its overlords. Why are those people wrong who say that AI is going to save us?Paul Cudenec: Well, there are so many reasons, aren’t there? Even the idea that AI can create beautiful things is disproven just by looking at a piece of AI art. I recognize it now. It took a while to realize that particular style was actually AI creating things. I mean, it’s hideous because it’s false. To me, anything that is beautiful—I associate beauty, in the classical tradition, with truth and nature. Those things belong together.Some creative professionals may be able to use AI to do away with boring, mundane work—filling in forms or whatever—but they will still have their creativity in their job. For most people, AI is placing them in little boxes and telling them what to do. AI is becoming their slave master, basically, their boss.It’s also the prison guard to their cell, deciding things without any communication, without any causation, without the slightest hint of humanity—which you would expect from a human boss. There would at least be some understanding there.This is going to be a rigid system, far worse than any of us have experienced before.And, of course, it’s going to continue to destroy nature, the living world, with these data centers they’re building everywhere, sucking up all the water. How selfish of us to think we should be prioritized for drinking water over the demands of the AI industry. They’re cutting down trees and building power infrastructure to provide the electricity these systems require.Kevin Barrett: Do you think there’s a built-in reason why AI is not going to make things better? It’s basically an imitation machine. The chatbots imitate human speech, human conversation, human discourse.Paul Cudenec: Deliberate falsity—not just accidentally. It’s been set up that way.The good thing, though, is that this imitation may prove to be its downfall. I’ve read that AI goes around the internet finding things to adopt as its opinions and source of knowledge. Increasingly, it’s finding mistaken material generated by AI itself and feeding that back into the system.So yes, I think you’re right, and I hope they can’t get past that. Maybe they think if they build enough data centers they can…—-Zionist CensorshipKevin Barrett: The basic logic they’re using is pretty incredible. Supporting Palestine is supposedly a call for genocide against the Jewish state. Wait a minute—I thought it was kind of the other way around, wasn’t it? Who went there and tried to get rid of the people who were already living there? I don’t think it was the Palestinians.Paul Cudenec: No, exactly.The last time I was in the UK, I spoke at an event staged by an organization called The Real Left. It used to be called Left Lockdown Skeptics during Covid.I wasn’t the only speaker making the point that it’s the same networks and the same entity behind both agendas. I ended up talking about Judeo-supremacism and the power of the Rothschilds.A Jewish anti-Zionist speaker who had spoken earlier that day and whose speech I had enjoyed—because she explained how, despite being Jewish, she’d been accused of anti-Semitism for opposing Israeli actions—actually became offended by what I was saying. She accused me of anti-Semitism and walked out.That was the last time I was in the UK. I think the temperature has been notched up a bit since then on those issues.It’s not that different in France, really. I think they’ve gone a little further in Britain, but there is a lot of pushback. That’s encouraging. There are many people speaking out on this issue on social media and elsewhere.Kevin Barrett: So now in the United States, it’s actually a certain branch of the Republican Party that’s pushing these restrictions. They’re banning what is really a pretty mainstream style of thought and analysis.Back when I was in the academy, being radically pro–Third World liberation and supporting Palestinian liberation groups was considered perfectly normal in many circles.It was the same thing with South Africa. Everybody saw it as the same thing. Mandela freeing South Africa—everybody agreed on that, except for a small minority.Supporting armed resistance against occupation was not considered an extreme position. Everybody supported that. Now it’s treated as illegal. It’s strange. The views that were acceptable if not almost mandatory in the academy where I used to work are now effectively prohibited. I’m still having a hard time adjusting to that.(For the full conversation, watch the video or listen to the audio above.) 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 linkThe US-Israeli war on Iran is already pretty weird, even before we start factoring in Chinese-alien intel technologies, mind-waves controlling Trump, psychedelic “jellyfish” drone formations terrifying pilots and taking down F-15s, EMF weapons that cause droughts (and yield downpours when you blow them up), Uri Geller issuing red-alert Mullah-telepathy warnings as he attempts to eat kosher hummus with a flaccidly drooping spoon…do we even need such stuff to see this as the oddest war ever?It is deeply strange that a mid-level regional power like Iran can utterly defeat the world’s most powerful military. It’s bizarre that the supposed religious fanatics who rule Iran speak and act with tact, reason, consistency, and restraint, while the president of the United States blathers incoherently, alternating drooling obscenity-laced threats with equally incoherent outbursts radiating peace, love, and call-option-friendly investment optimism. And perhaps the most bizarre sight of all is the global economy drifting slowly and inexorably towards a cliff, like an unconscious canoeist drifting towards Niagra Falls, while gathered onlookers (the markets) seem oblivious to the catastrophe that is about to unfold.Already cursed to live in interesting times, we don’t need the curse to get worse (and presumably even more interesting). But Iran war fringe stuff is definitely a thing, and as far as I can tell nobody has tried to bring it all together. I asked Gemini:Has anyone written a comprehensive article about “fringe” phenomena from the Iran war?  I’m talking about reports like: *Uri Geller says Iran is using mind waves to control Trump. *F-15 pilots are terrified of Iranian drones flying in “alien jellyfish” formations. *Iran accuses the US of weather warfare and claims it ended its drought by blowing up US radars in the Gulf States. Gemini answered:“There is no single, all-encompassing article that covers all of these ‘fringe’ and unusual stories.”Until now.And I’m the man for the job. Before I learned Arabic and became an Iranian-TV Middle East expert, I moonlighted as Dr. Weirde, author of Dr. Weirde’s Weirde Tours: A Guide to Mysterious San Francisco. What’s more, my academic training included studying reports of fringe phenomena as background for a Ph.D. dissertation comparing miraculous and supernatural claims in medieval Moroccan saints’ legends to contemporary personal experience narratives. So the precise spot where Islamic-world-geopolitics meets high weirdness is my bailiwick. Where to begin? We might as well start with the jellyfish. Last Wednesday, Press TV’s headline announced: “Downed F-15 pilot’s account of ‘alien’ Iranian jellyfish formation shocks US intel.” According to the report:The US military and intelligence community were thrown into a state of profound shock and disbelief when an American F-15 pilot, shot down over Iran in April, reported witnessing a sight that defied conventional understanding of Iranian military capabilities.According to a report by CNN on Tuesday, which cited four sources familiar with the incident, the pilot described seeing multiple Iranian drones hovering in the air, moving in perfect unison, in a formation that eerily resembled a jellyfish.CNN quoted one of the pilots:“Multiple drones interconnected and moving as one with smaller drones below the bigger drones like legs,” one of the sources familiar with the pilot’s witness account told CNN. “Real alien sh*t.”But is it “alien sh*t” or Chinese sh*t? China is famous for its amazing sky displays featuring drones flying in incredibly dense and complex formations.While Iranian drone engineers may be cooperating with their Chinese counterparts, we shouldn’t imagine that Iran isn’t capable of breakthrough drone innovations without outside help. Iran is an engineering powerhouse, as the US military is learning the hard way. Google tells us:Iran produces roughly 230000 to 250000 engineering graduates annually. It routinely ranks in the top 3 to 5 countries globally for total engineering graduates outperforming major economies like Germany and Japan. A standout characteristic of Iran’s engineering landscape is that women comprise up to 70% of its STEM and engineering graduates one of the highest ratios in the world.Wait a minute…Isn’t Iran a medieval theocracy that keeps women barefoot and pregnant? That’s what Fox News and the Iranian royalists in Beverly Hills keep telling us. I guess those barefoot and pregnant Iranian housewives must be finding the spare time to sit around in their chadors earning online engineering degrees and building extraterrestrial-looking drone swarms that can take down F15s. Radical Islam at its absolute scariest!So there’s probably nothing extraterrestrial or supernatural about Iran’s “alien jellyfish drones.” As the Ukrainians found out the hard way, Iran has good drone engineers.And while we’re debunking dubious legends, let’s quickly disabuse ourselves of:*The Khordad “UFO” Sightings & Metallic Spheres: An AI hallucination…ask your favorite AI about this and it will spin a completely fictitious yarn, inventing a tale that will make the accounts of the craziest human UFO abductee seem relatively plausible. *The Persian Gulf “Cthulhu” / Caspian Sea Monster Reports: Another AI hallucination, in which Gemini takes a deep whiff of DMT and tells us:* The Claim: A fringe maritime rumor alleged that sonar technicians aboard coalition warships detected massive, unidentified biological anomalies in the Strait of Hormuz. The more extreme versions of the rumor claimed Iran had “weaponized deep-sea creatures” or unearthed an ancient anomaly to attack naval vessels blocking the strait.* The Reality: This rumor was a highly distorted game of telephone regarding Iran’s asymmetric naval tactics. To counter American naval primacy, Iran deployed hundreds of semi-submersible, low-profile speedboats and remote-controlled explosive aquatic drones to bottleneck the Strait of Hormuz. To sonar operators and radar systems, these small, erratic, wave-skimming signatures looked highly unusual, which internet forums quickly spun into “sea monster.”But there is no such rumor. Gemini hallucinated it by taking the insane American psy-op about Iran supposedly weaponizing kamikaze dolphins, adding a pinch of HP Lovecraft and a very real fleet of Iranian speedboats, and turning the mixture into a bad acid trip.*The ‘New Nostradamus” predicted the Iran war. It seems that on or around February 22, some British guy who calls himself “the new Nostradamus” predicted the US would go to war with Iran in March. But you didn’t have to be Nostradamus to notice the US had sent nearly all its available military assets to the region and would likely attack. What’s more, the self-styled soothsayer Craig Hamilton-Parker expected the war to end almost instantly, saying it would be: “a swift and limited operation: It will escalate quickly, then stop.” The tabloid Times of India tells us: “He also references symbolic imagery from earlier readings, ‘yellow and red flags’ and ‘a lion soaring above Iran.’” In other words, Hamilton-Parker expected the Iranian royalists, who are despised by nearly all of the Iranian people, to take over Iran in the wake of a swift US victory! Wow. Talk about a Nostra-dumb-ass!Real Paranormal RumorsSetting aside the ridiculous claims of hallucinating AIs and ill-informed fortunetellers, there actually are some interesting paranormal rumors about the US-Israeli war on Iran. Some can be sourced to the Iranian side. According to some Iranian sources, Iran has not only been waging war on the Epstein class, but also against the child-sacrificing worshippers of Baal. Iranian demonstrators, and pro-Iran demonstrators around the world, have repeatedly burned statues of Baal in “a symbolic protest linked to renewed online conspiracy theories surrounding the late financier Jeffrey Epstein and alleged child abuse by Western elites.”The Jerusalem Post tell us that these are just “antisemitic conspiracy theories.”The Post article begins:Iranian state-aligned media and senior regime figures have again invoked supernatural and conspiratorial language in describing the conflict with Israel, with recent and past material referring to a “war of occult sciences”, “Zionist sorcery,” jinn, and Jewish talismans. The theme has also surfaced in Iranian claims that Israel used “occult and supernatural spirits” during the 12-day war.So claims that beneath the surface of the Zionism-vs.-Iran war is “a war of occult sciences” are just antisemitic conspiracy theories…except that Israel is also offering its own version of the claim. Israeli media reported this week that “Uri Geller Claims Iran Used Mind Waves on Trump Over Iran Deal.” According to Grok, which does not appear to be hallucinating:In a Channel 14 interview on June 22, Geller said Iran deployed low-frequency waves—like telepathy but tech-based—to sway Trump into signing the June 17 Islamabad Memorandum, a 14-point pact extending a 60-day ceasefire, reopening the Strait of Hormuz toll-free, and offering Iran $300 billion in reconstruction aid tied to nuclear talks. The deal, inked at France's Palace of Versailles and in Tehran, drew fire from Israel's right-wing circles as too soft, with no new nuclear concessions from Iran. No evidence backs Geller's claims, which experts dismiss, while online mockery highlighted his past CIA psychic ties amid Israel's frustration over the U.S.-Iran thaw.Geller claims that he has done psychic work for intelligence agencies, beginning with the Mossad, for decades, and that this kind of activity is carried out by all governments. I emailed him, asking:Is this accurate? “Uri Geller Claims Iran Used Mind Waves on Trump Over Iran Deal” https://x.com/i/trending/2069127215397396752I mentioned that my go-to psi science source Dean Radin has spoken highly of his spoon-bending abilities, and invited the Israeli psychic and friend of Netanyahu on my podcast. Geller replied:Yes I believe they did and I have inside intel info. However I do not do podcasts. But watch these:https://www.reddit.com/r/remoteviewing/comments/l2dc2u/the_secret_life_of_uri_geller_psychic_spy_bbc/Call me crazy, but I believe Geller and the Iranian anti-Baal people. I think Geller is right that governments have weaponized psi. Jon Ronson’s The Men Who State at Goats was designed to obfuscate that reality by skunk-spraying it with humorous ridicule. The reason I have Geller’s email is that I hang around private online groups with people—many retired intel folks—who understand these things. So count “governments use psi” as one of those conspiracy theories that are very likely true. But the evidence isn’t very respectable, and much of it is circumstantial, so don’t hold your breath waiting for Ron Unz to write an American Pravda piece.Weather WarfareHere’s another weird conspiracy theory about the Iran war that is likely true: Iran’s reservoirs are suddenly brimming with water in the wake of rains that “coincidentally” started falling as soon as Iran blew up most of the US’s radar stations in the region. According to left-leaning Global Research, respectable voices in the region have long been accusing the US and Israel of stealing rainfall from targeted countries:Iraqi MP Al-Kaikhani in turn has claimed that Washington and Tel Aviv had been “stealing clouds”, causing droughts regionally.The right-wing French RIVAROL published a similar article, translated by the Occidental Observer. Excerpt:AN ABNORMAL DROUGHT THAT DRAGGED ONAbout fifteen years ago, the then-President of Iran, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, repeatedly claimed that Western powers (under American influence) were “stealing” rain from Persia and much of the Middle East (including Iraq). Naturally, at that time, almost everyone in the West considered the strongman of Tehran a crackpot, a conspiracy theorist who, moreover, had the misfortune, it was assumed, of being a notorious historical revisionist.Westerners continue to silence or deny what Mahmoud had calmly stated. In 2018, Iran officially accused the United Arab Emirates and Israel of stealing its rains, when the senior official of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, Brigadier General Gholam Reza Jalali, declared: “Israel and another country are working together to prevent Iranian clouds from raining.”The New York Times reported that the country Jalali did not name was the United Arab Emirates, which has launched a cloud seeding program by injecting chemicals into clouds in an attempt to induce rain in its favor, but also to prevent rainfall in Iran.Today, however, many Middle Eastern elites are talking about the extreme drought and equally abnormal heat that have plagued the region for ages. We also recall that before the war against Iran, the country had suffered for years from a dramatic water shortage that directly endangered the people, especially the nation’s capital, whose inhabitants (and first and foremost the government) were ready to flee rather than become parched or dry out like old stones.THE RETURN OF THE RAINAnd then, suddenly, a miracle amidst the misfortunes! In Iran, the clouds finally wept, abundantly and regularly, and temperatures returned to normal (dropping by an average of five degrees Celsius). A few days after the first Iranian strikes against American bases located in the United Arab Emirates and elsewhere on the Arabian Peninsula, the regional climate changed completely.I don’t dismiss these claims. Around 2015, at the VIP building of Imam Khomeini International Airport, I met a man who said he was an engineer working on an Iranian program aimed at countering the US weather warfare program. He said the Americans were responsible for the draught in Iran, as well as the related one that had opened the door to regime change in Syria, and that the programs involved electromagnetic energy. He added that Iran was making great progress countering them, and expected to have the problem solved in the fairly near future. (Apparently he didn’t realize back then that the only solution was to blow up US radar stations!)Hyper-Precise Targeting IntelAnd finally, one more “true conspiracy theory”: Iran has hit US targets with shocking accuracy, sparking rumors about advanced or esoteric technologies. The Wall Street Journal just published another article featuring satellite photos showing just how accurate those Iranian missiles really are. But Iran is using engineers, not psychics. Gemini, its DMT apparently worn off, tells us: “Esoteric” Chinese Tech and Satellite TargetingThe Claim: Reports allege that Iranian missiles are striking Western and regional targets with a hyper-advanced, pinpoint precision that did not exist months ago, driven by clandestine or “esoteric” Chinese intelligence and technology transfers.The Reality: The tech isn’t magical or spiritual; it is a highly sophisticated digital architecture. Intelligence experts point to Iran utilizing China’s BeiDou satellite navigation network, alongside algorithmic AI targeting data, to bypass U.S. electronic jamming. Furthermore, leaks have exposed intricate corporate supply chains funneling massive amounts of Chinese sodium perchlorate (a critical solid ballistic missile fuel component) directly to the IRGC. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]So the bottom line is: It’s a weird war. Nobody in the chattering classes of the West expected Iran to be able to pull off a coup of this magnitude. And among those who didn’t realize who they were dealing with, and didn’t understand until too late that they were picking on the wrong country, were such self-styled Nostradamuses as Craig Hamilton-Parker, Benjamin Netanyahu, and Bibi’s credulous sycophant, Donald J. Trump. 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 linkDissociated PressIn a characteristically brilliant diplomatic coup, US president Donald “3D Chess” Trump has convinced the Iranian government to sweeten the Memorandum of Understanding so Trump can claim it includes something—anything—other than abject and unconditional surrender.Below are the additional 10 amendments to the MOU leaked to Dissociated Press by an unidentifiable White Horse souse.Amendments to the Memorandum of Understanding Between the US and Iran1) Iran insists: We don’t just promise never to build nuclear weapons, we CROSS OUR HEARTS AND HOPE TO DIE!2) Iran will build a stunning monument to Donald Trump: a 1:100 scale LEGO replica of Mar-a-Lago, called Mar-a-LEGO, to be placed on a traffic island in central Tehran. Iran promises never to blow it up, cinematically or otherwise, as long as Trump doesn’t violate the deal.3) Jared Kushner can have a very small island in the Persian Gulf if he promises not to build a bunker or rape any children there.4) Iran promises that it will not gloat, chortle, or smirk as it takes possession of the $300 billion tribute payment from the defeated United States.5) Iran pledges to redouble its efforts against ISIS and al-Qaeda, starting with the US-supported government in Damascus.6) Iran agrees not to sue the Trump Organization for using the trademarked currency name “rial” for a forthcoming cryptocurrency roll-out of “The Trump Rial,” as long as Trump makes it clear that Iran neither endorses nor has any role in this or any other Trump Organization scam.7) Iran agrees not to release any Trump-Epstein files, and to fire at least 100 missiles at Tel Aviv if Israel releases them, and maybe even if it doesn’t.8) Iran agrees to help Trump throw Netanyahu under the bus: Ayatollah Khamenei Jr. will take his arms, Trump will take his legs, and they will swing Bibi back and forth a few times and then throw him beneath an AEC Routemaster double-decker London transport vehicle traveling at 40 miles per hour through central Tehran packed with tourists paying exorbitant prices to observe the proceedings from close range. Proceeds will be split evenly between the Trump Organization and the Revolutionary Guards.9) Iran promises never to say anything positive about former President Obama and his very-bad-not-good JCPOA, nor anything negative about Trump’s very fine extremely wonderful Iran deal, a deal like nobody has ever seen before.10) Iran sweetens the deal with a promise to supply the White House chef with a full year’s supply of top-grade Iranian pistachios, accompanied by ten cases of pistachio-flavored Diet Coke. 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 linkRasheed Muhammad of the Red Pill Diaries interviews Kevin Barrett.Excerpts:Kevin Barrett: “The Iranian psychiatrists have been advising the Iranian negotiators on how to deal with a megalomaniacal psychopathic narcissist. And the Iranian negotiating team says they’ve been doing much, much, much better ever since they got that advice from Iran’s top psychiatrists.”“Trump curses out Netanyahu and says, everybody hates Israel. Trump has said maybe a dozen or a couple of dozen blurt-outs that were more truthful than anything any president has said about these topics for a long time. So I did my satire saying, yeah, the Iranian psychiatrists are taking credit for curing him from psychosis, and now he’s back in the reality-based community.”“And then Vance is backing him up saying that the Israelis should be very, very careful because Trump is the only head of state in the world that can stand them anymore. ‘We’ve got one guy, one head of state in the world who runs the world’s most powerful country, who still doesn’t hate their guts, who still is sort of on their side. Maybe, if you behave yourselves.’ So yeah, it seems like if it’s all an act, I don’t see why. It has no point, because they’re not going to fool the Iranians into letting their guard down. So no, I think it’s actually just reality setting in.”Rasheed Muhammad: “So that’s what happens with empire at the end. It seeks to regain a lost hegemony, a lost global dominance through military adventurism, but that only accelerates the decline. That’s true at the end of every empire: the Austro-Hungarian Empire which stumbled like the Germans into World War I, the Athenian Empire that attacked Sicily and all its fleet were sunk…that’s what empires do.” 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 False Flag Weekly News link (show features tribute to Cat McGuire)There are lots of great female activists and commentators out there. One of them was Cat McGuire, the False Flag Weekly News co-host who passed away on Friday. Watch Helen Buyniski and I remember Cat at the beginning of this week’s FFWN.But why in the world would anyone ever pay any attention to…Laura Loomer? When I asked Google “who the h* is this person” the answer came up: “Laura Elizabeth Loomer (born May 21, 1993) is an American far-right political activist, conspiracy theorist, and internet personality.” Right…but since she’s unpleasant and unintelligent, why does anyone care about her?Well, it turns out (surpise surprise) that she has friends in high places. Google says she enjoys “direct, high-level access to President Trump.” Like Monica Lewinsky, Loomer appears to have been “sent” to the President of the United States by rich Zionist Jews. But don’t joke about Loomer “Lewinskying” Trump, or she might sue you, like she sued Bill Maher when he said something about Trump making her put a bag over her head before she’s allowed to crawl under his desk. As an apparent junior member among Trump’s circle of Jewish handlers, which is headed by only slightly more intelligent and experienced individuals like Jared Kushner and Steve Witkoff, Laura Loomer may have access to inside information. So when she tells us that a false flag “ten times worse than 9/11” is on the way, we can’t entirely write it off as the feebleminded ravings of a drooling Islamophobic idiot. Link to tweetGlenn Greenwald has a point: Israel has a record of orchestrating terrorist outrages, assassinations, and false flags when it feels its back is up against the wall. They killed JFK to get nukes. They did 9/11 to hijack the US military and send it against the seven countries Israel viewed as threats. What wouldn’t they do to prevent the US from implementing a peace deal with Iran that throws Israel under the bus?A huge false flag blamed on “Muslims with financial ties to (anti-Israel) podcasters” might not pass the verisimilitude sniff test. But neither did the JFK magic bullet, nor the 9/11 demolitions, nor the Charlie Kirk magic bullet for that matter. So if midtown Manhattan gets vaporized by an Iranian nuke financed by Tucker Carlson’s Qatari bank account, and Israel breaks out in celebratory dancing while [[[the media]]] plays endless loops of Palestinian kids bribed with candy pretending to celebrate, don’t say Laura Loomer didn’t warn you.Israel might stand to benefit from a purported “Muslim terror attack” that was only nine times bigger than 9/11…or possibly even smaller than that. The political climate in the USA is unfavorable to Trump’s handling of Iran, but even less enthusiastic about blowing up the global and domestic economies by shredding the deal. But things could change overnight in the aftermath of a big “Muslim terror attack.” If the event were blamed on Iran, Trump’s deal, and the economy, would both go up in smoke. And if the attack were catastrophic enough, it might generate the political will to put the half-million or more “boots on the ground” that would be required for a real attempt to impose a regime change on Iran. And that, of course, is what Israel wants. That is why Netanyahu and Mossad chief David Barnea lied to Trump to trick him into attacking Iran in the first place. As with the CIA lying to JFK to con him into approving the 1961 Bay of Pigs invasion, the president was told: “We can easily pull off this regime change without sending in the Marines,” when in fact the whole purpose was to grease the skids for a full-scale invasion.They could also assassinate Trump and blame it on Iran. Using a Hezbollah-style fiber-optic FPV drones to take out the President presumably wouldn’t be that hard. Those drones have a range of up to 30 miles! Why bother climbing onto rooftops or trying to catch Trump at his Mar-a-Lago golf course, as the various fake wannabe Trump assassins have, when you can hit him from miles away? Blaming a patsy would presumably be much easier when the actual drone operator is far from the kill zone. But the Mossad probably won’t kill Trump, because JD Vance has been all but telling them not to. Vance’s recent anti-Israel blurt out translates to a simple three word message: “Don’t kill Trump.”"Donald J. Trump is the only head of state in the entire world who is sympathetic to the nation of Israel at this moment in time. And he happens to be the head of state of the world's superpower. If I was in the cabinet of the Israeli government, I might not be attacking the only powerful ally I have left.”Translation: “If I were Israel, I wouldn’t be killing the only powerful ally I have left…because the next president would turn Tel Aviv into a parking lot.”Bibi, of course, might make sure that there are two “Iran-sponsored Hezbollah FPV drones” so that Vance is taken out along with Trump. That would leave Mike Johnson, Chuck Grassley, and Marco Rubio manning the line of succession. Interestingly, all three publicly support Trump’s Iran deal, while the rest of the Republic Party howls in outrage in hopes of attracting lavish infusions of kosher cash. (Tom Cotton, Ted Cruz, Bill Cassidy, Mike Pence, and Nikki Haley, among others, have openly revolted against the deal, blasting Trump's MoU as a “fiasco" and "the worst foreign policy blunder in decades.”)Has someone from the US side of the Deep State whispered in the ears of Johnson, Grassley, and Rubio about how unseemly it would look, and how dangerous it might prove to be, were anyone in the line of presidential succession to give Israel the impression that killing the people ahead of them might serve Zionist interests? Inquiring minds would love to know.Given the unpropitious line of succession, the Israelis might prefer false flag terrorism over assassination, as Laura Loomer’s unsubtle tweet seems to suggest. But what kind of terror attack? Targeting “the tallest building” is a long-time Zionist obsession, according to Christopher Bollyn, who reveals that Mossad founder Isser Harel stated in 1979 that “Islamic terrorists” would destroy New York’s tallest building because it was a phallic symbol. It so happens that the tallest building in America is One World Trade Center in New York City at exactly 1,776 feet. What’s more, One World Trade Center is owned by the notorious Jewish terrorist and insurance fraudster Larry Silverstein, a close friend of Netanyahu, who confessed on television to being party to the demolition of WTC-7 on 9/11. Silverstein also owns the 73-story US Bank Tower, conveniently located only six miles from the heart of Hollywood and its thousands of Jewish cinematic magicians and storytellers who could help “sell” the Iranian terror attack plotline.But maybe blowing up tall buildings and blaming it on Muslims is too “been there done that” i.e. “worked once, won’t work again.” So let’s help our Mossad friends brainstorm about how to carry through on Loomer’s threat. Here are a few ideas:*White House Reflecting Pool Algae an Iranian Bioweapon—Devours Washington DC!*Trump Vaporized by Exploding Golf Ball that Turns Out to Have Been an Iranian Mini-Nuke!*Iranian Sleeper Cell Hidden in National Weather Service—Controls Rain to Ruin July 4th Barbecues! (They Made It Rain in Iran By Blowing Up US Radars, So What If They Make It Rain HERE?!)*CIA Warns: Every Third Pothole in America May Be a Secret Iranian Missile Silo!*Entire East Coast Blackout Caused by Single Iranian Operative Unplugging Very Large Extension Cord!*Nuclear Alert Issued After Suspicious Persian Cat Seen Near Strategic Air Command Headquarters!*Iranian Cyberhackers Blamed for Mind-Eating Social Media Virus Named Laura Loomer!And if those aren’t stupid enough, feel free to drop some even stupider ones in the comments, in hopes of making the Mossadniks who are reading this laugh so hard that they forget to launch a false flag ten times worse than 9/11. 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 linkExcerpts:Richie Allen:..Iran says an end to Israel’s hostilities in Lebanon is inseparable from the deal. But the Israelis are saying “our forces will remain in the country indefinitely.” Where is all this going to lead? Let’s welcome back to the program a friend of ours, the academic author and broadcaster, and long-time contributor to Iran’s Press TV, and he has traveled extensively in Iran, it’s always a pleasure to welcome back to the show our old pal Kevin Barrett. Kevin, how are you?Kevin Barrett:Hey, I’m well Ritchie. Great to be back with you.Richie Allen:Thank you very much, my friend. And you said to me this morning that it’s nice to be reporting good news for a change. So as far as you’re concerned, this is good news. This is reason to be optimistic. Kevin Barrett:Well, it’s better than most of the news. Richie Allen:Yeah, I’ll give you that. Kevin Barrett:Yeah, I think peace is better than war. And Iran basically winning is better than any alternative. So yeah, this agreement clearly favors Iran. Whether it’s going to last without blowing up again is an open question. But in the meantime, I think it’s basically a good thing that it’s opening up the possibility that the US is going to have to break from its total subjugation to Zionism and to Netanyahu. And we’ll see whether that actually plays out. But if the US is going to adhere to the terms of this agreement, it’s going to have to order the Israelis to pull out of Lebanon, pull out of Gaza, and this is going to be unprecedented. So it has potential to be something very good for the region and the world, but I don’t know if the odds are favouring that outcome. ..…that opens up a couple of different possible futures, right? And whether the American Platonic Guardians or Deep State are up to taking on the Israelis, again, is an open question. Richie Allen:I don’t personally believe that any president is really running things, but let’s just imagine I’m wrong because I’m often wrong. Let’s imagine Trump really is running the government, the administration. If he is, this is abject humiliation. Kevin Barrett:Well, it should be and it would be if Trump were rational. But Trump is quite capable of spinning delusions to support his narcissism. So I’m sure there will be handles he can grab onto to claim that he’s getting something better than Obama did. (And Trump can try to blame Netanyahu and say that when Netanyahu promised him the war would be a success) he was lying. Either that or he was totally incompetent and screwed up. So it’s Netanyahu’s fault, Trump! It’s not your fault. Blame it on Netanyahu. Blame it on the Israelis and go after them with all guns blazing. And that’s exactly what you need to do. Richie Allen:How many resolutions Kevin? How many resolutions at this point in history, how many resolutions were passed in the United Nations condemning and ordering the Israelis to stop the settlements and to stop the interning of Palestinian children? It’s got to be in the hundreds, right? Must be. Kevin Barrett:Yeah, I think there are hundreds of these UN resolutions telling Israel to do things that it’s never done. And the two most important ones are, was it 192, there’s 240 something, I’m forgetting the numbers right now, but the two keys resolutions. The first requires Israel to allow Palestinian refugees who were driven out of Israel by terrorism to return to their homes and be compensated for their suffering. And then the other one is post-1967, demanding that Israel return to its pre-1967 borders. Because the principle that you can steal territory by launching a war has been officially contrary to international law since World War II. So those are the two key resolutions. Israel has to allow all Palestinian refugees to return, and to return to its pre-1967 borders—or better yet its UN borders…though the international consensus is for the 1967 ones.Richie Allen: Tell me this, has Gaza and the horrendous problems facing the Palestinian people been forgotten in the wake of the attacks on Iran and Lebanon? Kevin Barrett: Well, I don’t think it’s been forgotten. Actually, the people of Gaza have been saved, in a way, by Iran. Though Iran is being more forthright about stopping Israel’s war in Lebanon. But likewise, Iran is going to demand the end of this war on Gaza as well…Richie Allen:Norman Finkelstein has been a very prominent pro-Palestinian voice for many many years. And his aunt I think or his mother was in Auschwitz. So he’s an interesting character He came out and said something which I’m sure you’re aware of, which I found interesting. He said that he’s not at all comfortable with the US alternative right or the right wing alternative media, namely Tucker Carson, Candace Owens and others, supporting Palestine.Kevin Barrett:Well, I admire the work of Norman Finkelstein. I think he’s basically a good guy. But if you try to figure out where he’s coming from…he is one of these people who’ve grown up in the Jewish community, surrounded by the myths of the Jewish community about Jewish suffering, the persecution of the Jews. Everywhere the Jews have ever gone, they’ve been persecuted by their neighbors, for no reason. And so, you know, whereas some people from the Jewish community react to that narrative and that culture by becoming insufferably narcissistic, and often even psychopathic, like probably the majority of Jewish Israelis, others like Norman Finkelstein react to this narrative by accepting this victim role, this belief that the Jewish people have been victimized, but then universalizing it and identifying with victims everywhere. This puts Finkelstein not to far from the Iranian Shia ideology, which identifies with victims and demands that we stand up for victims. And that’s good. But I think this conditioning, which created the Norman Finkelstein that we know, who is standing up for the Palestinian victims, and even telling a certain amount of truth about the Holocaust industry…I think his ideology and worldview are conditioned by this sacred narrative of victimization that begins, in his culture, with the alleged victimization of the Jews throughout history. And that narrative and that culture make him suspicious of, let’s say, a right-wing American ideology, which is not founded on this defense of victims, which, on the contrary, is actually, to some extent, reacting against the victimization narrative, whether it’s anti-LBGTQ (because the left has made them out as victims) or whether it’s any of the other areas where the left has been identifying with victims. So I think Finkelstein is wary of the American right wing because of that. And I think he probably has some of that atavistic Jewish fear of the goyim getting out of control. And the goyim that Jews are taught they have to watch out for are the nationalistic ones, the right wing ones, the patriotic American or German ones who represent their mainstream majority culture and then are going to be coming after the Jews. Now the right-wingers would argue that’s what’s really going on here is that the Jews always come into these cultures and seize the best niches in the economy and basically become parasites off these cultures and take over the commanding heights of these cultures, especially in finance and media, and when the dominant culture—let’s say white Americans—doesn’t like it, they get into a clash with the Jews. And this leads to the Jews getting expelled or persecuted. If we think about both of these cultures with their narratives—the Jewish left wing one of Norman Finkelstein, and the right wing one represented (in watered down form) by people like Tucker Carlson and Candace Owens—we can see why there would be a clash between them.Richie Allen:Yeah, for me it’s just wretched identity politics. I do want to say, and we won’t get into it because Kevin and I have gotten into it before, I don’t agree with Kevin that Jews have not been othered and ostracised and blamed throughout history. Kevin Barrett:I didn’t say that!Richie Allen:No no no, but you did say it’s effectively a myth that the Jews were victims and that they were run out of countries around the world. You don’t agree with that. I think it’s more complicated. I think Jews have been othered and scapegoated and blamed throughout history.Kevin Barrett:Of course they have. But often for good reason.Richie Allen:No, not for good reason. We’re not going there. But yeah, for me, it comes back to identity politics, really. And it’s the bane of my life, Kevin. And we’ve had this before you and I. Ultimately, salvation, I think, lies in realising that whatever our beliefs are, whichever God we pray to, we’re all the same mate. And there is an unfolding tyranny that has gripped the world. It’s a technocratic tyranny that’s building up and it doesn’t spare anybody. I mean, it’s funny isn’t we talk about these things. The most austere, the most heavy handed of the restrictions during the COVID times were undoubtedly in Tel Aviv and in Jerusalem and in the towns of Israel. The Israelis were absolute b******s to their own people during that particular time which I think is worth mentioning now.It’s fascinating Kevin the Finkelstein thing it really is because he suffered greatly because of I believe because of his activities you know he lost tenure, didn’t he, at Paul University, if I’m not mistaken. And he went after Alan Dershowitz, didn’t he? And they came down pretty heavy on Finkelstein, the lobby, the Israeli lobby. So I’m fascinated by it. I think if you leave aside... it was a brilliant answer you gave by the way I think you’re probably on the money there but for me I look at Carlson and Owens and I see grifting Kevin. I see it being about engagement farming and brand building, follower building and ultimately money building. But I say that probably far too often for my listeners’ liking. But that’s where I see it. I don’t see any sincerity in it. Am I wrong? Kevin Barrett:Yeah, I think you’re wrong if you think that there’s no sincerity at all in people like Tucker Carlson and Candace Owens. I think they’re both probably pretty sincere overall, more so than when they worked for Fox News, and more so than the people who stayed at Fox News. So, yeah, I wouldn’t go quite that far. Was it Mark Twain who said that “it’s hard to get a man to see something if his income depends on not seeing it.” And so people like Tucker Carlson, Candace Owens, when they were working for Fox, there were a lot of things that they didn’t see. And then they started to see some of them. And I think they were sincere enough to be willing to step outside of Fox and speak more honestly about a lot of these issues. But even today, even in the positions that they are in today, there may be places that they just sort of unconsciously don’t want to go. Richie Allen:Fair enough. I’m not going to come back on that. I’ll give you the final word on that. Listen, the High Court in this country ruled earlier this year that the UK government’s proscription of Palestine Action was unlawful. That was right. It was a good decision. It shouldn’t be a terrorist offense to support an organization that ultimately wants to bring an end to the tyranny of the Israeli state against the Palestinians. But the government appealed it, and the court has ruled that the banning of Palestine Action was indeed lawful. Kevin Barrett:Yeah, it’s pretty outrageous that opposing genocide is illegal and can get you imprisoned in the UK. And supporting genocide, which one would think would be practically a capital crime, is actually pretty much mandatory. So we’re living in a topsy-turvy, upside-down world, to say the least. I actually kind of like the American tradition of First Amendment jurisprudence, which says that the only way your speech can be restricted is if there is a really direct connection between your speech and something seriously unlawful. In other words, if I want to say “Here’s why I support Palestine Action, or Hamas, or whatever”—and I have, I wrote a long essay about why I support Hamas, giving all sorts of good reasons, I think. Anybody’s welcome to argue with me and tell me why they think I’m wrong. Obviously that shouldn’t be illegal. What should be illegal is if I am giving some kind of a speech in a situation where my impassioned words are going to directly lead to somebody committing a crime. That obviously is what “crying fire in a crowded theater” would refer to. So these 80-year-olds in London who hold a little cardboard placard saying “I support Palestine Action”—can anybody really argue that people who see that placard are immediately going to run out and commit some crime? It’s ridiculous. So Great Britain really should be ashamed of itself, that this is going on in the country that gave us free speech in Hyde Park, and the Magna Carta, and all these things. It’s outrageous. Richie Allen: It’s outrageous. You’ve got the lobby here telling the British government that when people use slogans like “from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free” that what it really means is it’s okay to kill Jews...It’s interesting that you’re speaking to me from Morocco, where you did write that very lengthy, well-written article about why you support Hamas. You know, the way it is here (in the UK), if you were working here, you would be in jail now. That’s how crazy it is. I mean, I’ve always said, I don’t fence straddle. I never have done. I always give the opinion that I really believe, the one I really believe. I don’t support any group or I don’t support anybody. I never supported the IRA. And I’m a die-hard Irish republican. I don’t support any group at all. But the Palestinians have every right to resist their occupation. In fact, it’s enshrined in the law that they have the right to resist. But it has become so utterly despotic now, that if you were living and working here, you’d be in jail for saying you support Hamas. That’s a fact. Kevin Barrett:Well, if I run out of money, and I can’t pay for my rent and food any more, which could happen since they’ve deplatformed me from Patreon and Youtube and Stripe and all of these places, I guess I could scrape together my last twenty dollars and buy a Ryan Air ticket from Morocco to London and get off the plane in London and tell everybody about my article and I could have my food and housing covered for the rest of my life by the British taxpayer…(For the full unexpurgated interview, check out the audio or video track above.)Stripe is Substack’s only processor and they debanked me, so you can no longer pay me through Substack. Now I am posting everything on Substack free and asking people to sign up for recurring donations at my Paypal donation page…or better yet, the free speech platform SPdonate. Alternately you can Paypal or Zelle to truthjihad[at]gmail(dot)com. Note that Zelle, unlike other methods, doesn’t charge any fees. 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 TruthJihad linkLive Press TV interview broadcast 6/11/26 @13:15 pm Quds TimeKEVIN BARRETT:Well, once again, we’ve seen that Trump and the Americans are lashing out in frustration because they’ve lost the war. They lost within the first 24 to 48 hours, and they have no more realistic options. They’ve bombed all the military targets they can bomb with massively diminishing returns, and so now they’re going after civilian targets. The New York Times just reported on its front page this morning that the destruction of two reservoirs in Bamani, in southern Iran, appears to be a war crime. If the New York Times is telling us that the American government is committing an obvious war crime by targeting civilian drinking water, and they’re putting that on their front page, you know there is some dissension going on, and some strategic problems, afflicting the command and control of the American empire.So basically Trump is lashing out, vacillating between ridiculous exaggerated threats and equally ridiculous exaggerated claims that peace is at hand so the markets should be happy in order to help Trump’s and the Republicans’ prospects in the upcoming elections. He also probably would like to calm things down in time for the World Cup because the Americans are already getting all kinds of terrible publicity around the ways that they’re treating people. They’re not even allowing the Iranian team to sleep in the United States. They have to take a three hour flight into the United States, and then fly out that same day. It’s ridiculous. And they’re treating fans in similar ways, turning people back who have perfectly good visas and so on, and subjecting people to torture as they try to get through American immigration. So the Americans are looking terrible in front of the world right now, and Trump doesn’t want them to look even worse, as it’s obvious that he’s lost this war. But what can he do? Bomb civilian facilities? Meanwhile, Iran is hitting military targets. Iran hit, I believe, 21 different US bases across the region, and apparently hit a hangar in Jordan containing advanced U.S. aircraft, F-35s.So, once again, the same pattern keeps emerging, where Iran remains disciplined, goes after military targets, and goes after strategic assets like control over the Strait of Hormuz. The United States, with nothing military or strategic that it’s capable of doing, just lashes out and then Trump’s mouth lashes out as well.PRESS TV:Kevin Barrett, why isn’t Donald Trump trying to cut his losses? Domestically, his approval ratings are awful. The economy is being affected with this unwarranted war. Regionally, I think, the U.S.’s reputation has taken a massive hit. One would think that instead of convoluting the situation even more, adding more knots to what already is, that the Trump administration, Donald Trump itself would be trying to cut his losses, but that’s not happening.KEVIN BARRETT:Well, Trump has personality issues. As Bandy Lee wrote back maybe 10 years ago, Trump is clearly a pathological, narcissistic sociopath. And he has delusions of grandeur, as we see in all of these tweets where he tweets himself as Dr. Jesus and all these things. He’s the last person on earth that could ever admit they made a mistake.So had he been a rational human being, and then had Trump even been minimally rational, as soon as it became clear within the next 24 to 48 hours after that attack on February 28th that it wasn’t going to work, that’s when Trump should have laid the blame on Netanyahu and gotten the hell out. That’s when he could have cut his losses to an absolute minimum. And he still would have had to deal with Iran running the Strait of Hormuz, but he wouldn’t have been in this position where the Americans just keep digging this hole and they’re going deeper and deeper and deeper. You’re supposed to stop digging when you’re in that situation, but apparently Trump and his advisors don’t know that. And part of the reason (for US inability to cut its losses) along with this unfortunate personality of Trump’s, is the fact that not just Trump but the American government in general is largely influenced if not controlled out of Tel Aviv. And the Israelis are in a terrible strategic situation. They are seeing that their dreams of regional hegemony evaporate as Iran and its allies assert themselves in the region, gain control over the Strait of Hormuz, potential control over the Red Sea, and escalation dominance with their missile force that can’t be touched since it’s in underground storage. And suddenly Israel sees its dreams going up in smoke, and all they can imagine doing is continuing to force their American vassal, from whom they collect trillions of dollars of tribute, to bleed itself digging this hole deeper and deeper.So how does this all end? I think ultimately they are going to somehow have to cut their losses. And maybe Netanyahu going down will be the way it all pans out, and the Zionist entity will then appoint new leadership, try to blame Netanyahu for their excesses and failures. And then maybe Trump will again try to shift that blame to Netanyahu and try to find a way to wriggle out. But Iran’s going to be on top when that happens.PRESS TV:Kevin Barrett, let’s also talk about the Iranian response to the Israeli attacks that took place in the south of the Lebanese capital, Beirut, in the Dahia district. So Iran, it held its word. It kept up its word. It said if an attack. He also said that the ceasefire must encompass the entire resistance front. How significant was that, seeing the retaliation being carried out against the Israelis by these.KEVIN BARRETT:Well, this case of Iran drawing a red line and then acting when it was crossed actually changes the whole regional equation, as all the observers, including Western observers, are admitting. Prior to this, Iran was so restrained that it really never, ever hit anybody unless it was hit itself. And now Iran drew that red line around Beirut and said if Israel goes ahead and bombs Beirut, then Iran will retaliate.This raises the possibility that Iran can now dissuade and deter the Zionist entity from its most egregious excesses, potentially not only from bombing Beirut, but perhaps even ultimately forcing the Zionist entity to withdraw from places like the parts of Gaza that it occupies, as well as southern Lebanon. And if to the extent that this happens, we will have to see some major radical change in leadership in Tel Aviv. They’re going to have to admit failure. And that’s probably going to require scapegoating Netanyahu and coming up with new leadership. And it won’t be that much better. It’ll be devoted to genocide and expansion. But they’re going to have to admit that they lost this round. So Iran’s drawing this red line around Beirut and then standing by it and punishing the Zionists for crossing that red line completely changes the regional equation.PRESS TV:Kevin Barrett, you mentioned the IAEA resolution the anti-Iran resolution where the Board of Governors they adopted this anti-Iranian resolution that happened on Wednesday. The resolution has been called everything from being flawed to being illegal as well. Is there a big question mark right now over the legitimacy and with it the independence and reputation of the IAEA?KEVIN BARRETT:Well, the IAEA has shown that it’s a corrupt cat’s paw for this evil empire that’s ruling the world through nuclear threats. The Zionist entity is the world’s worst case of nuclear proliferation. They are not signed on to the NPT in any way shape or form. They’re blatant serial violators. They stole the nuclear material to build hundreds of nuclear weapons from the United States, with the help of the Kosher Nostra organized crime ring that dominates the United States. And so the IAEA was actually complicit in the war on Iran by putting out their resolution essentially seeming to give some kind of justification for the attack on Iran. And so they have a terrible record and this is not going to help. Ultimately they’ve been proven irrelevant and the world is going to have to come up with some new institutions to deal with the problem of proliferation.Stripe is Substack’s only processor and they debanked me, so you can no longer pay me through Substack. Now I am posting everything on Substack free and asking people to sign up for recurring donations at my Paypal donation page…or better yet, the free speech platform SPdonate. Alternately you can Paypal or Zelle to truthjihad[at]gmail(dot)com. Note that Zelle, unlike other methods, doesn’t charge any fees. 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 False Flag Weekly News link (recorded Sunday, minutes after news broke of Israel crossing Iran’s red line by bombing Beirut)“Crazy Bibi” could have made good money selling furniture in Philadelphia: “Hurry, hurry, hurry, these prices are f*ing crazy!” Instead, he’s running Israel’s going-out-of-business sale, peddling tens of thousands of corpses of Palestinian and Lebanese women and children, while the world is no longer buying his excuses.Bibi could have made even more money in commodities speculation: “Come on down, hurry, get your August oil futures—these prices are REALLY f*ing crazy!”But Bibi has one Trump card and he’s playing it for all it’s worth. Though we can’t be sure what’s on the card—is it Trump performing a sex act on Bill “Bubba” Clinton as stated by Jeffrey Epstein in an email to his brother, or something even worse?—it’s obvious that Bibi is the butch and Trump is the femme, mirroring the Roy Cohn-Trump “mentorship,” meaning that Netanyahu just keeps leading Trump around on a leash, ignoring the Orange Poodle’s pathetic little yelps.That’s why when Trump tells Netanyahu not to strike Iran, Netanyahu gives Trump the proverbial finger and bombs Tehran anyway.But you know what’s really f*ing crazy? I’ll tell what’s f*ing crazy: Israel is conducting a hostile takeover of the US military. If there is a reason that every politician who supports this shouldn’t be summarily executed for treason, please let me know in the comments, because I can’t think of one.As I write this Monday at 1 pm Quds Time, corresponding to 6 a.m. US Eastern, it isn’t yet clear whether the US will be fully dragged into the revved-up Iranian-Israeli hostilities. But I wouldn’t bet against it. Even pre-hostile-takeover, the Israeli-US war on Iran is a joint effort, and the US is obviously the junior partner. Essentially Israel’s entire military is being provided free of charge by the US taxpayer. It’s the US, not Israel, that used up half of its entire arsenal of THAAD interceptors protecting the genocidal Zionist entity occupying Palestine. There is no reason to think Trump will actually use all of that theoretical leverage provided by the fact that the US taxpayer completely pays for the fake state of “Israel” in order to gain any meaningful degree of separation from the “f*ing crazy” mad dog terrorizing West Asia.If “Israel” succeeds in embroiling the US and its Gulf vassals in major escalation, not only will what’s left of US bases in the region be pummeled, and US ships damaged and perhaps sunk, but the Red Sea will likely be closed by Iran’s Yemeni allies, driving global oil prices towards the Götterdämmerung that everybody except the futures markets has been predicting. What’s more, I wouldn’t bet on the life support systems in Zionist-occupied places like Kuwait and especially the UAE continuing to support life. Without electricity for air conditioning and desalinization for potable water, those so-called countries will barely be fit for snakes and lizards. Message to Linh Dinh, who rashly flew to Dubai a few days ago: Please remove yourself from the “plastic a*****e of the universe” (Faulkner thought it was LA but he hadn’t seen Dubai) before the lights go out and the taps run dry!Are there any American national security insiders getting tired of “Israel” dragging the US, West Asia, and the world into complete ruin? Possibly. A few days ago someone leaked a story to The New York Times about the Pentagon facing a “growing espionage threat from Israel.” (How much greater the Mossad threat could possibly get after they’ve already killed a president and his about-to-become-president brother, slaughtered US sailors on an unarmed spy ship 59 years ago today, and blown up the Twin Towers in the mother of all false flags, remains to be seen…)Max Blumenthal reported an interesting detail about the “growing Israeli espionage threat”: The Mossad got caught planting bugs in the Secret Service vehicle that would lead the response to any emergency involving the president. If you had contingency plans for another assassination of a sitting president you might want to do something like that.But there’s no obvious reason why Israel would want to assassinate Trump, who services Bibi with barely a peep of protest. So maybe they’re bugging the Secret Service emergency vehicle just to send a message: “Because we can!”Ever since Trump let Netanyahu drag him into the idiotic and criminal February 28 attack on Iran, and the Iranians responded by seizing permanent control over the Strait of Hormuz, Trump has been flailing around desperately trying to minimize the public perception of the size and scope of the disaster, while reassuring markets that everything will be soon returning to normal. Daily distractions, alongside occasional obfuscations, have sufficed to keep markets from fully facing the terrible truth.Now that the war is exploding again, what new distractions await us? Humorists note that if war on Iran was a distraction from Epstein, now Trump needs more Epstein revelations as a distraction from his ever-more-disastrous war on Iran. But from Trump’s perspective, an even better distraction would be aliens abducting Steven Spielberg and landing on the White House lawn as a PR stunt for Spielberg’s new film Disclosure Day. (Spielberg denies conspiracy theories that his film will be grooming the public to believe in aliens, but then, he also denied that Schindler’s List was grooming the public to believe in the Holocaust, so it’s best to take anything he says with a proverbial grain of salt.)Will the aliens arrive just in time to watch Trump serve as ring girl when Bibi MCs the first big UFC fight at the White House?And would “aliens land to watch UFC fight at White House” succeed in distracting the public, and the markets, from the Zionist-incited total implosion of Earth’s economy?Or maybe they’ve got an even bigger distraction up their sleeves. If and when they whip it out on us, you can bet that False Flag Weekly News will be there to expose the sordid, shocking truth.Stripe is Substack’s only processor and they debanked me, so you can no longer pay me through Substack. Now I am posting everything on Substack free and asking people to sign up for recurring donations at my Paypal donation page…or better yet, the free speech platform SPdonate. Alternately you can Paypal or Zelle to truthjihad[at]gmail(dot)com. Note that Zelle, unlike other methods, doesn’t charge any fees. 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 False Flag Weekly News linkIsrael just prevailed in its scorched earth campaign against the USA in general, and the state of Kentucky in particular, by “primarying” Rep. Thomas Massie. Since they couldn’t Epstein him, the Kosher Nostra used AI to generate a suggestive clip of Massie having a “threesome” affair with Democrats Ilhan Omar and AOC. Welcome to the AI era! Who needs Epstein and his gaggle of teenage sex slave shiksas when you’ve got AI? From now on, Israel will just create fake videos of imaginary misbehavior on the part of anyone who doesn’t follow their orders.But how long will that strategy work? Fox News addicted boomers who can’t tell AI from reality, and who love the “Israel” they learned about from Leon Uris, are dying off. Younger Americans are increasingly disgusted by Zionist Jew lies, Zionist Jew depravity, and Zionist Jew genocide. Massie won more than 80% of the Gen Z (under 30) vote. He won the 26 to 35s 72%-16%. He won Gen X (ages 36-64) by a greater than 6% margin. Unfortunately for Massie and America, the MOFs (moronic old farts) turned out in great numbers, and two-thirds of their votes went to Massie’s Israel-owned opponent, Ed Gallrein. Or did they? The senior (Israeli) citizen voters were responsible for practically all of the mail-in ballots, and the vast majority went to Gallrein. In an interesting coincidence, Gallrein’s total mail-in haul of 10,854 votes perfectly covered his margin of victory of 10,283 votes. Were all ten thousand plus of those Zio-ballots actually filled out and mailed by old fogies who were compos mentis? The 2020 election, Trump’s supporters never tired of telling us, was stolen by Democrats who made sure that entire senior centers full of zombies voted unanimously for Biden. Trump himself calls mail-in ballots “election fraud” and “cheating” and has been trying to ban mail-in voting, but hasn’t succeeded so far since the Constitution deems that states run elections and the details are handled by local administration.But for some reason Trump hasn’t been protesting Gallrein’s victory and demanding a thorough inspection of all those mail-in ballots to see whether they were postmarked in Tel Aviv. That’s probably because Trump has never had a job in his life except money launderer and front man for the Kosher Nostra.Though Israel got away with primarying Massie, like it primaried Cori Bush and Jamaal Bowman and a long list of people before that, it likely won a pyrrhic victory. By exposing Israel’s control of the US Congress in an unprecedented way, and outraging the majority of non-retirement-age people nationwide, the Zionists are wasting what’s left of their soft power—their appeal to hearts and minds.AIPAC’s Massie takedown happened in the wake of two of Israel’s worst-ever PR disasters: The New York Times’ exposure of Israel’s unbelievably disgusting torture of Palestinian prisoners, including training dogs to commit rape, was quickly followed by Ben Gvir sharing a video of himself joining Israeli guards in abusing the humanitarian activists who were attacked and kidnapped a thousand kilometers from Israeli shores and taken to Israel for brutalization.With all of this self-inflicted PR damage, Israel is sacrificing any potential it may have had for a long-term future in favor of minor, short-term gains. As it wins at the tactical level, by successfully kidnapping and abusing activists, kidnapping and dog-raping Palestinians, or getting honest politicians thrown out of the US Congress, it loses bigly strategically. That’s also true of the Israel-driven war on Iran. As neocon superstar Robert Kagan has been grumpily observing, the vicious attack on Iran February 28th basically forced the Iranians to permanently seize the Strait of Hormuz, thereby raising Iran’s status as a regional power by several notches. While the sneak attack succeeded tactically by mass-murdering Iranian leaders and schoolgirls alike, it will go down in history as one of the most colossal strategic failures ever recorded. (If Israel thought Iran pre-Hormuz was an existential threat, just wait till you see what’s coming.)Tactical success creating strategic failure seems an Israeli speciality. That’s basically the thesis of Ronan Bergman’s Rise and Kill First, which chronicles Israel’s grotesque history of political assassinations (while leaving out the biggest ones, including the Kennedys). Bergman notes that Israel has grown increasingly proficient at murdering its leading opponents, but that every time it murders a Resistance leader, new Resistance leaders arise in his place to present even greater threats. That is certainly what happened when the Zionists wiped out a major segment of Iran’s leadership February 28, uniting the country behind equally-capable leaders who are even more hardline than the martyred ones.Why do the Zionists keep shooting themselves in the foot by shooting people they would be well advised not to shoot? Why do they brag about dog rape and abuse of humanitarian activists, when strategically it would make more sense to respect basic decency and international law? Why do they make a pushy, obnoxious spectacle of themselves sacrificing Thomas Massie, whose influence could have been dealt with more subtly and effectively through low-key, rational politicking? And above all, why do they keep behaving in ways that increase the determination of their Middle Eastern neighbors, and an ever-greater segment of the world’s population, to be done with them, when they could easily accept the international consensus of Oslo, Camp David, and so on, and assure themselves of a decent future?E. Michael Jones, who is leading a conference I’m attending here in Croatia, says “the Jews are the enemies of Logos.” By Logos he means something like “the God-given rationality, order, and beauty infusing creation.” Dr. Jones argues that the Jews, in rejecting Jesus Christ, rejected Logos, and have been at war with it ever since. That is why they are infused with a spirit of hatred and ugliness and grotesquely aggressive behavior that turns out to be self-destructive.Dr. Jones makes a pretty good argument for that thesis. But Zionist Jews themselves, with their outrages against decency and morality and reason, are making an even better one. 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 linkThe series of chemical weapons hoaxes—false flag incidents that helped NATO and Israel overthrow the Syrian government and install their current ISIS/Al-Qaeda puppets—are unraveling. Today Dr. Piers Robinson joins us to discuss this issue by way of his recent article “Dr. Brendan Whelan's ILOAT Win Reveals Clear Evidence of OPCW Corruption.”TranscriptKevin Barrett: Welcome to Truth Jihad Audio-Visual. I’m Kevin Barrett, doing this podcast since 2006. I try to bring on the most interesting writers and translate them into audiovisual. One of the best writers right now is Piers Robinson. He’s a fellow refugee from the controlled academy. We’re not so controlled now (that we’ve left). Piers has done great work on a number of issues. We recently did a podcast on his work on the 9/11 planes. And now we’re going to revisit another of these big deceptions and scandals: the Syria chemical weapons thing. It’s hard to say whether it even was a thing. So let’s find out. Hey, welcome, Piers Robinson. How are you?Piers Robinson: Good to see you, Kevin. I’m doing well, thanks.Kevin Barrett: Good to have you back. So these chemical weapons accusations against Syria during the war that finally brought down the Syrian government a couple of years ago always had the stench of dubiousness about them, to say the least. But it was kind of hard to nail it down and prove exactly what was going on. It was complicated, right? Lots of alleged attacks going both ways.Piers Robinson: You are correct. There was one in Homs in 2012 in December which was a staged event and they tried to spin it off as a sarin or a nerve agent attack. But very quickly the wheels came off that and I think even the US State Department backed away from the claims being made. But that was one of the very earliest incarnations of what I describe as essentially false flags, staged events.Kevin Barrett: Bush had joked about Iraqi WMD and pretended to be looking for them under his desk. It turned out to be a complete hoax, and yet they rolled out the same thing for Syria. How do they get away with that?Piers Robinson: Well, that’s the incredible thing about it. Syria was one of the 9/11 wars. It was planned (by the neocons): Wesley Clark famously blurted out about the seven countries in five years, and Syria was one of them. So it was always one of the countries which they were going to use the 9/11 false flag in order to get a war going. And of course with Syria it didn’t really get going until 2011 when you had various covert operations and also multiple external actors fueling dissent within the country and then really pretty much almost immediately triggering unrest.Well, of course, there were no weapons of mass destruction there. But in the UK you had Dr. David Kelly, Britain’s top biological weapons expert, who had a rather candid conversation with the BBC and said that the British government had sexed up the intelligence on Iraqi WMD.At the same time, you had Ambassador Wilson in the US, who had been sent to Niger to investigate the yellowcake uranium claims, and he said pretty much the same thing. On both sides of the Atlantic you had very high, very significant officials basically saying that there was no WMD in Iraq because they were manipulating the intelligence.A lot of people became aware of that in the fullness of time. Then came Syria. It’s quite remarkable that one of the decisions they made — and I suspect some of this was to do with Israeli involvement, but a lot of it was actually rooted in UK Foreign Office planning — was to build a narrative around demonizing the Syrian government and Assad using the same set of allegations, this idea that there are chemical and biological weapons.Of course, in the case of Syria, the allegation was that Assad was using these weapons. In a way, it’s surprising that they embarked upon the same kind of deception again, but then perhaps not so surprising because it did work the first time.Kevin Barrett: Right, but people woke up to it, supposedly.Piers Robinson: People woke up to it, but they got the job done. But then that’s quite a long time to 2011. And I think you had the whole Arab Spring narrative building up around 2011. And I think it was easy for what was happening in Syria to get folded into that.There was a build-up to this, because prior to this there was an interesting series of alleged chemical weapons attacks. It actually started in March 2013 when there was actually an attack on Syrian army soldiers using a nerve agent. And the Syrian government went straight to the United Nations and said, “We want an investigation. Some of our soldiers have been killed and we believe it’s a nerve agent.”Almost as soon as the Syrian government had done that, you then had these counter accusations coming in from Britain, France, Qatar and the US alleging that the Syrian government was using chemical weapons.You had the emergence of what I understand now as essentially staged events. This is where you started to have the involvement of, for example, Hamish de Bretton-Gordon, a former British military officer who’d set up a company called SecureBio. As we know now, he was part of an MI6 sample-gathering operation in 2013.So you had this kind of interesting build-up to Ghouta 2013, all set around this invitation or request from the Syrian government: come in, send in the UN, send in the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons and get this investigated.Then all of these other allegations suddenly started being thrown out by the Americans and the Brits and these kinds of events occurring in Syria.When the joint OPCW-UN team arrived in Damascus in August 2013 to begin their investigations, at exactly that point there was a mass rocket-launch sarin attack in the suburbs of Damascus in Ghouta.So this is what we’re being asked to believe in terms of this narrative building: that the Syrian government legitimately requested the UN OPCW to come in, the inspectors get into the capital and then within a week or so you have this mass sarin rocket attack in Ghouta with a large casualty count.The details of this are a little bit more complicated than that. I know some researchers argue that actually not that many people were killed by sarin and a lot of these people were probably massacred.I think there are elements in the US who were part of this red-line creation. I think it was pushed by external actors in Israel as well. Obama famously backed away from it. He was given information from Clapper that this was not a slam dunk.They backed away. Russia, of course, defused the situation by persuading Assad to hand over Syria’s strategic chemical weapons stocks, which Syria always had essentially as a deterrent against Israel’s nuclear capability.But Assad said, “Okay, we’ll go along with this. We will sign up to the Chemical Weapons Convention and we will dispose of all of our weapons.” These were all put onto Cape Ray, an American warship, and then destroyed.That was the point at which the red line didn’t quite work for those wanting the full-scale intervention, but it did, I think from Israel’s point of view, get to this point of the disarmament of Assad.Kevin Barrett: For sure.Piers Robinson: I think with hindsight, knowing what we know now, it was a mistake. And it was also clearly a mistake because this didn’t bring an end to it.Within a year of Syria having acceded to the Chemical Weapons Convention and getting rid of its sarin stocks, you then had the sudden emergence of chlorine allegations.Chlorine historically as a battlefield munition was used by the Germans in the First World War. You need huge quantities of the material. You’re talking with these alleged tactics of chlorine cylinders dropped, they burst and chlorine would pour out.Kevin Barrett: Like somebody was getting in by the roof with a bottle of bleach from their laundry and kind of dropping the bleach bottle.Piers Robinson: Yeah, but this worked and these alleged attacks started to occur. Then the allegations started to be delivered from the usual suspects: Assad has now started to use chlorine weapons against his own population.The British government was very much involved in this. The Foreign Office and Ministry of Defence were involved in the sense that they had the White Helmets set up, as some of your listeners are probably aware. They had various other outsourced operations in Syria.The important point is around 2014 where the OPCW got drawn back into investigation of these attacks. What happened was that they set up an ad hoc body called the Fact Finding Mission, the FFM missions. These were there to deploy into the country.They were told that they had clearance to go in, so they went into opposition-held territory. But just as they crossed the line outside Syrian government-controlled territory where they had been safe, their convoy was ambushed.Two of the OPCW teams were held hostage for about 24 hours. They hit an IED. There’s a picture of their UN car severely damaged.At that point — and you can probably start to guess what might have been the rationale for opposition groups attacking the OPCW convoy — the OPCW decided they couldn’t safely send teams into those territories.So you had this setup where you had the OPCW with this ad hoc Fact Finding Mission set up to go into Syria, but then not being able to get in on the ground and relying upon information being supplied by groups aligned with belligerents in the country.In the case of the White Helmets, these were groups aligned with opposition forces.This went on for several years. I’ve gone through a lot of these. I’m working on a book on it at the moment. I’ve done a series for UK Column.Some of these allegations were transparently false, and yet they got reported on by the OPCW Fact Finding Mission and ultimately started to build this alleged body of evidence: here we’ve got another investigation, another chemical attack, not confirmed, but reasonable grounds to suspect this is going on.There was this period between 2014 and 2016 where what you had were essentially fairly crudely staged false flags or staged events.Some of the claims being made are laughable. In one instance, one of the early instances where the Fact Finding Mission gathered evidence from information supplied to them, there was a crater on the ground surrounded by dead animals. This is where one chlorine cylinder was supposed to have impacted and created the huge crater.Ninety metres away there was another yellow cylinder on a kitchen, which was claimed to have occurred at the same time.It was reported at the time by the White Helmets and the usual suspects promoting it over social media.So you had almost comical but ultimately effective operations because the OPCW Fact Finding Missions were very much, I would argue, co-opted by the intelligence services, certainly of Britain and other Western powers.They were basically serving up what the US wanted, what the British government wanted, what the French wanted and what the Israelis wanted.Even when you had these implausible scenarios being presented, more occurred throughout 2015 and 2016.There was a bizarre idea that chlorine was being generated in tiny quantities through improvised devices.As some people pointed out at the time, this was absurd. One person I know connected to the OPCW said, “Well, that will create enough chlorine to kill maybe a field mouse. Why not just drop a cylinder of chlorine?”But it helped create this impression of dastardly weapons being created by the Syrian government. That ended up in an OPCW report.Again, the same setup. By this point the White Helmets were very much in the driving seat of these chemical attacks. They turn up, they feed the information back, and they became key sources of information going back to the Fact Finding Missions.This was facilitated by James Le Mesurier, the former British military guy who was having direct contact with the OPCW inspectors. So you can see the dangers of the corruption of the process there.That rumbled on until 2017. In a way this helped maintain the backdrop narrative of the Syrian government systematically using chemical weapons.But it wasn’t necessarily having the splash they wanted. So this is where they moved to: okay, we need to bring sarin back into play here, even though the Syrian government has given up its sarin stocks.We were trying to hold this line that Assad was just using chlorine gas cylinders. Now that doesn’t really kill a large number of people. It’s not a particularly dangerous weapon to be using in that way.So then you had the Khan Shaykhun sarin attack, which the Trump administration bombed Syria over a week later.The White Helmets were heavily involved in that. Ted Postol, the American MIT ballistics and weapons expert, argued that this was a staged or false-flag event in order to try and get the Trump administration to carry out a bombing.Khan Shaykhun killed a significant number of people. I think about 40 people were killed in this sarin attack.I know people who’ve looked at it closely and said this is clearly a staged event. People are killed, but it’s a false-flag event which has occurred.This was around the point where I started, as an academic, to look at this issue.Then came Douma in 2018. About 43 civilians were killed. Again America, Britain and France bombed in retaliation, so it was very big news.It was initially presented as a sarin attack. These people were filmed in an apartment block with foam in their mouth and so on. It was argued at least initially by the US that this was a nerve-agent attack.The OPCW FFM team got into Syria. Just as the Douma alleged attack occurred, the area fell to Syrian and Russian forces. So for the first time the OPCW were actually able to get in on the ground and investigate themselves.All of those previous alleged attacks had relied upon the White Helmets. Now suddenly, because the Syrian government had secured the area almost immediately after the alleged attack, the OPCW Fact Finding Team were able to get in on the ground.America, Britain and France bombed anyway before they even got to work.This is where the wheels came off the Fact Finding Missions and the investigation of these attacks.The OPCW inspectors who were in charge of writing the original report ended up arranging to visit NATO weapons experts and chemical weapons experts, who gave unequivocal feedback that these people could not have been killed by chlorine.There’s no sarin present, but the actual features you see on the civilians and the numbers don’t make sense if chlorine gas had been used. It would make sense if a nerve agent had been used, but not chlorine.So immediately there was a problem.At the point at which the interim report was supposed to be published, Brendan Whelan and the others produced a report saying, “Okay, we need to do more work, but we have toxicology findings that don’t support chlorine.”They also raised concerns about the cylinders supposedly pouring chlorine down into the house and killing the 43 people in the building.They set this out in a very objective interim report which essentially raised the possibility that this could well be a false flag.That report was signed off by the Douma team. But at the point at which it went to publication, Brendan suddenly discovered that the report had been completely changed.The report they’d written had been rewritten to basically imply that this was definitely a chlorine attack. “We’ve got a bit more research to do, but that’s pretty much what happened.”That was the start of internal dissent within the OPCW, with Brendan Whelan challenging his superiors and saying, “What on earth is going on? Somebody has literally come in and rewritten our report.”Everything from there, for about six, seven or eight months before the final report came out, involved internal battles going on within the OPCW.Then when the final OPCW report came out in 2019 basically saying there were reasonable grounds to suspect that the Syrian government carried out a chlorine attack, the whistleblowers realised they had witnessed a manipulated and corrupted investigation.They tried to speak out internally.Other things started to happen. I was part of the Working Group on Syria, Propaganda and Media, and we were leaked an engineering study commissioned by Ian Henderson, one of the OPCW inspectors.The engineering assessment basically said that these yellow cylinders were more likely to have been placed by hand. It’s very unlikely they fell from helicopters.The cylinders didn’t punch holes in ceilings. These cylinders were placed there.We published that document in the Working Group and then all hell broke loose within the OPCW.We’ll talk about Brendan’s win at the International Labour Organization in a few minutes. But the issue remains unaddressed by the OPCW.The OPCW have continually refused to even meet with the scientists who were blowing the whistle.As I say, everyone has been to varying degrees smeared.Now we are in this kind of holding pattern on the issue where obviously the Syrian government fell in 2024.The OPCW has created a new special missions office to try and seal up the Syria file. We’re all waiting for them to pull out some evidence, haul in some people they’re going to accuse, and so on.But we don’t know what their play is going to be. They obviously have a huge amount of their credibility invested in this.That was a long introduction, but that kind of covers everything, I think.Kevin Barrett: Yeah, it’s kind of a different approach to false flags than 9-11. 9-11 was one huge thing all happening on the same morning and hijacking headlines reverberating out from there.Piers Robinson: As I said before, the basic setup with the OPCW Fact Finding Missions is they’re relying upon information supplied by the White Helmets.Another thing which came out of the Douma scandal was that the Office of the Director General in the OPCW and the Chief of Cabinet — which is considered the key power position — had oversight.You had a British career diplomat in charge during Douma, later replaced by a French career diplomat.The political and bureaucratic office had oversight of the investigation, while the verification and scientific divisions of the OPCW were kept away.So you actually had the political office taking control of the process.We know at Douma that the 43 civilians who were found dead in the building were almost definitely killed somewhere else.They were probably killed by Jaysh al-Islam, probably under the watch of British intelligence.So you’ve got some pretty dirty dealings going on as part of this narrative building.James Le Mesurier, as you probably know, fell to his death from his apartment building in Turkey two weeks after an OPCW official had given testimony at the Brussels panel.There are a lot of question marks over how he came to fall off the roof of his building in the middle of the night.But he was closely involved in this operation. We know that. We know he was this kind of channel between the White Helmets and the OPCW process.Our involvement in this was pretty horrifying.This is why when I was with a group of academics and we started looking at the Syria chemical weapons issue back in 2017 and early 2018 — this was before Douma — within weeks of setting up that Working Group we were on the front page of The Times of London being described as Assad apologists.These were pretty unknown professors in Russell Group universities.Kevin Barrett: Yeah, I remember that.Piers Robinson: We realised, boy, we’re right over the target. They really, really wanted to shut us up.Kevin Barrett: It didn’t take them long. With 9/11, the 9/11 Truth Movement had been building up slowly for several years before they finally pushed back in the summer of 2006.That was also when a group of academics had gotten involved. Scholars for 9/11 Truth had suddenly gotten about 100 people on record, with the possibility of a lot more. That was when they pushed back.Apparently you guys were doing a better job, or at least doing it quicker.Piers Robinson: Tim’s still in position. I’ve worked hard to keep publishing in mainstream academic outlets and still managed to do that. I count that as a major victory given the amount of mud thrown at us.But this is how the system works. You can shut people up by reputational attacks.As I say, I’ve managed to get stuff published in the last few years.We did this big report for Mick Wallace and Clare Daly when they were MEPs.I’m writing a book and I had a meeting with a mainstream academic publisher and said, “This is the book I’m going to do on the whole Syria OPCW chemical weapons issue.”There’s a chance I’ll get it out with a mainstream publisher.But it’s difficult. As you know, there’s a lot of gatekeeping in academia.But I’ve still managed to work with people in mainstream academia. I still publish and write and present and give talks.It hasn’t been total exclusion. That was certainly my sense in 2019 and 2020. I thought, “Well, this is going to be the end of me having any involvement in mainstream academia.” But it hasn’t worked out that way.Still, I’m a naive optimist about these things.Kevin Barrett: Isn’t it bizarre how suddenly the fact that Syria is now controlled by ISIS and Al-Qaeda people — one would think it wouldn’t be too much of a stretch to think those people might actually have been committing atrocities. Yet the media, which demonizes radical Islam and built the whole War on Terror on demonizing Al-Qaeda, is totally happy with having the president of Syria being Al-Qaeda because he represents the West.Piers Robinson: It is amazing. That whole narrative flip or inversion of what we see is extraordinary.Of course, this is picked up on by Massie and other American politicians.The whole Islamic fundamentalist narrative was constructed. Essentially it’s false. This is a product of the intelligence agencies of the West, with Israel absolutely at the center of it, spinning a massive deception on audiences in the West.Do you think we’re at the point — as we were saying in our last talk with Iran — is this a point of failure in the West? I’m not quite sure where it’s all going at the moment.Kevin Barrett: I’m still hoping my predictions from 20 years ago hold true. I’ve always thought that a combination of a really grave military defeat plus an economic implosion could lead to the kind of situation that got the Argentine generals thrown out after the Falklands.It seems like the global economy is heading for the cliff right now.So it looks like that combination of a catastrophic military defeat followed by an economic implosion. Maybe when the pieces get swept up, that’s the time when the angry voices saying, “How did we get to this point?” start to be heard.Piers Robinson: I probably feel the same as you. I’m hopeful and optimistic that there’s a context now where these things can properly unravel and there can be awareness, maybe even accountability.But is there going to be another card played in terms of trying to distract populations? It’s difficult.Clearly the international system is changing significantly. The distribution of power, whether economic, ideational or military, is clearly changing.There’s clearly an awareness-raising going on in the US.It’s realistic now to talk about whether it’s feasible for Israel to continue to exist in its current form given what has just happened.That would have been unthinkable for polite liberals. People like me were considered jihadist crazies for saying things like that 20 years ago.Kevin Barrett: Yeah.Piers Robinson: But they’ve used up their support. Certainly globally it’s at rock bottom.Even in the West, with what we see in Candace Owens, Tucker Carlson, Charlie Kirk — that part of the American right clearly shifting away from this kind of blind support.So something good might come out of that.Kevin Barrett: Right, it’s kind of strange how they’re breaking out the UFO thing right now.Piers Robinson: I think that’s just a sign of weakness. “Oh blimey, you can’t start any wars, you can only do false flags — what can we do now to distract the masses? Okay, we’ll have to go for the little green men.”I don’t believe any of it. I think it’s PSYOP.Kevin Barrett: I’m confused about what the reality is. But I agree with you about the propaganda value or propaganda purpose of what they’re doing right now.We ended False Flag Weekly News this week with the flying saucer video landing on the White House lawn and burning into the lawn: “Release the Epstein files.”I actually did dive into that topic because my PhD work was on Moroccan medieval Sufi saint legends, and those legends are built around miracle stories.So that ties into my longstanding interest in questions of extraordinary phenomena.It does seem that if the whole thing is a big propaganda operation built on nothing, they’ve put an awful lot of effort into it and gotten an awful lot of people involved in counterintuitive ways.So I actually think there is something going on.But whether we’re going to hear the truth from a government commission, especially Trump’s, I wouldn’t bet on that.Piers Robinson: Yeah, they’re going to spin it.I like to keep open-minded about all these things. There’s more things in heaven and earth and so on.But for sure the stuff they’re pumping out is for the purpose of trying to distract from economic crisis.Here in Europe there’s a lot of chatter about war with Russia.Kevin Barrett: Right, and the elites are open about it. Maybe that’s the thing they’re going to do.I don’t understand it. My whole life the assumption has been that Europeans are somewhat more rational than the crazy gung-ho Americans, much less the completely crazy gung-ho Israelis.Piers Robinson: This is an unelected individual in charge of the European Union. This is what they say. It’s not what you hear on the street.We’re in this kind of post-COVID era where there’s already widespread skepticism toward authorities.But getting people ready to go to war really focuses the mind amongst the population.I think there is this historical memory in Europe.What German is going to want his son or daughter to go and die in trenches in Ukraine against Russia?Even a lot of Ukrainians have been reluctant to go along with the press gangs grabbing them and throwing them into vans to take them off to the front-line trenches, almost like World War I except with drones.Kevin Barrett: I don’t know what the attraction would be to that kind of war or to nuclear war, for that matter.And I don’t understand the geostrategic purpose.Honestly, with Europe, I had always thought it would be good if Europe had more power and maybe rearmed a little bit and was more independent and acted as a counterweight to the United States because I always thought the Europeans were more sensible.But now I don’t know.Piers Robinson: I think there might be some economic arguments in there in terms of remilitarization, like kickstarting the economy in a Keynesian kind of way.But I suspect most of the rationale is probably elites keeping control of the population by constructing an external enemy.There’s no strategic interest. Obviously it’s in Europe’s interest to have good relations with Russia. Russia is just over there with lots of cheap energy.So I think there’s no core interest in going toward conflict with Russia.This is elites. We have economic crisis. We have a financial system which is a house of cards. Everyone keeps asking when it’s going to collapse.We have economies which clearly need to be recalibrated given the shifts in the distribution of power globally.The world’s changing and I’m confident we will change because necessity forces change.But as we go through that change you’ve got elites at the top who are trying to hold on to the existing order and their power.This is one of the cards they’re playing: war against Russia.There were big demonstrations in town. There were always local demos every week.So there was pushback there. I think if we get pushed closer to war with Russia, you’ll see the same.I remember that a year and a half ago Sahra Wagenknecht called a demo at Brandenburg Gate. Jeffrey Sachs was piped in by livestream. They pulled 50,000 people at a week’s notice over the Ukraine war.Kevin Barrett: They arrest people for holding placards.Piers Robinson: That was going down in Britain. All of that stuff is very much out of control.But there’s a limit to what they can do with censorship as well.They’re trying to control social media, but you can clamp down there and people will communicate in other ways.I’ve always thought about internet-based communications and their desire to control discourse through technology.Most people also go down the pub and talk to their friends. There is a social world outside the internet and governments can’t control that in the way they want to.Kevin Barrett: This Iran war is the least popular war in US history right off the bat, and yet we’re not seeing huge crowds opposing it. We just see polls showing that nobody agrees with it.Piers Robinson: That’s an interesting question. Support for European leaders is also rock bottom.You have crazy leaders carrying out crazy policies which none of the people support.Is this simply the death throes of the Western Empire? That’s always the backdrop I hope we’re seeing here — a painful process that big powerful blocs and empires go through as they accommodate to a new reality.Kevin Barrett: It’s the emperor’s-clothes thing. But is Trump not already there? Half of his base now pretty much rejects the consensus.Piers Robinson: That consensus group is fragmenting.I’m guessing Charlie Kirk was killed for reasons that are not too difficult to fathom.Kevin Barrett: The people who ran public opinion through the methods you’ve studied for so long are maybe having a harder time now and getting desperate as their empire crumbles. So let’s come back and talk about it as the crumbling continues.Piers Robinson: Keep our fingers crossed and hope for the best.Kevin Barrett: Thank you. Keep up the great work.Piers Robinson: Okay, Kevin. Good to talk.Kevin Barrett: Take care.Piers Robinson: Take care. 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 False Flag Weekly News linkWatch the first-ever False Flag Weekly News roundtable above, featuring several of our favorite FFWN fans…plus long-time cohost Cat McGuire and her sister Colleen. (Cat and Colleen open the show discussing Cat’s health condition that led to her stepping down as regular first-cohost-of-the-month.)I have dreamed of finding myself in a strange country where I can’t communicate with anyone. Since I am a native speaker of English, that won’t happen in real life the way it happened to my Moroccan in-laws who visited Turkey and found their Moroccan Arabic, French, and bare smattering of English didn’t work.But I am experiencing something along those lines here in Milan, Italy. I arrived from Barcelona Saturday and have been trying to speak Italian with people. But it keeps coming out as Spanish with an Italian accent. People chuckle and answer me in English.I studied Italian informally for less than a year back in 1989, and have barely used it since. I can read Italian newspapers, thanks to the many cognates with French and Spanish, but have forgotten how to say hello and order coffee.Since I moved to Morocco in 2023 I have been spending a lot of time and effort upgrading my Arabic. Besides the radically different “high” and “low” varieties of Arabic, Morocco also features plenty of French, Spanish, and Amazigh (Berber). There are actually four to six types of low Arabic (darija) and three types of Amazigh. And high Arabic has two very different registers, Modern Standard Arabic and Classical. So you could say that there are thirteen native languages used in Morocco, a nation a little over half again as large as California.I predicted to my students thirty years ago that communications barriers would fall within their lifetimes: English would become even more of a de facto global language, and translation technology would make most spoken and written information available to everybody. Fewer people would bother to learn foreign languages, because they wouldn’t have to. At some point they might not even have to learn English, since they could just speak into their phones and have it come out in whatever language they choose. Those in technical professions would find technical terminology available in their native languages thanks to machine translation. In short, it won’t be long before everybody can easily talk to everybody!That AI-powered Tower of Babel is already half-built. If it ever reaches the heavens, humanity will seamlessly communicate as one. Then again, it might stall and fall, like the original Tower of Babel did. If that happens, it won’t be because humanity has been suddenly shattered into tribes with thousands of different languages, but because people aren’t satisfied with life as atomized individuals. They want families, neighborhoods, community.The False Flag Weekly News CommunityIn 2014—a decade after jumping headlong into the 9/11 truth movement, and eight years after being defenestrated from academia—I created False Flag Weekly News along with Jim Fetzer and the late Allan Rees. Our idea was to critique the media by way of an hour-long weekly news roundup. We would try to cover the most significant stories of the week, debunking mainstream propaganda along the way. I wanted the show to be snappy, fast-moving, heavy on terse but clever soundbites, with lots of back-and-forth repartee including occasional disagreements between hosts. Above all, I wanted to inject some humor. The horrible truths of history and current events are painfully indigestible without the spice of laughter.We started out posting on several YouTube channels and growing a respectable audience, before shadowbanning and later deplatforming kicked in. After YouTube had banned all of the channels featuring the show, it moved to Rumble and Bitchute in 2021. Along the way, FFWN has attracted an intellectually high-end audience, including some enthusiastic supporters who comment on the episodes and/or contribute to the Fundrazrs that keep the show going. (Preparing each week’s episode is labor-intensive, as the co-hosts who occasionally stand in for me can testify.)Thinking “anyone who likes FFWN is probably a pretty cool person, I wouldn’t mind meeting some of them” I set up this week’s show as a roundtable discussion and emailed invitations. Watch the result and drop a comment letting me know what you think: Should I do this again? Part of the fun was chatting with people before we started recording the show. If I do another episode like this, I’ll make sure to reserve a block of time before the actual show for informal discussion. I’ll also need to figure out how to moderate the discussion with greater dexterity, especially if the number of participants grows.The highlight of the evening turned out to be Cat and Colleen McGuire’s surprise appearance. Cat McGuire, with often-unsung backing from her twin sister Colleen, has been an activism dynamo for at least a decade, and was the first FFWN co-host every month for years until brain cancer slowed her down last summer. Virtual vs. Real CommunityCat McGuire is a real-life friend. I’ve visited her in New York, she has stayed in our guest room in Saidia, Morocco, and we’ve hung out in other places. She’s one of those people who, though neither family nor neighbor, I genuinely care about. I really miss connecting with her every month. I’m sad that she is so seriously ill, praying for her recovery, and appreciating the courage and wisdom she’s showing as she deals with her illness by taking her dedication to ihsaan (making things better) to the spiritual plane.I doubt I’d feel that close to her if I only knew her through the internet. We humans are wired for hanging out with friends and family and neighbors in real life (or “meat space” as the autist cyberpunks used to call it). But the digitally-mediated world is giving us ever-less of that. Lonely people stare at their phones all day, addicted to reels and shorts and porn and social media outrage, manipulated by governments and corporations and their hired propagandists.I’m one of the lucky ones who has escaped the worst digital traps and cesspools and instead met an unusually high-quality bunch of people thanks to the internet. I like all the people I’ve gotten to know through the False Flag Weekly News community, including those I’ve never met in real life. And being in Morocco, I’m lucky to be able to hop around Europe on $20 Ryan Air flights meeting some of them in person. (I once even randomly ran into a FFWN fan in Tamraght, Morocco, also about a twenty-buck flight from Oujda.)My weird existence as a rootless red-pilled cosmopolitan (tendance sois-disant antisémite) with a virtual community spread across the world is probably not what human nature intends. Celia Farber, another real-life friend I met through Cat, tells me she craves settling down in a place she can call home, but isn’t quite sure where that would be. Since she has friends in Sweden, she’s thinking of heading there.Assuming the jet fuel doesn’t run out, I expect to be back home in Saidia, Morocco by early June. I’m loosely affiliated with a soon-to-open café-bookstore there, Café Shakespeare, where people will be encouraged to hang out and have interesting conversations in real life. Maybe a False Flag Weekly News fan or two will eventually find their way to Saidia.Meanwhile, the show must go on. Stay tuned to False Flag Weekly News, and feel free to drop by the next roundtable. 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 linkMonika Wiesak is the author of America’s Last President: What the World Lost When It Lost John F. Kennedy . In it, she explains in detail why the loss of JKF mattered far more than not only the likes of Chomsky claim, but even more than most of Kennedy's admirers realize. She also dares to explore the possibility, following Michael Collins Piper, Laurent Guyenot, and Ron Unz, that Israel was the prime force behind the assassination. Check out her new Substack article on that increasingly hot topic…it’s very useful background information for those wondering why so many voices with huge audiences including Cenk Uyger and Tucker Carlson, Lawrence Wilkerson and Judge Napolitano, Wilkerson and Tucker Carlson, Marjorie Taylor Greene, Candace Owens, and most importantly former CIA officer John Kiriakou, who says that more than 10,000 JFK files have been illegally withheld because they reveal that Israel did it have been saying such things.TranscriptKevin Barrett: Welcome to Truth Jihad Audio Visual. I’m Kevin Barrett, doing the radio show for years and now some video too. I try to bring on important authors and writers to translate the written word into some spoken dialogue. We have a very important author today, Monika Weisak. She’s written some great books on a number of topics, probably none more important than America’s Last President: What the World Lost When It Lost John F. Kennedy. So…hello Monika, how are you?Monika Wiesak:I’m good. Thank you very much for having me on today. Kevin Barrett: It’s great to have you and meet you. I admire your work. Here is your book on JFK, America’s Last President: What the World Lost When It Lost John F. Kennedy. And I think it’s an important book because the only thing remotely close to it that I know of anyway is the James Douglass book JFK and the Unspeakable, which is primarily about the assassination, but it touches on the reasons for the assassination, which were essentially that John F. Kennedy was standing up for the public interest against a long list of people who didn’t have the public interest in mind at all. But your book focuses on that and not so much on the assassination, and I think it’s a great contribution, so congratulations.Monika Wiesak: Thank you.Kevin Barrett: The last chapters on the assassination kind of hint—actually, you could go from that last chapter to the Douglass book, and it would be a pretty good segue, wouldn’t it?Monika Wiesak: Yeah, what I wanted to do is, I felt like nobody had really answered the question. The subtitle of the book is What the World Lost When It Lost John F. Kennedy. And I felt like no book had really properly answered that question because the first question to ask about any massive historical assassination is what changed, or what did we lose, or why does it matter? And I felt like a lot of the books were focusing on the technicalities of the assassination or were theorizing about what might have happened.Kevin Barrett: That’s a great point. And that’s actually something that doesn’t come out nearly as forcefully in the Douglass book. It’s kind of implicit, right?And it’s quite shocking, really, how radically different the world might have been had the Kennedy program succeeded. And how do we even start to think about something that massive?Monika Wiesak: Yes. It’s sort of why I put it together, because it was so much more than I imagined. Before I studied his presidency, what I’d kind of heard rumblings of was, oh, maybe Vietnam or things of that nature, but it’s really the whole world. It’s Africa, it’s the Congo, it’s Latin America, it’s Indonesia, it’s Laos and Vietnam, it’s the Middle East, it’s Palestine. All of these policies changed drastically upon his assassination.Kennedy was very much in support of Third World nationalism. He gave a lot of foreign aid to Africa, to Latin America. I think foreign aid to Africa increased something like fivefold. He did the Alliance for Progress for Latin America, which was to help those countries become independent and help make them not so reliant on just a primary export, but really to develop their own economies.I think he just viewed the world as sort of... We were catering to the ultra-wealthy in the United States, as we do today, rather than the lives of your average American.Kevin Barrett: Right. That quality of Kennedy’s, that he actually had compassion for ordinary people and wanted to set policies that served their interests, really shines through in your book. And that includes both Americans and people outside of the U.S. And I think a lot of people have missed much, if not all, of this. I know for many years I’d read people like Noam Chomsky, who is anti-Kennedy and basically tries to claim that anybody who cares about that assassination is completely misguided and Kennedy was ruthless.So to what do you attribute that kind of second assassination of Kennedy that came from many different quarters, including from the left, from Chomsky? What was behind that?Monika Wiesak: Yeah, it’s got to be because they don’t want people to care, right? If you want to cover up a coup d’état that occurred, one of the easiest ways to cover it up—there’s two ways to cover it up, right? One is to cover up the crime itself, which they did with the Warren Commission and whatnot. But they didn’t do a great job of it because it’s a difficult crime to physically cover up.So the other way to cover it up is to make people not care. And in some ways that’s a more effective way.Like Chomsky said, “Who cares who killed JFK? Who cares if it was a jealous husband?” Implying it doesn’t even matter if it was a conspiracy. It doesn’t even matter if it wasn’t Oswald because Kennedy meant nothing to this world.Kevin Barrett: Was he alluding to Cord Meyer and Kennedy’s relationship?Monika Wiesak: I don’t know what he was alluding to, but I think what he was alluding to was that it doesn’t matter. It doesn’t matter if Oswald did it or not because nothing changed when Kennedy died, I think is what Chomsky’s argument is. And you have to really question Chomsky because it’s very obvious that a massive amount did change. One just needs to look at the historical record to see that. So one has to wonder what Chomsky’s intentions were in downplaying it.And I think his intentions were to make people not care. He said that bluntly: why should anyone care?And so I think it’s because something like the assassination of a president is something that can really mobilize people. There are a lot of atrocities happening around the world, and it’s a horrible thing to say, but it’s difficult to get Americans to really understand those atrocities or really put in the effort to try to correct them because they don’t really grasp them. They’re so distant from Americans’ everyday lives.But the murder of America’s president—people understand that. People grasp that. People are impacted by that. So that’s something that could actually mobilize the public.Kevin Barrett: Chomsky also said at one point—and I think when people pressed him on JFK and made some of the points you just made—he switched tacks and said that it would be sort of fatal for the left, meaning his people, to try to take on the people who had the power to kill a president. They would be far too powerful to take on. It would be suicide to try to take them on. He actually said that, which struck me as bizarre.Monika Wiesak:Yeah, that is bizarre, because if enough people speak about it, there’s nothing that can be done about it. You can’t stop the truth if enough people speak on it. Chomsky had a pretty large following, so he absolutely could have mobilized people to try to do something about the Kennedy assassination if he wanted to.Kevin Barrett:Or 9/11, for that matter.Monika Wiesak:Yeah, or any major crime. I think he could have mobilized people, but he chose not to, and I think that makes his career look highly problematic.Kevin Barrett:Yeah, I agree completely. So getting back to this situation that Kennedy faced, it was kind of an interesting historical moment, wasn’t it, with the Cold War taking on a whole new dimension as the USSR was just bringing online a really serious nuclear weapons force that could challenge the American force and actually would match and challenge it within a decade.Kennedy takes over just in time to start overseeing that. And he is really pretty much the only U.S. president, one of very few global leaders in the West, that’s sympathetic to these movements that shook off European domination. Those two things by themselves already, even setting aside the economy and the economic issues and the civil rights issues and so on and so forth, this was really a world historical moment, wasn’t it?Monika Wiesak:Oh, absolutely. And I think there were two major things happening at that time.One was there was a real risk of World War III. There were many in the U.S. military who were itching for war with the Soviets, who thought now is the time to get rid of the Soviets. We have to do it before 1963, before their weapons become too sophisticated. If we do it now, like you said, we might only lose 20 million. If we wait a few years...And at the same time, all of these countries in Africa particularly, but all around the world, had just recently become independent. When Eisenhower was president, he had on average one African leader a year come to the White House. During Kennedy’s 36 months, he had on average one African leader or head of state a month come to the White House.Kevin Barrett:I didn’t know that until I read your book. That’s fascinating.Monika Wiesak:Yeah. So pretty much every month he’d have some head of state from Africa come to the United States to visit. It wasn’t just that he gave them a lot of aid, but he formed very friendly relations with them. He rolled out the red carpet for them.When Algeria went independent, he had this huge event at the White House. It was just this spectacular event for them. And you can’t imagine that happening today in the U.S., all these countries being celebrated.He pushed Portugal hard to try to give Angola independence during his presidency. And he was very supportive of these countries staying unaligned. Back then there was something called the Non-Aligned Movement. That was countries that didn’t want to align with the United States or with the Soviets, but just kind of wanted to be independent and make their own decisions. And Kennedy was very supportive of the Non-Aligned Movement, which was led by Sukarno, the president of Indonesia. They had a conference in Belgrade while he was president, and Kennedy was very supportive of that.So he was not into America being the dominant power. He was into America having friendly relations with all these other independent nations, and he felt that was best for the stability of the world and that was best for Americans.It wasn’t to the benefit of the average American for the U.S. to be an imperial power. It wasn’t to the benefit of the average American for the U.S. to get caught up in wars or to be dominated by a few oligarchs. It was best for the average American to live in a peaceful, cooperative world with other countries. That’s sort of how Kennedy viewed the world.Kevin Barrett:Flynn and Hillary Leverett wrote Going to Tehran, arguing for a sort of JFK-style policy towards Iran. In other words, we don’t have to be totally hostile and constantly sponsor terrorism against them, trying to overthrow their government. We can disagree with them on certain things, but also have a productive relationship, trade with them. We’ll get more influence that way.But those people never seem to win ever since Kennedy was killed. And you have to think there’s kind of a direct link there.Monika Wiesak:Oh, absolutely. Kennedy actually visited Iran in 1951. It wasn’t in my book, but he went in 1951. Then he went on these TV shows afterwards, and he wrote in his diary that the U.S. should work with Mossadegh, that the British were being really unfair, and that the British were exploiting the Iranian people, and that America needed to work with Mossadegh and with the people in Iran. So his view is very opposite to what happened later, which was the coup in 1953 that installed the Shah.Even back then, as a young congressman—he wasn’t even senator yet—he was already going on TV and talking about the importance of supporting local populations and supporting their desires. He just viewed the world in a very different way, and I think he would be absolutely horrified at what’s happening in the Middle East today.And he predicted it, right? Because if you look at his letters and his memos and his meetings, one quote he said in his meetings—which wasn’t in my book—is that he wanted the Nuclear Test Ban Treaty, or one of the most important reasons to get the Nuclear Test Ban Treaty, was to stop countries like Israel and Egypt from getting nukes. And he’s like, if they get nukes, we’re going to be, quote unquote, “in a b***h of a scenario.”So that’s where we are. That’s exactly where we are 60 years later. I think he would be horrified, but I don’t think he’d be surprised because he felt like this is where it would lead if something wasn’t done to keep the nuclear genie in the bottle, so to speak.Kevin Barrett: Indeed, yeah. And I think he would probably be one of the few mainstream American politicians to very strongly condemn the genocide of Gaza as well. That’s something that you can’t imagine Kennedy presiding over: the United States supporting Israel flattening Gaza and killing tens of thousands of women and children that way.Monika Wiesak: No, because when he was president, he supported Palestinian right of return. Now, he tried to do it in a very fair way in terms of it wasn’t just “everybody go back,” but everybody gets the choice to go back. So he supported the Joseph Johnson plan through the UN, where the idea was that every refugee would get the choice to go back, the choice to be compensated, or the choice to move to another nation.And it was sort of in favor of compensation. Because it was sort of in favor of compensation, they estimated maybe 10% of refugees would choose to go back. But they felt that was a fair way where everyone would get a choice, where it wouldn’t flood Israel with refugees at the same time.But obviously the Joseph Johnson plan ended up falling apart. Israel was very opposed to it. A lot of the Arab nations were opposed to it because they thought it was unfair.Kevin Barrett: And there are many people today arguing that the driving force behind the assassination was probably Israel and its friends in the American establishment, especially the CIA and especially a certain James Jesus Angleton. That debate is still ongoing, but I think the people arguing that the Israeli factor was probably bigger than the Vietnam factor are picking up steam. And to the extent that that’s the case, that certainly would reinforce what you said: that the Middle East would be radically different today if he had lived.Monika Wiesak:Oh, absolutely. I think it’s by far the greatest long-term impact and the greatest short-term impact. And that’s kind of why I put out a Substack article a week or two ago to show the timeline of Kennedy’s policies toward Israel and a timeline of the assassination so people can see how closely those two timelines line up.Kennedy had started some cursory inspections of Dimona in September 1962, but Israel concocted this elaborate ruse to fool inspectors. Kennedy then spoke with Golda Meir on December 27, 1962, and he said, “I want much more thorough and frequent access to Dimona.”So really that whole spring into the summer, into June, Israel kept delaying JFK. They kept coming up with excuse after excuse as to why they couldn’t do inspections. Finally JFK got fed up in the middle of May. He even considered leaking Ben-Gurion’s refusal to the papers.But then Ben-Gurion responded and said, “We can do inspections at the end of the year.” And Kennedy responded and said, “No, the end of the year is not acceptable. I want inspections this summer.” And the next day Ben-Gurion resigned.So to me, it looks like Ben-Gurion’s plan was to stay and delay Kennedy to the end of the year. When Kennedy wasn’t going for that, he had no choice but to resign, as that was the only way left to delay Kennedy. And of course when he resigned, a new administration came into place and they immediately contacted the State Department. They were still writing letters to the U.S. saying, “Don’t worry, these French rumors are false. You’re going to get your inspections before the reactor goes critical.”And of course Kennedy gets assassinated. The reactor goes critical in early January, and no inspections ever happen before it goes critical. There were some inspections Lyndon Johnson did after it went critical, but they’re not at all the inspections that Kennedy wanted.And I think it’s a fair question to ask: because there were also memos speculating where are they getting their uranium from, because they were trying to figure out where they were getting their materials from. So there’s an argument to be made that if those inspections happened, maybe they would have figured out that the uranium came from NUMEC in Pennsylvania. And that could have potentially, at the very least for negligence if for nothing else, implicated Angleton.So I think Angleton had a personal motive to make sure Kennedy doesn’t find out what’s going on at Dimona, where this uranium was coming from, because that has personal impact on him, forget the geopolitical impact. So I think in the immediate term they tremendously benefited from the assassination because whatever was going on there was never uncovered. And if Kennedy had determined that there was some illegal activity going on, he would have gone after that. There’s no doubt. And with Bobby Kennedy as attorney general, there could have been a lot of people in a lot of trouble potentially. But then also in the long term, because they still have the bomb today, and the reason that they’re able to do what they did in Gaza these last few years, I think a big part of the reason is because they have nukes. And when you have nukes, you can get away with a lot more than you would have been able to get away with if you didn’t have nukes. So they’re still benefiting from that crime every single day of every year for the last 60-plus years. And they’ll still be benefiting from it probably 100 years from now, 200 years from now, 300 years from now. As long as they have nuclear weapons, they’ll be benefiting from the Kennedy assassination. Because I think there’s a good chance that JFK would have not just shut down their nuclear program in that moment, but if he had caught them funneling materials from the U.S. and whatnot, he might have permanently shut down their nuclear program and it was never getting off the ground again.And so I think people really have to look at the long-term ramifications. Because when you look at something like Vietnam, yes, it was absolutely horrific. Yes, it would not have happened had Kennedy stayed president. But it’s not happening today. So that was more of a short-term benefit of the assassination. And the other thing is, if you look at the timelines, that assassination planning seems to have activity going on that’s setting up the assassination starting in the spring of ‘63. Kennedy didn’t sign that NSAM to withdraw the first advisors until October ‘63, but the assassination planning is far along by then. So I don’t think signing that NSAM to withdraw the advisors had any impact on the assassination. Again, we’ve already had movements in like March and April that seems to be setting this assassination in motion. So to me, like I’m looking at what was happening in late 1962, early 1963 to set this thing in motion. And that’s sort of what I wanted to emphasize with my timeline is, at least for me, a lot of people view it as Kennedy was just too problematic of a president. You know, he—there’s—it’s just he was going to get assassinated because, to your point, Kevin, he was making too many power segments angry. And I think that’s why they were able to get away with it, whoever did it, because nobody cared for Kennedy. They were all like, “Thank God he’s gone,” I think was the general kind of sense. Kevin Barrett: There was supposedly applause that broke out in the CIA station in South Korea when the news of his assassination broke, which is really kind of astounding and disgusting.Monika Wiesak: Yeah. So I think there were many, many power sectors that were relieved to see him gone. I don’t want to use the word simplistic, but it’s almost like when you mesh together a bunch of motives that you’re not really thinking about timelines and you’re not really thinking about when did this start, what could have triggered it. Whereas for me, timelines are really important, and I think it’s important to look at those policies that did change during that time period that were crucial in November 1963 that couldn’t wait till re-election because Kennedy was about to go into a re-election year.I mentioned in my article that Goldwater was a bigger hawk on Vietnam than LBJ. So if I’m someone that wants the Vietnam War, why not just sabotage his reelection campaign? And I don’t know—again, I don’t know who was behind the assassination. I can’t say anything for certain, but I think people need to take into account: who wanted LBJ in power, who couldn’t wait until Goldwater, how do these timelines line up? And these are all really important questions.And I think we need to get into those details rather than just saying everyone in power hated Kennedy, because then we’ll never get to the bottom of it. Because then it just stays as this vague thing, he killed by this vague entity, rather than, no, he was killed by people with names and faces. And I think we need to figure out who those names and faces were.Kevin Barrett: Right. I recently learned that Edward J. Epstein had created a shadow 9/11 commission after 9/11 and invited Ghislaine Maxwell to join it. And that raised all kinds of alarm bells for me because way back in the day, when I started looking at this, back in the 1970s, when Edward J. Epstein was publishing JFK assassination stuff, including—what was that book of his on Oswald?Monika Wiesak: Legend.Kevin Barrett: It’s called Legend: The Secret World of Lee Harvey Oswald. And in that book, apparently his main source was Angleton, who now everybody suspects is the CIA guy that the Israelis went through to kill Kennedy. Epstein was involved in the suspected Mossad assassination of George De Mohrenschildt to prevent him from testifying at the House Investigations Committee. So the fact that this very suspicious character who seems to be involved in covering up the JFK assassination for Angleton and the Israelis, namely Edward J. Epstein, was inviting Ghislaine Maxwell onto a shadow 9/11 commission, whatever that was—you know, it made me wonder whether there was like a shadow JFK commission too that Epstein had been on—namely people on the inside who are trying to prevent the truth from coming out. And that the same Epstein somehow wound up on the same thing for 9/11, which frankly I think was probably perpetrated by the same people who killed JFK. So that’s a lot of stuff to throw at you, but there it is.Monika Wiesak: Yeah, so I know Epstein wrote a book. I didn’t read his book, but it questioned the official narrative in terms of Oswald being the lone gunman. And I think it questioned the official narrative, so he was considered a skeptic or a Warren Commission critic. But then he used Angleton as his source for the article.And so, you know—and then everybody—I don’t think there’s very much—there’s no doubt that Angleton controlled Oswald’s files. I think everyone’s in agreement in that. I think everyone who studies the assassination views Angleton as a suspicious character. I think he’s the one person that everyone agrees on. Whoever people think the prime culprit was, they all tend to agree that Angleton was central to this thing because he controlled Oswald’s files. He was sort of the architect of the Oswald legend or whatnot, or at least one of the architects.So I think everyone suspects Angleton regardless of their view of the assassination. And the fact that then Epstein used Angleton as a source for his book does make you wonder: was this to drive skeptics in a certain direction? Was this to mislead skeptics and get them spending time on something they shouldn’t be spending time on or looking into things they shouldn’t be looking into rather than focusing on other things?And I do think in a lot of ways not enough focus is given on Kennedy’s policies. And that’s another reason when I wrote America’s Last President and why I didn’t want to even touch on the assassination, because I feel like people feel they can solve the crime by studying Dealey Plaza, and it doesn’t work that way. You have to first really understand the intricacies of Kennedy’s policies and the timings of his policies and when everything was happening.Because sort of what happened to me is that I had read Douglass’s book, JFK and the Unspeakable. And the conclusions in the book made no sense to me at all because it was sort of like: “We want war, we want war, we kill this man, we control the autopsy. If we want, we can say there were multiple shooters—the easiest excuse in the world to say that the Cubans did it. But no, instead we push this lone nut theory. And we do it all because LBJ said so.”So you’re going to kill one president and then just listen to the next who tells you he’s not going to give you what you want? It just made no sense to me—that conclusion of that book made no sense to me. And so I was like, I don’t know what happened, but I know this didn’t happen, like not the way—or at least this hypothesis can’t be correct.I went to study Kennedy’s presidency, and then the other thing I realized right away was, well, wait a minute, this whole story or thesis that he changed is not accurate either. Because I can see here based in the 1940s, 1950s, he’s an anti-colonialist, he’s pro-peace. In his very first State of the Union, he’s talking about we should explore space with the Soviets. This wasn’t in 1963—he’s saying this in January 1961.So I’m realizing, wait, that’s not right either. And so that’s what made me think this can only be solved if people really, really study his policies, really understand them, because his policies were incredibly consistent. He was always pro-peace. He was always anti-colonialism. He was never working for the oligarchs. He didn’t go through this massive transformation during his presidency.I mean, obviously the Cuban Missile Crisis impacted him as a human being. How could it not? So I’m not trying to underscore the fact that he wasn’t emotionally impacted by that event, because I think he was. But his views didn’t change. It maybe reinforced the views he already had.So I just feel like we really need to focus on Kennedy’s policies, on the timelines of those policies, and also what was immediately urgent, what was long-term urgent, and things like that, and not oversimplify it because I feel people oversimplify it too much as “Kennedy was a good guy, he was working for the people, so he got killed.” And while I agree that that’s true, it keeps you from really studying the assassination in any depth because you oversimplify it.You oversimplify it when you say, “Oh, the military-industrial complex hated JFK.” But JFK increased military spending. So why is some war profiteer or military contractor going to kill someone who’s increasing their profits? As a percentage of GDP, military spending back then was much higher than it is today.Kevin Barrett: Until Trump’s increase kicks in.Monika Wiesak: Yeah. Yes, I should say that. Yeah. But it stayed stable between JFK and LBJ. And the reason Kennedy was a big military spender is not because he wanted to go to war, but he wanted to diversify the defense establishment. So he was horrified—absolutely horrified—by the fact that his military were like, “Well, if we get into any little scuffle with the Soviets, just drop your nukes.” And that to him was absolutely horrifying. He’s like, “I don’t want my first response to a small scuffle to be to drop a nuke. So I want to build a really diversified military, you know, where I’ve got lots of options.” And at that time there was also a real risk of war with the Soviets. I mean, war was a very real possibility at that time. And that’s another reason he wanted a strong military: He felt that that would discourage the Soviets from being aggressive…so that the Soviets feel like, “You know what? It’s not worth being in this arms race with the US. We should just agree to some sort of disarmament, and that’s going to be best for both parties.” And that was Kennedy’s view.And if you listen to his meetings or in phone calls, he says himself, “The only reason I was able to get a nuclear test ban ratified is because I had increased military spending, because the Senate would have never, ever ratified my treaty if I hadn’t increased military spending.”And so people get so confused about JFK, and it’s easy to say, “Oh, he changed.” But he didn’t change. He always was a big military spender because he wanted to diversify the defense establishment, because he wanted to avoid war, and because he wanted to negotiate true multilateral nuclear disarmament. And he felt the only way to do that is to have a strong negotiating position.And so I think there’s a lot of misunderstandings about what Kennedy’s goals were and what he was doing. But I didn’t see any change. That’s just from studying Kennedy’s presidency.Kevin Barrett: I suspected that he may have changed in a certain way based on the Bay of Pigs experience when he first came into office and he was greeted with this disaster in the making when they lied to him and told him, “Oh, just send this handful of CIA-backed Cuban exiles into Cuba and the people will rise up and overthrow the government. Everybody will live happily ever after.” And that was a total lie. The CIA knew that this was just a trick to get it going so then they would send in the military.I think that did maybe change him a bit in terms of waking him up to some of the realities of power, and how some of his naive assumptions that these people had good intentions back when he was a so-called 50s Cold Warrior were not true. So I think that was a change to some extent, wasn’t it?Monika Wiesak: Yes. No, that’s an excellent point. When I say he didn’t change, I meant his ideals or his goals. But I think he absolutely became smarter. And so I think what you said is very crucial and very important and very accurate, is that he did learn from the Bay of Pigs. He learned not to trust his advisors. He learned how manipulative the national security state can be and how he was manipulated into this event.And he blamed himself for it. He took responsibility. He didn’t blame anyone else for it. So he absolutely grew. He absolutely became smarter, became more savvy. So when I say he didn’t change, I don’t want to make it sound like he didn’t improve because he did grow and he did improve and he did become more savvy. It was more his ideals, his overall world vision, that didn’t change, if that makes sense.Kevin Barrett: Exactly. He didn’t suddenly go from being a Cold Warrior to a hippie peacenik because he took LSD.Monika Wiesak: Yeah.Kevin Barrett: But yeah, so there’s an interesting possible parallel here between Kennedy and the Bay of Pigs and then Trump in this attack on Iran—although in a sense they’re total opposite characters—because in both cases the presidents were lied into a ridiculous doomed attack. Kennedy was told that the Cuban people would support these exiles, and Trump was told the Iranian people will just love it if we murder their leaders and blow up their schoolgirls.So you think that that parallel—the scary thing about that parallel to me, Monika, is that the CIA, when they lied to Kennedy, what did they think would happen? Well, they were planning to invade and take over Cuba.How about the Israelis? What did they really think would happen? Were they really stupid enough to believe that this so-called decapitation attack would somehow regime-change Iran into being pro-Israel and pro-America? Or another puppet government would somehow be acceptable to the Iranians? I can’t believe that they’re that stupid.So I’m concerned that just as the CIA wanted the Bay of Pigs provocation to trigger a full-scale invasion, Israel knew the first phase would fail and wanted something much bigger that they hoped would follow.Monika Wiesak: And they figured as soon as it failed, Kennedy being a new president would get scared of this big failure and would send in the military to fix it, right? That was their hope. Their hope was to con JFK into sending the military into Cuba.And of course JFK didn’t fall for the—well, he fell for part of the con, although I guess in his defense, you know, this was all set up before his presidency and he didn’t know what to do with those exiles because those exiles had to leave. I think they were in Guatemala. You know, they couldn’t stay there. They would either have to come to the US and be angry and frustrated because they were already promised to return to the island. So he had to do something. Like doing nothing was not an option for Kennedy.But nevertheless, I think he wouldn’t have done that if he knew that that’s how it was going to go. And so he did get conned, you know, JFK. And I think the other thing is all of his advisors were telling him to do it.Kevin Barrett: With Trump, Hegseth was the only one who was really on board and the rest were all sort of, you know, “Well, that sounds a little dubious.” Or, you know, Vance supposedly was the only one who said it’s really not a good idea, but even he didn’t say it’s really not a good idea as he should have.Yeah, so I think there’s definitely parallels, but there’s some differences between the two situations as well…how about Trump being an anti-JFK?Monika Wiesak: Oh, absolutely. Because JFK, like even though everyone told him to do it, he was like, “It’s my fault. It’s 100% my fault. Like, you know, I’m the president. I should have made a better decision. I should have analyzed this better. I should have pushed back against my advisors. It’s not the advisors’ job to govern this country. It’s my job. So hence, it’s my fault.”You know, like he said, “Victory has 100 fathers and defeat is an orphan.” And he’s like, “Well, you know, I have to take full responsibility for this.”I don’t think Trump would ever admit to any mistake in his life. You know what I mean? He’s always bragging about how great he is, how wonderful he is, how he’s the most amazing president and the most amazing leader.Kevin Barrett: He knows more about anything than everybody.Monika Wiesak: Yeah. So I don’t think he’ll ever admit to a mistake. I don’t think he’ll ever admit that he was conned. I think he’s always going to try to make it sound rosy and as though everything is going according to how he planned. So they’re very, very different character-wise, JFK and Trump.Kevin Barrett: And what does it say about the American people, that the American people actually appreciated Kennedy taking the blame for the Bay of Pigs and his poll ratings went up in the aftermath of that, which really pissed off people like Allen Dulles and the CIA guys, especially when Kennedy then fired them. So the American people were actually kind of appreciating Kennedy’s style at that time.Monika Wiesak: Oh, absolutely. Because we just had real leadership back then. We had someone who cared about people, who cared about doing a good job, who was very committed to his job, who was very hardworking, who had great character, and who was very honest. And the other thing that I sort of put a chapter in America’s Last President about it is when Kennedy was president, 80% of the public trusted the government. Today, about 20% of the public trust the government.Kevin Barrett: Indeed. Can you imagine it turning around? Is there any possibility that somebody with a kind of JFK approach would have any traction in today’s world?Monika Wiesak: I think it would be extremely, extremely difficult. I think one of the reasons Kennedy was able to slip through is because he came from a very wealthy family. So he campaigned for years even before he officially announced he was running for president. He would fly every weekend with Ted Sorensen often to all these small towns across America for the couple years before he announced he was running for the presidency. He was unofficially campaigning for a long time in a very grassroots way. He had the money to do that. He had the money to travel, to visit people.And I think because he was so wealthy, he was not as dependent on other donors. He didn’t feel as beholden to these big money donors as maybe other politicians feel beholden to them and dependent upon them. And he also had a lot of unique life experiences because he suffered a lot during his life. He had horrible back pain. He almost died multiple times in his life. He was very sickly at times in his life. You know, as I said, his life was saved by indigenous islanders.So he had this very unique experience where he understood struggle and pain, but yet he came from this ultra-wealthy family. And so it was kind of like lightning in a bottle, so to speak. And I think sort of these things allowed him to kind of sneak through.And television was just becoming a thing then. And he was, I think, very TV-savvy. And, you know, I think he gave a very good appearance. And so I think that helped him a lot with TV being a new medium at that time.So I think today would be extremely difficult. It would have to be someone wealthy. I don’t think someone without a lot of wealth would stand a chance because it costs so much money to run. And so you need someone who’s financially independent enough to do it and who’s willing to put their money on the line, so to speak, and who’s willing to do it over the long term like Kennedy campaigned over years.Because you’re not getting necessarily the media support, so you have to do it yourself, which with social media today, you know, it might be easier for someone to get out there and reach a large audience.And so I think it’s possible, but unfortunately I think it would have to be someone very wealthy who kind of, for whatever reasons, disagreed with parts of the establishment and sort of, you know, get in there.But then the problem becomes what’s going to prevent that person from being assassinated? You know, if it happened in 1963, what’s to say it can’t happen again? And I think that’s why it’s really important to have a truth and reconciliation about Kennedy, not only because America has to heal from what happened—and I don’t think America can heal until the truth about that assassination comes out.Kevin Barrett: Indeed. And if that does happen, and if the truth ever comes out, and it does turn out the way we suspect it might, which is with a major role for the state of Israel, political consequences of that would be pretty powerful, wouldn’t it?Monika Wiesak: Yes. No, absolutely. I mean, I think like whatever the truth is, I know it’s not going to be pretty, but it has to come out. You can’t heal until you have the truth. You have to start with that regardless of how ugly it is.Kevin Barrett: I agree. And I think maybe the truth could clear the space for the possibility of these kinds of public-spirited idealists getting back into politics and displacing the increasingly unfortunate cretins that we’ve had over most of my lifetime.Well, thank you, Monika Wiesak Wazick. It’s been a good hour of conversation. I appreciate your great work. I look forward to talking with you again about a couple of your other books as well.Monika Wiesak: Thank you.Kevin Barrett: Okay, thank you. And where can people find your book?Monika Wiesak: Oh, they can buy it on Amazon, ThriftBooks, Barnes & Noble. There’s also an audio version. I self-recorded the audio, so it’s not professional. But if you can handle my voice, you can check that out as well.Kevin Barrett: Oh, cool.Monika Wiesak: And yeah, so you can find it at all the major outlets.Kevin Barrett: Okay. America’s Last President: What the World Lost When It Lost John F. Kennedy. Highly recommended. Thank you, Monika Wiesak. God bless.Monika Wiesak: See you down the road, inshallah.Kevin Barrett: Thank you. Bye.Stripe is Substack’s only processor and they debanked me, so you can no longer pay me through Substack. Now I am posting everything on Substack free and asking people to sign up for recurring donations at my Paypal donation page…or better yet, the free speech platform SPdonate. Alternately you can Paypal or Zelle to truthjihad[at]gmail(dot)com. Note that Zelle, unlike other methods, doesn’t charge any fees. 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 linkExcerpt:Press TV: It was the US that started this aggression on Iran. It was the US that then had to propose a ceasefire. It was also the US that then had to extend unilaterally the ceasefire. Then it was also the US that had to call off its so-called Project Freedom. And most recently it was US destroyers that had to flee as the Iranian army, as the Iranian navy targeted them when they were targeting Iranian tankers. Iran has said that another targeting of Iranian tankers and they would target American centers in the region and also American tankers.So the U.S. did everything it could. We’re talking about decades of sanctions. We’re talking about all kinds of coup attempts, bloody coup attempts, especially more recently when more than 3,400 Iranians were murdered as a result of U.S.-Israeli agents on the ground hijacking peaceful protests, turning it into riots. And then, of course, we had war imposed on Iran.So Iran has been the victor in this battle. Iran was the one who was able to push back the western enemy, the American enemy, and so there is no reason for Iran to make any concessions, especially because when Iran was bombed a second time, Iran was negotiating, was talking about making concessions on its nuclear program, not to an international body, not to the IAEA.And Iran had of course warned the U.S. that another aggression on Iran and you will be faced with all kinds of response, from extreme retaliation, from a regional war to a new management office, which has shut out all American warships and Israeli warships as well.This is what the U.S. brought upon itself. Now that they have exhausted all their cards, they have exhausted all their options, and now that their inflation jumped to 3.8 percent, which is the highest. And so it will act as such and it will demand basically what is the rights of the Iranian nation.Kevin Barrett: Yes, this has been a really amazing period to be witnessing, especially from my perspective, because I got interested in the Islamic Republic of Iran and the revolution when I was young, but I didn’t become a specialist or expert in it. I started really paying attention about 15 years ago.And I’ve really grown to appreciate the genius of Iran’s Islamic Republican leadership over the decades in maintaining their independence and sovereignty in the face of this ongoing attempt to destroy it and to regime change Iran and to turn Iran back into a U.S.-Zionist client puppet state like it was under the Shah.This war, I think, has permanently essentially decided the conflict in favor of Iran, because Trump did what Brzezinski warned against 15 years ago, which is he said “we the Americans should not follow Israel into a war on Iran like a stupid mule.”Today Trump is stupider than a mule. This is completely backfiring against all American geostrategic interests. And it has essentially given Iran the chance to step up and flex its muscles and show that it actually has essentially permanent control over the Strait of Hormuz and the massive resources that flow through it, which is the equivalent of a nuclear weapon. People have always asked themselves why Iran does not want nuclear weapons. It has a religious prohibition. But it also doesn’t need one, because it has the equivalent.If Trump wanted an off-ramp, he actually had one after the Pakistan negotiations. All he had to do was accept the ceasefire and make it a real ceasefire. Instead, he went and did this so-called blockade of the blockade, which is doubly stupid because the problem, from the American point of view, is the fact that products are blocked. And so he just made them even more blocked. And that was another colossal blunder, almost as big as his original colossal blunder of getting into this war in the first place.And so now China has absolutely no reason to even try to force Iran to do what Trump tells them to do. Why would China do that? China is actually weathering this situation better than America and its allies. They have a strategic reserve. They have diversified their energy. They have a lot of coal. They have all sorts of diverse energy supply chains, so they don’t need to worry themselves the way that the Americans and all of their allies, including their supposed anti-China allies in the region like Japan, and they hope Taiwan, South Korea, and so on.Press TV: The global energy crisis, Dr. Barrett, the IEA, the International Energy Agency, said it is the worst energy crisis ever, unprecedented in history and about to get worse. How does this equate, from your perspective, to leverage that the U.S. president has or lack of moving forward or actually pressed into coming up with a definitive solution to this conflict? Or does he not care, simply?Kevin Barrett: And Russia, China, and Iran, America’s adversaries, are all coming out of this much, much stronger. Russia is selling its energy for a much higher price. The sanctions have had to be dropped…. China has a huge strategic reserve and a diversified energy supply. And then Iran, as we’ve seen, has now got effective de facto permanent control of the Strait of Hormuz, taking it to a whole new level in the geopolitical world.So Trump has got himself in a terrible fix and he lost his last chance for a graceful exit after the Pakistan negotiations. And now I think he’s going to learn in China that he’s going to be headed for an ungraceful exit.Press TV: Kevin, for years the Israelis, and you mentioned them, so I want to bring it up now, and the impact this has had on regional resistance. They’ve been assassinating Palestinian and Lebanese resistance leaders and figures and commanders that they think are obstacles to Israel’s agenda for the region. And now the U.S. has joined Israel’s endeavor. Obviously, you alluded to that.Kevin Barrett: Yeah, I think they made a huge miscalculation based on their arrogance. They imagine that if anybody threatened them the way that, let’s say, the resistance leaders are threatened, the way Iran’s leaders are threatened and so many have been assassinated, the way the Hezbollah leaders are threatened and assassinated, the way the Hamas leaders are threatened and assassinated, the Islamic Jihad leaders and so on, that they will have to capitulate because people like Trump and the people around him, the Western decision makers, are basically cowards.But that’s not the way the resistance works. The resistance is made up of people who are spiritual, moral and have principles and are willing to risk and sacrifice their lives for what they believe in, including the liberation of their lands and the preservation of their dignity, their religion and their culture.And this is something that’s incomprehensible apparently to a major segment of the Western leadership. They imagine that by wreaking havoc with terror attacks on resistance forces and leadership they can somehow terrorize the resistance into giving up. 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 False Flag Weekly News linkOn October 26, 1972, Henry Kissinger momentously announced: “Peace is at hand.” According to Kissinger, North Vietnam and their Vietcong allies were about to see the light, lay down their weapons, and come to terms with the US and its South Vietnamese vassal.Kissinger’s announcement made screaming front page headlines. It electrified the country, coming as it did seven years after US involvement in Vietnam had become a quagmire, and five years after American public opinion had turned decisively against the war. The American people were sick of the war, and Kissinger’s bombshell promised not just peace, but “peace with honor.”Kissinger stunned the world with his peace announcement just twelve days before his boss, President Richard Nixon, sought re-election against antiwar challenger George McGovern. Though McGovern’s campaign had been hobbled not only by its own mistakes, but also by a long list of “dirty tricks” by pro-Nixon covert operations, Nixon’s campaign still faced the problem of the election potentially becoming a referendum on the war, which conceivably could allow McGovern to snatch victory from the jaws of looming defeat.McGovern’s last-ditch hope was dashed by Kissinger’s “peace is at hand” bombshell. The media ate it up, and most Americans bought into Kissinger’s claim that the war was effectively over. Nixon won reelection in a landslide. Less than two months after Kissinger’s peace proclamation, the Nixon administration launched the Christmas carpet bombing of North Vietnam, dropping 20,000 tons of ordnance and killing thousands of civilians. Peace, least of all “with honor,” was apparently not quite at hand. In January 1973, Kissinger referenced his “peace is at hand” remark of a few months earlier at a news conference, causing an eruption of cynical laughter among the assembled reporters. The real end of the war came more than two years later, on April 30, 1975, when Saigon finally fell. It was an abject US defeat, with no “honor” whatsoever. Indeed, the dishonor only mounted as Nixon, Kissinger, and their successors refused to pay Vietnam the promised war reparations, leading the Vietnamese to covertly hold on to about half of the US servicemen they had captured, virtually all of whom suffered and died in atrocious conditions as political and media elites averted their collective gaze.Today, US president Donald Trump is waging an even more unpopular war, this time against Iran. Like Kissinger on the eve of the 1972 elections, Trump seeks political gain via bogus “peace is at hand” announcements. But Trump’s gains, unlike Nixon’s and Kissinger’s, may be (criminally) financial as well as political.Last Wednesday, the Kobeissi Letter reported:BREAKING: According to our analysis, ~$920 million worth of crude oil shorts were taken 70 minutes before an Axios report claimed the US and Iran were near a "14-point" deal to end the war.At 3:40 AM ET today, nearly 10,000 contracts worth of crude oil shorts were taken without any major news.This is equivalent to ~$920 million in notional value, an unusually large trade for 3:40 AM ET.At 4:50 AM ET, just 70 minutes later, Axios reported that the US is "close" to a "memorandum of understanding" to end the Iran War.By 7:00 AM ET, oil prices had fallen over -12% with these crude oil shorts gaining approximately +$125 million.Minutes later, Iran launched the "Persian Gulf Strait Authority" and oil prices surged +8%.What just happened?Mainstream and quasi-alternative media, for once, picked up the story. Business Insider reported that “Online sleuths are raising more red flags around suspiciously timed Iran-war oil trades.” Common Dreams noted the “Epic Insider Trading.” The Daily Beast wryly noted that “Trump’s DOJ Is Investigating.” (Just like foxes are investigating alleged crimes at the henhouse.)What galled many observers wasn’t just the brazen scope of the enormous insider bet that oil prices would briefly fall, but the maddening fact that this has been happening over and over again: Trump hysterically barks out bloodcurdling threats, oil prices rise, Trump says peace is at hand a few minutes or hours after insiders bet on falling prices, prices fall, insiders collect jackpot, Iran denies Trump’s BS claims, prices rise again, Trump utters new bloodcurdling threats, rinse-and-repeat.The BBC was already onto it two weeks ago, a week before the latest billion-dollar bet:According to the Daily Beast:At least four traders made a combined $2.6 billion in the oil market by wagering that oil prices would drop shortly before Trump made major moves, according to trade data from the London Stock Exchange Group shared with ABC News.The suspected insider trades happened on March 23, April 7, April 16, April 21, and again last Wednesday, May 6. All came on the eve of highly dubious “peace” announcements. The SEC is supposed to be investigating these and other examples of apparent insider trading, a crime that can bring up to 20 years in federal prison. But according to Senator Elizabeth Warren of the US Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs: “The SEC’s job is to make sure our markets are fair and honest. But nearly a year into running the agency, Chair (Paul) Atkins is unleashing a Golden Age of Fraud…the Trump SEC has gutted oversight and enforcement tools, even proposing to dismantle the database that helps the SEC catch insider trading, market manipulation, and other corporate crime.” Atkins, a Trump crime family crony, apparently sees his job as running interference for the Trumps’ accumulation of double-digit billions in personal enrichment via various criminal schemes.Trump, who was supposedly elected to “drain the swamp,” has turned out to be the swampiest president in all of history. And though I’m not surprised—back in 2015 I was calling out Trump as a Kosher Nostra frontman initiated into organized crime (and depraved sexual practices involving political blackmail) by his mentor Roy Cohn from 1973 through 1986—it seems that a fair number of MAGA true believers are only now beginning to wake up and notice what kind of monster they voted for. Shameless ChutzpahWhat Trump learned from Roy Cohn can be summed up in two words: shameless chutzpah. While some may call that a pleonastic pleonasm (i.e. a repetitious redundancy), since chutzpah is by definition shameless, we Arabic speakers know that seemingly unnecessary repetition can be used for emphasis and intensification. Trump’s chutzpah takes shamelessness to the next level.Chutzpah is a quintessentially Jewish thing. It’s a Yiddish word describing an attitude that is not only common in Jewish culture, but seen as more of a good thing than a bad thing. The self-made orphan with the gall to throw himself on the mercy of the court is not merely a target of ridicule; he is also admirable, especially if he somehow gets away with it. Jews teach their children about the positive side of chutzpah:Roy Cohn, a mob lawyer and mob lieutenant (maybe even a colonel or general) perfectly embodied chutzpah. He rarely bothered to prepare for his court cases, because he always won them when his opponents learned that they were up against the mob and dropped out. Trump was Cohn’s goy boy toy. It’s actually surprising that Cohn, who died of AIDS (which may actually be undiagnosed syphilis more often than not) never gave Trump the pox. Or did he? In this week’s False Flag Weekly News (watch it above) Dr. E. Michael Jones opines that Trump is indeed suffering the the symptoms of advancing syphilis, which can cause mood swings, memory loss, impaired judgment, confusion, delusions, mania, delirium, and sudden outbreaks of socially-inappropriate anger, hostility, and aggression. Take Trump’s Easter Sunday tweet:Following that notorious tweet, Pope Leo uttered a saccharine pro-peace bromide or two, which triggered Trump, who once again lost all self-control and began tweeting out politically ill-advised attacks on the Pontiff, compounding the damage by posting a picture of himself as “Dr. Jesus” a week after Easter.In Jewish culture, and among boldly amoral people in general, chutzpah is only good when you can get away with it. The self-made orphan who somehow convinces the naive goy judge to release him—perhaps by insisting that he is not just an orphan but a Holocaust survivor to boot, and that holding him responsible for his crime would be antisemitic—is exemplary; whereas a less talented or less lucky parricide, whose excuse is rejected and who is sentenced to hang for murdering his parents, becomes a cautionary tale and a figure of fun.Trump’s increasing recklessness, whether caused by syphilis, advancing age, or too many diet cokes, is causing him to run the risk of getting caught. Did he really think he could get away with his lame attempt to regime-change Iran? Does he imagine his insanely erratic tweets will somehow strengthen his bargaining position and burnish his reputation? Does Don Jr. or Jared or whoever is making the insider bets really think they’ll escape scot-free in perpetuity?The Trump regime’s out-of-control chutzpah, like that of the parricide orphan pleading with the judge for mercy, is begging for comeuppance. And Iran seems poised to deal it out with a vengeance.Video link 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 linkThe September 11 2001 attack on the US set off a series of wars that killed millions of people. 9/11 led directly to the ongoing genocides of Gaza and South Lebanon and the disastrous Israeli-US attack on Iran. Since an ever-growing segment of the population realizes that the Western media and political elites are lying outrageously about these events, it may be time to revisit the “the most successful and most perverse publicity stunt in the history of public relations” (as National Medal of Science winner Lynn Margulis called 9/11).According to the 9/11 Commission, radical Muslim hijackers successfully commandeered four aircraft on September 11, 2001 and flew three of them into buildings, two of which miraculously imploded in apparent controlled demolitions officially blamed on plane crashes and fires. Among the many problems with that story: The flight paths of the three planes, reconstructed from FAA radar data and videos, is radically inconsistent with what human hijackers would and could have done. Instead, it overwhelmingly suggests that the planes were under automated control.Those conclusions, apparent in broad outline to researchers 20 years ago, have been strongly reinforced by the new study “Flight simulator study points to automated control of 9/11 flights” just released by the International Center for 9/11 Justice. In this episode of the Truth Jihad podcast we discuss the study with its author, Dr. Piers Robinson. Dr. Robinson is “a political scientist and currently a co-director of the Organisation for Propaganda Studies, co-editor of Propaganda in Focus, and is Research Director and board member of the International Center for 9/11 Justice as well as co-editor of its flagship Journal of 9/11 Studies. He is also a member of Berlin Group21 and PANDA, convenor of the Working Group on Syria, Propaganda and Media, and associated researcher with the Working Group on Propaganda and the 9/11 Global ‘War on Terror’. He has served on the boards of several academic journals.”\—Excerpt:Kevin Barrett: …And of course, this is an interesting and somewhat controversial topic because it’s not absolutely clear how the perpetrators managed to create the illusion of hijackers seizing control of planes and crashing them into buildings. Piers Robinson: Well, as you set out in your introduction, I work for International Center for 9/11 Justice now. I joined them two or three years back as part of my work on propaganda and deception. I think you’re familiar with my work on Syria and the OPCW. And when I joined the organization, we were very interested in trying to advance our understanding of the 9/11 events and build upon, as you pointed out, the very solid basis of evidence we have regarding the controlled demolition of the buildings in New York. And to try to expand our understanding into different aspects of this operation, the aviation side of things, for example. And so really that’s where the initial idea came from. We thought that there’s a lot of debate out there. We were initially working with some commercial pilots and we were trying to work through and obtain access to a simulator in order to insert them into this simulator and get them to carry out some of the maneuvers which we saw on 9/11.And we made sure that we had a spread of pilots. Initially we had high-experienced pilots involved, three commercial pilots, two of whom were former military pilots, basically military fast-jet pilots. And then we had a group of lower-experienced pilots, private pilot license, who were closer to the kind of experience levels of the alleged hijackers on 9/11. So we had a good spread of expertise and we ran through the study in two stages.Let’s just run through what we got the pilots to do. First of all, we were very interested in what was reported to be UA175, the aircraft which hit the South Tower of the World Trade Center. Now this is derived from NTSB radar data tracks as well as visual analysis of the flight route. What happens with the plane which hit the South Tower is that the plane comes in and it’s offset from the South Tower. You see this white line here going over City Hall. The plane at this point was heading towards City Hall and then (banked sharply towards the WTC). So we asked the pilots to try to replicate this maneuver.We also looked at the Pentagon route, and this is from the NTSB report on the aircraft which purportedly flew into the Pentagon. At this point here, the plane is actually heading directly towards the Pentagon, and then it starts to turn off to the right, and then it enters this 330-degree descending turn to line up with the Pentagon.And we also did this for the South Tower route. We placed them here over the starting point, probably about three minutes out from the South Tower, and we just said fly as you would in order to try to hit the South Tower….Stripe is Substack’s only processor and they debanked me, so you can no longer pay me through Substack. Now I am posting everything on Substack free and asking people to sign up for recurring donations at my Paypal donation page…or better yet, the free speech platform SPdonate. Alternately you can Paypal or Zelle to truthjihad[at]gmail(dot)com. Note that Zelle, unlike other methods, doesn’t charge any fees. 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 False Flag Weekly News linkOn April 23, the 410th death anniversary of William “All the World’s a Stage” Shakespeare (and his trusty Hispanic sidekick Cervantes) CNN published a thought piece entitled “How Would an Assassination Attempt Be Staged?” Two days later, on April 25, somebody staged yet another Trump assassination attempt, this time at the White House Correspondents Dinner at the Washington, DC Hilton. According to the official narrative, the Hilton shooting was staged by a lone producer, director, casting director, lead actor, and stuntman (it was a dangerous scene) named Cole Tomas Allen. We are told, and video seems to confirm, that Allen descended a back stairway from his hotel room, sprinted past a security checkpoint, fired a shot which struck a Secret Service officer’s bulletproof vest, evaded return fire, tripped on a magnetometer box and fell to the ground, and was jumped on by cops, never having gained access to the actual ballroom where the event was taking place. Allen left a brief manifesto calling himself a “friendly federal assassin” who was “no longer willing to permit a pedophile, rapist, and traitor to coat my hands with his crimes.”Surrounding the event were some odd coincidences. As I wrote the morning after the shooting:Trump’s press secretary, Karoline “Machine Gun Lips” Leavitt, predicted last night’s shooting two hours before it happened: “There will be some shots fired tonight!”…Fox News reporter Aishah Hasine was in the midst of describing Leavitt’s husband Nicholas Riccio half-bragging half-warning her of what was about to go down, when suddenly and for no apparent reason (beyond the obvious one) Fox cut off the feed...Weird Israeli connections also surfaced, as is par for the course with these kinds of events, including:The patsy’s social media profile featuring a picture of him wearing an IDF sweatshirt; the patsy’s name being allegedly researched in Israel less than 24 hours before the attack; and the shooting erupting at the exact moment that an Israeli magician was terrifying Melania by exposing private information she had thought was secret.If powerful insiders staged the event, perhaps using Allen as a mind-controlled patsy, what might have been their motive or motives? Social media users argued that the shooting greased the skids for Trump’s secure White House ballroom, which had been facing legal and political challenges. The Guardian noted: “Trump’s quick pivot to claiming that the shooting incident confirms the need for a more secure ballroom at the White House, and rightwing pundits’ near-uniformity in messaging along the same lines in the immediate response, heightened the conspiracy framing.” The Israeli connections suggested another possible motive: reminding Trump just who were the “magicians” who could stage assassination events, and who held terrifying secrets that could ruin his and Melania’s lives. The Guardian reported what many believe: “Israel is blackmailing him for untold reasons, perhaps related to the Jeffrey Epstein files, and dragging the US into war in Iran.”The Guardian’s phrasing subtly injects confusion where none is necessary. Blackmailing Trump for untold reasons? Back when it was Russia being accused of blackmailing and controlling Trump, everyone knew the reasons why a foreign state would want to blackmail and control a US president. Is the Guardian pretending that it can’t even imagine why Israel would want to blackmail Trump? Unless, of course, they were using untold in the sense of “a quantity so huge that it cannot be measured, counted, or fully described.” Could the author, Rachel Leingang, be hinting at the obvious fact that Israel would have countless reasons to want to control the US president? Did she sneak that one past her editors? Perhaps those “untold’ reasons, Leingang tells us, might be “related to the Jeffrey Epstein files, and dragging the US into war in Iran.” Is Leingang pretending to be too stupid to understand what she is saying, in a clumsy effort to avoid responsibility for unambiguously and explicitly conveying what everyone knows or strongly suspects to be true? The moral: If you write for mainstream media, never offer a clear, straightforward summary of what “conspiracy theorists” believe, because it might sound reasonable and convincing. Instead, muck it up a bit, add some confusion, and give the reader the impression that it’s the “conspiracy theorists” who are confused.CNN’s “How Would an Assassination Attempt Be Staged?”, published 48 hours before the latest shooting, exhibits a similar technique of seemingly deliberate obfuscation. Noting that the hashtag #staged has been picking up momentum, reflecting ever-growing skepticism about the July 13, 2024 “Trump shooting” in Butler, Pennsylvania, the author, Harmeet Kaur, offers an overly complicated mishmash of reasons why staging a political PR event would be…overly complicated. And that, of course, is why nobody would ever do such a thing.Kaur begins by pretending that she doesn’t understand what the term staged could possibly mean in the context of a political PR stunt. After a detour through the etymology and philology of the term staged (“from the Old French ‘estage,’ meaning ‘dwelling,’ and its verb form ‘estager,’ meaning ‘to stay somewhere.’ ‘Estage’ is also related to the Latin ‘stagium’”) Kaur notes that by the 1930s staged was being used to describe faked crime scenes. Such doings, she suggests, are rare and exotic. The plain, obvious fact that almost any serious crime, committed by criminals with above-room-temperature IQs, will involve “staged” presentations of evidence and/or the lack thereof, including such simple “staging” as wiping away fingerprints or wearing ski masks, apparently doesn’t register with her.Nor does Kaur note that a certain ethnoreligious group, whose genocidal crime headquarters, I mean “state,” is the number one suspect in the Butler and Charlie Kirk shootings as well as countless other state crimes against democracy, has a well-documented history of staging crimes for political gain. As you watch the following half-hour video compilation of mainstream media reports of Jews hoaxing “antisemitic” attacks on themselves, keep two things in mind: 1) This is just the tip of an enormous iceberg; and 2) That iceberg of thousands of similar cases represents just the dumb and/or unlucky ones who got caught.Rumble linkThe US clearance rate for ordinary crimes, mostly committed by impulsive, none-too-bright criminals, is less than 45% for violent crimes and less than 15% for property crimes. Miscreants who plot their crimes carefully—as high-level political criminals do—are obviously going to get away with the vast majority of their misdeeds, even before we factor in the likelihood that they have corrupted law enforcement and the media. What is surprising about the Butler, Pennsylvania “Trump shooting” is not that they managed to pull off such a complex and difficult operation, but that they did it so casually and clumsily, not even bothering to create even the slightest wound on Trump’s ear. Roughly two and a half hours after he was taken off the rally stage, Trump says in a Truth Social statement, “I was shot with a bullet that pierced the upper part of my right ear. I knew immediately that something was wrong in that I heard a whizzing sound, shots, and immediately felt the bullet ripping through the skin. Much bleeding took place…” Yet not one shred of convincing evidence, not least of all the extensive medical evidence that would exist had Trump actually taken a bullet to the ear, supports the claim that Trump’s ear was wounded in any way. Nor does he appear to have suffered the hearing damage that might have been expected.Whoever was in charge of the Secret Service detail must have known that Trump was in no danger. Less than a minute after the volley of shots, Trump was allowed to stand up and shake his fist in front of the flag in an obviously pre-planned photo op. Apologists for the Secret Service conspirators claim that the determination “shooter is down” reassured them that it was perfectly okay to allow Trump to stand up and expose himself to more potential bullets. But had the event been authentic, how could they have possibly known that there was only one shooter? Kaur’s CNN article avoids even entertaining such questions. Like Leingang’s Guardian article on the Hilton shooting, it offers an ad hominem argument against the “conspiracy theorist” by representing him as a deliberately discombobulated straw man, whose supposed incoherent, confusing arguments are actually CNN’s own deliberately distorted rendering.Kaur hauls out Spencer Parsons, “an associate professor of media production at Northwestern University and an independent filmmaker who has staged shooting scenes,” to claim that staging the Butler “Trump shooting” scene would be so difficult as to be essentially impossible. Parsons claims that a “staged shooting scene” requires vast numbers of people: “the director, camera operators, camera technicians, lighting technicians, sound engineers, special effects coordinators, safety coordinators and so on.” Talk about misdirection! Why would ANY such people be necessary for a high-level criminal operation involving a deceptive shooting?! Were camera, lighting, sound, special effects, and safety technicians necessary when hypnotized patsy Sirhan Sirhan fired a volley of random shots, distracting onlookers while the professional killer pressed a revolver to the back of Robert F. Kennedy’s head and pulled the trigger, leaving powder burns on his skull?Kaur tell us that setting up a patsy to take the blame for a shooting is impossibly complicated:Then there’s the issue of the fake assassin himself. The task would require an extraordinarily skilled marksman, someone who could aim close enough to the candidate’s head to make it look like he’d intended to hit him without actually hitting him. (Acquaintances of the gunman who tried to shoot Trump told reporters that he was rejected from his high school’s rifle club because he was such a bad shot.)And to make the situation seem believable, the Secret Service would have to kill the designated shooter after he opened fire, an outcome the person in the gun-wielding role either wouldn’t anticipate or would have to be willing to accept.Kaur again sets up a preposterous straw man: A conspiracy theorist stupid enough to think Thomas Crooks fired shots that came anywhere near Trump’s head, and that Crooks was a conscious, witting, fully-informed participant. But nobody thinks that! What skeptics actually think is that Crooks, like most other patsies going back to Sirhan, was probably mind-controlled. (For an introductory discussion including a demonstration of MK-Ultra style hypnotic mind-control, check out Jesse Ventura’s “Mind-Controlled Assassins and Programmed Killers.”) Crooks, like Oswald, was “just a patsy” who didn’t shoot anyone. The actual shooting, which did not and could not have caused a bullet to come anywhere near Trump’s head, but which likely did strike three onlookers, killing one of them, was fired from the building behind and to the left of the one that hypnotized patsy Crooks had climbed onto. For details, check out my interview with filmmaker John Hankey, and watch his film below.Kaur then implies that it would have been too difficult or impossible for Trump to use a squib to create the fake blood he smeared on his face like warpaint for the photo op:The blood would be another consideration, Parsons says. Film crews simulate gunshot wounds via squibs, small explosive devices that spout fake blood when detonated — some conspiracy theories surrounding Trump’s assassination attempt claimed that he used a squib because the blood on his face was supposedly only seen after he raised his hand to his cheek, though researcher Katherine FitzGerald noted at the time that the first appearance of blood was not clear from the videos.Another technique for staging bloodshed might involve the candidate superficially wounding himself with a small razor blade, like professional wrestlers do, but that also presents challenges…Wait a minute! What does Kaur mean, also presents challenges?! The first paragraph quoted above fails to present the slightest argument or evidence that Trump or a Secret Service confederate would have faced the slightest “challenge” in using a squib to produce the fake blood. The word also is a lie. Kaur hopes the careless reader will gloss over it.Having refuted nothing while flailing about with straw men, Kaur concludes:Given all of this, Parsons finds the idea that an assassination attempt of this scale could be “staged” to be “tremendously unlikely.” “This is just astronomically difficult to stage,” he adds. “The whole thing, from a filmmaking perspective, seems to be just immensely, immensely difficult and really based on a lot of chance.”What would be so hard about putting an MK-Ultraed patsy on a rooftop, a professional sniper in a difficult-to-spot location where he could shoot a couple of bystanders, and giving Trump a blood squib after rehearsing “hit the deck, smear the blood, count to fifty, get up, shake your fist in front of the flag”? Sure, you and I couldn’t do it, but we don’t control the top of the federal command chain.Setting up that scenario wouldn’t require precisely the same skill set that Parsons, the film-and-TV guy, enjoys. But if you think that people with “deceptive shooting” skill sets don’t exist, you must not know much about special forces, intelligence agencies, organized crime, and the rather large area where they overlap. That’s why someone like Joe Kent, the former Counterrorism chief who knows people with such skill sets, can easily see that incidents like the Butler and Charlie Kirk shootings are extremely suspicious, and point directly at the overlapping territory inhabited by Israel, Israeli-linked organized crime, and their assets in US military, intelligence, and police agencies…and, perhaps most importantly, the mainstream media that insists on obfuscating such matters. 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

Video linkWe interrupt this satire with a promo for my new book Bad Birder’s Birding Report: Nonsense Ornithology from Bad to Verse. Normally it’s twenty bucks plus shipping for a hard copy or five bucks for a Kindle ebook, but from now through midnight Pacific time tomorrow, Friday, May 1, you can download the Kindle version free...then leave a review before the Zionists get there!Why would you want to do that? Humor isn’t just a weapon, as the satire below exemplifies. It’s also healing. Studies show that laughter releases endorphins, reduces stress hormones, and improves cardiovascular function.Slashing satirical humor can be a weapon against tyranny. Gotta love those Iranians who laugh off Trump’s deranged threats, like Mohammed Marandi and the Iranian diplomatic team laughing off threats to their lives from the CIA-linked Washington Post (“hey Mohammed, I could strangle you now and collect the bounty”).But silly, lighthearted nonsense humor, like most of the poems in Bad Birder’s Birding Report, also has benefits. It unleashes the inner child, keeping the mind flexible and the heart human. Reading nonsense poetry to children—or to cats, as in the above video—is a great way to take a break from the ongoing insanity of media-distorted “reality.”And if you’re seeking Serious Literary Value, Claude Levi-Strauss would tell you that the poem “Catbird” (see video above; text here) begins with the binary opposition cat/bird built into the name of a certain meowing feathered species, and resolves it into Lewis Carroll’s famous “grin without a cat” (in this case a grin without a bird, either) thereby questioning the premises of mainstream ornithology and warming the hearts of conspiracy theorists and other epistemological ne’er-do-wells. If it leaves the reader as a smile without an ego, if only for a split second, you can always sue me in small claims court.We now resume our regular satirical programming…Trump to Declare Victory, Hope Iranians Die LaughingDissociated Press“A whole civilization will die laughing tonight!” Donald Trump’s chilling social media threat to declare victory over Iran, causing Iranians to collapse in helpless hilarity and laugh themselves to death, has been condemned as a war crime by the Pope, the U.N. Secretary General, the Office of Comedic Safeguards and Verification (OCSV) and other eminent individuals, institutions, and agencies.OCSV Deputy Director Evelyn Smirkov explained that calling such a calamitously misbegotten war a “victory” would exceed generally accepted hilarity guidelines by at least 100 megatons and thereby constitute a gross violation of international law, common decency, and generally accepted comedic practice. Smirkov added that Trump’s declaring victory over Iran would indiscriminately target civilians as well as military forces, causing Iranians from all walks of life, including women and children, to fall to the floor pounding their fists in helpless spasms of glee screaming “no! no! Stop, Trump! Please stop! We can’t take it any more! You’re killing us!” before expiring.Trump’s threat to wipe out Iran with a humor bomb reportedly emerged from a CIA study of potential Iranian responses to Trump’s declaring victory and fleeing with his proverbial tail between his legs. The study found that any victory declaration by Trump would initially elicit stunned disbelief, followed by howls of derision, and finally spasms of uncontrollable laughter that would cause its victims to dissolve into helpless blobs of jelly. By weaponizing the victory declaration and making it even more obscenely arrogant and ridiculous than everything else Trump says, the CIA discovered, Trump’s bombastically preposterous claim that he had triumphed over Iran could be made far more lethal than all the remaining stand-off bombs in America’s arsenal put together.The CIA study envisaged sending US special forces to Isfahan to attempt another raid on Iran’s enriched uranium while Iranian forces are disabled by laughter convulsions following Trump’s victory declaration. Unfortunately, the study’s authors concluded, the problem of “friendly funny fire”—that is, US troops finding Trump’s announcement just as hilarious as the Iranians do—makes that plan unlikely to work.Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who is reportedly planning to declare himself Messiah and cause all the goyim to die laughing, could not be reached for comment. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit kevinbarrett.substack.com

Rumble link Bitchute link False Flag Weekly News link Donald Trump just keeps on getting shot at. Fortunately for him, if not for the rest of us, the people shooting at him are stunningly incompetent. For some reason, competent shooters always shoot at people causing problems for Israel, like the Kennedys and Charlie Kirk, while the doofuses shooting at Trump couldn’t hit the broad side of an ear. And if by some fluke they do hit the broad side of Trump’s ear with an AR-15 bullet, the bullet itself turns out to be incompetent. Actually, an AR-15 bullet that hits a human ear without leaving any visible sign of damage is worse than incompetent. As Trump would undoubtedly say to such a bullet, had he hired it during his days at The Apprentice: “You’re fired!”And speaking of bullets getting fired…Trump’s press secretary, Karoline “Machine Gun Lips” Leavitt, predicted last night’s shooting two hours before it happened: “There will be some shots fired tonight!”Social media reacted with a rapid-fire full-automatic volley of rotten fruit. The consensus: “This didn’t age well.”Leavitt wasn’t the only one betraying insider awareness that the “shooting” wasn’t on the up-and-up. Fox News reporter Aishah Hasine was in the midst of describing Leavitt’s husband Nicholas Riccio half-bragging half-warning her of what was about to go down, when suddenly and for no apparent reason (beyond the obvious one) Fox cut off the feed.Naturally, each time yet another blatantly fake “Trump assassination attempt” is unveiled in real time before our eyes, complete with chutzpah-drenched “revelation of the method,” mainstream media goes into overdrive covering up all the obvious tells and pretending to take the ludicrous official narrative at face value. No wonder Gen-Z never even bothers to check what’s on MSM, instead going straight to the ribald chorus of sarcastic derision erupting on social media.Oddly, the latest fake Trump shooting happened just days after mainstream media suddenly felt compelled to take note of the fact that hardly anybody, even in Trump’s MAGA base, still believes that Trump’s ear was struck by an AR-15 bullet in Butler, Pennsylvania on July 13, 2024. Last week Wired magazine informed us that “MAGA Is Increasingly Convinced the Trump Assassination Attempt Was Staged” and The New Republic echoed “MAGA Increasingly Believes Trump Assassination Attempt Was Fake,” while CNN offered a mind-bogglingly lame debunking: “How would an assassination attempt be ‘staged’?” and MS NOW ‘splained away “Why MAGA has developed conspiracy theories about the assassination attempt on Trump.”Author’s aside: I was all over the Butler fake Trump shooting long before it became fashionable.A paranoid conspiracy theorist who imagined that conspirators cover up their unraveling conspiracies by staging even more preposterous, instantly-unraveling conspiracies might be forgiven for wondering whether the latest blatantly-fake “Trump shooting” was staged to distract us from the unraveling of the earlier, equally-blatantly-fake “Trump shooting.” The coverup team, our conspiracy theorist suspects, must be cackling gleefully: “Bwa-ha-ha! They’ve all completely forgotten about Trump’s perfectly intact ear, and how those Secret Service guys let him stand right up and do that fist-shaking photo op in front of the flag, exposing himself to more potential shots, had anyone been actually shooting at him…Now all they’re talking about is Leavitt’s prediction and Fox News cutting off Aminah Hasine and how fake and gay THIS ‘Trump shooting’ is!”Another shocking fact about the latest “Trump shooting”: The alleged wannabe assassin was NOT, repeat NOT, an Iranian android made of LEGO. (They’re apparently saving that for the next “Trump shooting.”) This time, the patsy, Cole Tomas Allen, a computer science graduate and game developer, was recently named “teacher of the month in Los Angeles County.” According to Trump, the suspect “charged towards the hotel’s metal detectors in possession of ‘multiple guns’” but only managed to fire a couple of shots and lightly injure a Secret Service agent before being taken into custody.The “somewhat random shooting in loose proximity to Trump, one or more feds injured” schtick echoed last Thanksgiving’s false flag shooting two blocks from the White House, where long-term CIA asset Rahmanullah Lakanwal set himself up for a lifetime pension in witness protection by shooting or pretending to shoot two National Guard members. (Or perhaps he was mind-controlled and actually shot people and will in fact spend the rest of his life in prison.) The Thanksgiving false flag’s motive was all-too-obvious: Demonize immigrants so Trump could unleash the full force of his immigration crackdown. That shooting’s PR impact was sufficient to reverse the wave of court decisions hamstringing Trump’s war on immigrants. In its aftermath, Trump halted all asylum claims, pledged to "end all federal benefits and subsidies to non-citizens" and to “permanently pause migration from all Third World Countries to allow the U.S. system to fully recover." (Here is a typical outside-the-US discussion of the Thanksgiving false flag; if you don’t understand Moroccan Arabic, just use YouTube’s handy auto-translate feature.)The Thanksgiving false flag’s purpose was obvious (anti-immigration). The Butler ear-nick’s was even more obvious (anoint and elect Trump to obey Israel’s orders to attack Iran). But last night’s shooting at the Washington Hilton, unlike its earlier analogues, did not wear its purpose on its sleeve. Was it meant to demonize award-winning teachers or computer scientists or game developers? Probably not. Was it intended to demonstrate the need for a secure White House ballroom? That is one theory making the rounds on social media, propelled by Trump’s statement that the Hilton was “…not a particularly secure building…I didn’t want to have to say this, but this is why we’re going to have to have all the attributes of what we’re planning at the White House. It’s actually a larger room, and it’s much more secure. It’s drone-proof. It’s got bullet-proof glass. We need the ballroom! That’s why the Secret Service and the military are demanding it. They’ve wanted the ballroom for 150 years for lots of different reasons. But today is a little bit different. Because today we need levels of security that nobody has ever seen before.”The theory that Trump’s people would use a false flag to get a ballroom built sounds farfetched. But as Wikipedia tells us, “The project's above-ground construction has faced legal challenges, with construction as of April 18 being allowed to continue until June 2026.” Opponents of the project have called it sickeningly tacky, ostentatious, typically-Trumpian tasteless fiasco that defecates all over the historical integrity of the White House. The National Trust for Historic Preservation has sued to stop the project, while “the Trump administration replied that the ballroom construction must continue for classified reasons of national security that may be shared with the judge but not with the plaintiffs.”Just as Trump’s anti-immigration agenda had faced legal as well as political challenges that miraculously evaporated in the wake of the Thanksgiving shooting, so too his ballroom project has probably gone from “possibly obstructed” to “a done deal” thanks to last night’s false flag. So maybe those crazy conspiracy theorists aren’t so crazy. “There’s no way they staged this s**t just so he can justify building a ballroom LMFAOOOOOOOOOOO.” (1.5 million views.)Then again, all that ballroom-building blather could be a smokescreen for a deeper and more nefarious plan: Intimidate Trump into escalating the war on Iran. That would explain three strange, Israel-linked aspects of the shooting: the patsy’s social media profile featuring a picture of him wearing an IDF sweatshirt; the patsy’s name being allegedly researched in Israel Less than 24 hours before the attack; and the shooting erupting at the exact moment that an Israeli magician was terrifying Melania by exposing private information she had thought was secret. Taken together, those three odd Israeli connections to the event could easily be read as a message: “We know your Epstein secrets, we are the magicians creating these and other tricks, and we can get to you any time we like…so follow orders or else.”Trump is reportedly reluctant to escalate against Iran due to the devastating political fallout. His numbers are in free-fall, his MAGA base is cratering, and if the Democrats sweep both houses of Congress, impeachment, perhaps conviction, or even prison could be on Trump’s horizon. The war, and the economic damage it’s causing, is the problem. Finding an off-ramp before the damage becomes epic and irreversible is Trump’s overriding political imperative. But the only off-ramp is to hand Iran its victory laurels. And while Trump might be perfectly happy to lie and claim victory as he hands Iran the Strait of Hormuz, sanctions relief, and a nuclear deal that amounts to a lipsticked JCPOA, the Israelis see that outcome as an existential threat. For Netanyahu and his cronies, the war must go on until Iran and the whole region and the global economy are all flattened. So Israel has every reason to try to force Trump to accept the disastrous political price he is paying for this misbegotten war, by threatening him with even worse consequences if he seeks an off-ramp. Those “even worse consequences” could involve the prospects of either assassination or the exposure of catastrophically damaging material from the Epstein files or their analogues. The shooting last night, occurring at the exact instant the Israeli magician threatened the Trumps with exposure of their secrets, could be read as a double-edged threat referencing both of those “even worse consequences.”Stripe is Substack’s only processor and they debanked me, so you can no longer pay me through Substack. Now I am posting everything on Substack free and asking people to sign up for recurring donations at my Paypal donation page…or better yet, the free speech platform SPdonate. Alternately you can Paypal or Zelle to truthjihad[at]gmail(dot)com. Note that Zelle, unlike other methods, doesn’t charge any fees. 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 False Flag Weekly News linkWho should be anointed Supreme Leader of the United States of America? Donald Trump fancies himself a shoo-in. Like the 1960s Beatles, he thinks he’s more popular than Jesus. He wants a lifetime appointment, daydreaming: “If we happen to be in a war with somebody…no more elections.” I agree with Trump that America could use a Supreme Leader: someone who’s appointed for life and exercises guardianship over the state, like the Supreme Leader in Iran, or the Pope in the Vatican. But the last man on Earth worthy of such a position is Donald J. Trump. Instead, I’m voting for the guy Trump picked a fight with this week: Pope Leo.Trump’s spat with the Pope, like a pro wrestling match, pits a decent protagonist against a “cartoonishly evil” villain. On one side, a thoughtful, reasonable, peace-loving guy in a Pope’s hat; on the other, a deranged Epstein-class-blackmailed narcissistic megalomaniac who might as well be sprouting Baal horns. (Wait a minute…he actually is sprouting Baal horns!) Only the dumbest pro wrestling crowd on Earth, which would be saying something, would have trouble figuring out who to cheer for.Most Americans are cheering for the Pope to kick Trump’s lard-padded rear end all the way down to the seventh circle of hell. Figuratively speaking, I mean: They love Leo and are increasingly ready to vote in a Democratic Congress that will impeach and convict Trump in preparation for a court sending him to spend the rest of his life sharing a cell with Netanyahu or some woman who looks a little bit like Ghislaine Maxwell or that Israeli national hero who rapes people to death with sticks.Me, I’ll vote for a Democrat when hell freezes over. Anyone who thinks we can solve America’s problems by voting for the right major party, or the left one, obviously hasn’t been paying attention. The former United States of America has been devoured by systemic rot. All that’s left is the putrescent corpse of the country that existed before Israel and its Epstein Class murdered John F. Kennedy and set the stage for the Kosher Nostra’s total takeover of almost everything that matters.But the problem isn’t just the Epstein class. It’s the system that opened the door to them: a fake democracy run by an actual oligarchy. The Founding Fathers didn’t intend it that way. They created a democratic republic, with the republican elements holding democracy in check by way of an “aristocracy of virtue.” They believed that if some people have vastly more power than others, well, that may not be democratic, but it’s okay because the powerful people are a self-selecting virtuous elite. People with plenty of money, which buys power, are presumably more virtuous than wastrels and beggars: to gain that money, or not lose it, they must have been diligent, capable, reasonably honest, prudent, responsible, and so on. Such people, in theory, would run the country, advised by the hoi polloi by way of elections. The American Republic has fallen because its oligarchy has steadily grown less virtuous and more vicious. Why? The most obvious answer: “Blame the Jews.” Since Jews took over from Protestants as America’s dominant ethic group after World War II, the typically Protestant virtues of diligence, probity, sexual restraint, frugality, universalist fair-mindedness, and a certain asceticism, have given way to the typically Jewish vices of greed, dishonesty, tribal nepotism, sexual profligacy and deviance, and so on.But were the WASPs really all that virtuous? Perhaps not, though at least the vicious ones had the decency to be genteel hypocrites, following La Rochefoucauld’s dictum that “hypocrisy is the tribute vice pays to virtue.” In any case, the USA was a completely different place back when gambling was illegal (now Adelson uses gambling proceeds to buy Presidents for Israel) and sex outside of marriage could land you in jail (now thinking there’s something wrong with it can practically land you in psychiatric observation) and liquor could not be bought on Sundays or after hours (today, only Muslims can even begin to envision booze restrictions) and obscenity, blasphemy, and pornography, not to mention blackmailing presidents by pimping children to them, were self-evidently crimes.Back when vice was illegal, Jews specialized in selling it. Usury, prostitution and human trafficking, abortion, liquor and drugs, gambling…such activities were taboo for Christians, but perfectly kosher for Jews to sell to outsiders. Now vice, and Jews, have come out of the closet and taken over. Everything is permitted, except criticizing the vicelords and their all-powerful oligarchy…because that would be antisemitic.But the fault, dear Brutus, is not in our Jews, but in ourselves. We’ve opened the door to vice, and the Jews who peddle it, by relinquishing religion. The one modern secular intellectual who gets this right is Emmanuel Todd, whose The Defeat of the West explains how ever-increasing secularization eventually lead to nihilism. Gemini summarizes:* Stages of Secularization: Todd outlines a shift from “active” religion to a “zombie” phase (where religious habits persist without belief), ultimately arriving at a “zero” stage.* The Rise of Nihilism: He argues that when the religious framework that once provided social cohesion (such as the work ethic and discipline of Protestantism) disappears, societies are left with an “emptiness”.* Deification of Emptiness: This state of “irreligion” does not simply result in neutrality; according to Todd, it produces a “deification of emptiness” or nihilism, which he characterizes as a drive to negate reality and destroy things and people.* Geopolitical Impact: Todd connects this nihilism to a “cult of war” and suggests it is a primary driver of the instability currently facing Western nations, particularly the United States.Protestants and post-Protestants tend to see religion as an individual thing. They think it’s about belief. But sociologists know how peculiar and unfounded that view is. Religion, ever and always, is about groups, not individuals. And it’s mainly about rituals and other actions, not beliefs. Religion is the glue that holds a community together. It promotes practices that offer a taste of the other world, in service to mapping out an orientation and a meaning to human existence, stuck as it is between this world and the next. To the extent that beliefs matter, they provide a metaphysical basis for privileging virtue over vice. But they do this mainly by infusing rituals and actions and shared systems of meaning, not by inculcating belief or arguing theology.Any society without religion inevitably rots into nihilism and dries up and blows away. That’s what’s happening to the West even as we speak. Trump, an openly vicious loudmouthed braggart forced into war for Israel by Epstein-class blackmailers, epitomizes the nihilism that infuses the West. The leadership in Islamic Iran, by contrast, is conspicuously virtuous, reflecting a society that is still held together by the glue of religion, as all viable societies are.So to fix the USA, it won’t be enough to just vote out the Epstein oligarchy. We need a return to religion.I propose that the Constitution be amended to include the post of Supreme Religious Leader, who will exercise guardianship over the American government and political system in roughly the same way Ayatollah Khamenei does in Iran. Our Supreme Religious Leader, like Iran’s, will be appointed by a Council of Experts elected by the people. The Council will consist of qualified religious scholars whose morals and ethics are beyond reproach, and whose reputation for spirituality is well-founded. (The Council itself will of course have to determine who meets those criteria and is eligible to be a candidate, whether for the Council itself, or for political office in Congress or the presidency.)The American Council of Experts will of course be more diverse than Iran’s, which consists entirely of Shia clerics. (Admittedly, Iran’s actually boasts a fair degree of religious diversity, since Iranian clerics hold extremely diverse views, though nothing remotely like what the US Council of Experts will feature.)The American Council of Experts will have to consist of people who respect other faiths and know something about them. Since our decadent society sends many of its brightest sons to seek plunder in Wall Street gambling houses or corrupt DC law firms, not to Religious Studies programs, we may initially face a shortage of qualified experts. In fact, the initial Council may be unable to muster more than two experts, E. Michael Jones and yours truly. After we are done appointing Pope Leo as America’s first Supreme Religious Leader, we will start taking applications from religiously-grounded intellectuals who would like to join us on the Council.False Flag Weekly News TranscriptKevin Barrett: Welcome to False Flag Weekly News, the weekly news show that almost manages to keep up with the insanity that’s afflicting your world. I’m Kevin Barrett with Dr. E. Michael Jones. Hey, Mike, how’s it going?E. Michael Jones: Good, Kevin. Good to be here.Kevin Barrett: It is. Yeah, we’re here. The world hasn’t ended yet. The Strait of Hormuz might sort of kind of be open or maybe not. We’ll get into that. We’ll also get into the big slugfest between the crazy president and the much saner pope. But first, let’s do our usual PSAs, public service announcements. We stand with Iran, and you can help False Flag Weekly News continue by going to truthjihad.com, finding your way to False Flag Weekly News, going to link number one, and that’s the fundraiser. Don’t let them cancel us. These guys have, but these guys haven’t. So you can PayPal or Zelle to TruthJihad(at)gmail(dot)com. You can freeze the frame and use the Mark of the Beast there, or better yet, here at SP Donate. And here we are. This is the—what is this? This is the PSA for “assassinate assassins.” So we’re told that the government has plans to kill all enemies, which would probably include us. So we better get them before they get us. So I actually called for the assassination of any political leader who even contemplates assassination. Good thing I’m not a political leader or I would have to assassinate myself. You can read the comment that was taken down from Yahoo by hitting pause. Yeah, so there she is. She’s been taken out of the lineup at MSNBC, Fox or wherever she was, not in a bad way. And Putin is still walking with us. Okay, breaking news. So, Mike, I’m sure you saw the breaking news today. Is it that the Strait of Hormuz is open or...? No, it’s closed. No, it’s open. No, it’s closed. What do you make of this?E. Michael Jones: Well, first of all, it’s an admission that they can’t go back to the status quo ante, which was that it was open to traffic and no tolls were being charged. So they can’t do that. So they have to do something else. So don’t just stand there and do something. So first they attack infrastructure. They’re threatening to attack infrastructure or attack civilians because they took out all the military targets they can take out. And now they’ve decided to blockade the blockade. Where does this end?So this means, I think, that they will attack Chinese ships so that the Iranians will let the Chinese ships through. But then the Americans will attack them and try to blockade them six weeks before they are going to have trade negotiations with China.It’s what you’re saying is you’re just flailing around. I think the operative instructions there are: don’t just stand there, do something, even though it doesn’t change anything. Do something.Kevin Barrett: Yeah, flailing around is right. Some people always thought the United States was too big to flail, but that’s apparently not the case under Trump anyway. So, yeah, this is getting crazier by the day. I’ve been on Press TV a couple of times talking about this. And, of course, it’s back to the usual Strait of Hormuz routine, apparently, where Iran has its toll booth and it doesn’t allow enemies through. So we’ll see how that develops. So this was the video of the traffic, and it seems like some of the traffic’s been turning around and going back. A lot of it’s turning around and going back. So, yeah, I guess so much. Here’s Trump trying to open the Straits. (Charlie Chaplin trying to open door.)Well, he hasn’t gotten it open yet. So I was on Press TV earlier today and also last night on the rolling coverage talking about this. And it’s Hormuzian confusion. That almost rhymes, but not quite. And, well, again, it’s really anybody’s guess what Trump is going to say next. Over in Iran, they’re supporting their government. These rallies are considerably larger than those small squares that they could fill with a few dozen people who hate the regime. So I guess Iran’s pretty united behind their war effort. This is Isfahan. And then Kushner and Witkoff, I guess, are praying for peace. (Image of them banging their beanie-topped heads against the Kvetching Wall.) Why did Trump send those guys to negotiate with Iran, Mike?E. Michael Jones: That’s a good question. I thought there was a change that the Iranians had said that they were willing to talk to Vance, J.D. Vance, because he wasn’t a Jewish real estate dealer. But then it turns out that that’s not right either because Kushner and Witkoff went to Islamabad along with Vance. And to top it all off, Vance took a call from Netanyahu while he was in the middle of negotiation.Well, the point here is that we talked about the Pope and Donald Trump. J.D. Vance is right in the middle. He’s a Catholic who was in the administration. So how do you react that way? The sensible thing to do would be to try and distance yourself from the Trump administration, to try and maneuver into a position where you have some type of independence. But he can’t do that. He wasn’t able to do that. He kind of stepped onto the stage and flubbed his lines, as many people do in history. It’s kind of like a repeat of Mike Pence, who was also a vice president. Couldn’t understand the dynamics of the situation. Couldn’t understand the way the Catholic vote was flowing out of MAGA, out of the MAGA coalition. Couldn’t do anything to address that. And so he took a kind of stance where he tried to lecture the Pope about not talking about theology. Be careful when you talk about theology.Kevin Barrett: Yeah, we’re going to get to that one. Yeah, he definitely put his foot in it there. Also, he should be taking phone calls not from Bibi Netanyahu, but maybe from the Pope. I think he would solve this thing a lot faster if he did that. Let’s get into the Trump versus Pope story. That’s our headline story this week. So Trump is attacking the Pope, which doesn’t seem like a good political strategy, six months out of the midterms. And especially because Trump sounds so unhinged. The Pope is weak on crime. Okay. And not only that, the Pope is weak on war, which is the real issue here, apparently. And then the Pentagon threatened the Pope. Did they? Did Hegseth get drunk and ask how many divisions the Pope has? What’s this about, Mike?E. Michael Jones: Well, they’re trying to—they don’t understand diplomacy. I think that’s the fundamental problem here. You don’t come on with a strong position that alienates the people that you have to keep on board. Just from a simple political point of view, one of the guys who understood this was Bill Clinton, who did a speech shortly after the whole Pope-Trump thing blew up. And he talked about swing states like Pennsylvania and Wisconsin. The Catholics are always the swing vote in these states, and it’s not a big percentage point. So if you alienate a relatively small number of Catholics, you lose the election. That’s what they didn’t do. Kevin Barrett: They alienated a huge number of Catholics.E. Michael Jones: Right, I know. So a completely unprecedented, full-blown attack on the religious leader of the largest group of Christians in the world and the largest group of Christians in the United States of America, with no sense that there might be political fallout from this. So it’s hard to understand anything other than Trump’s ego or his dementia being behind this.Kevin Barrett: Yeah, I thought Trump was a canny politician, an idiot savant who had a talent for politics. But it seems like the savant part is wearing off. And so, yeah, weeks away from developing nuclear communion wafers. Watch out for that.E. Michael Jones: He was—the MAGA coalition was America First. That was it. A bunch of people came behind. That was an idea whose time had come. When he got into office, it became Israel First. And then what it degenerated into was religious war between the Jews, like Mark Levine, and the crypto-Jews, like the Christian Zionists, against the Catholics. I predicted this would happen because the kind of moderate Protestants that are symbolized by Tucker Carlson—his background is an Episcopalian drawing on what his father lived in, as Episcopalians in the CIA, that type of thing—that world has disappeared. And so it’s going to be a fundamental clash between Catholics and Jews. That’s what it came down to. And Trump, instead of evading or softening the blow, exacerbated the whole thing and created a huge conflict for Catholics in the government, especially Catholics in the military.Kevin Barrett: Well, the problem is you guys don’t hate Muslims enough. They (Catholics) don’t hate Muslims enough. E. Michael Jones: Well, that’s the problem there. So you have the Pope, which is what you need if you’re going to have a universal church. You have to have someone outside of the political process who then can address the political process from that point of outside and say, these are the criteria you have to meet, the criteria for the just war theory. If you don’t meet them, it’s an immoral war and we can’t support it. It immediately puts the Catholics in the government in a bind. What do I do now? It’s approaching an even greater crisis because they’re going to apparently initiate a draft in December. That was the end of the war in Vietnam. They had to get rid of the draft because it alienated an entire generation. Now it’s going to be even worse. This is the ADL saying this: the most anti-Semitic generation in the history of the United States is now the 20- and 30-year-olds who are completely tuned into the Jewish question, unlike the baby boomers, unlike our generation, who are still watching Fox News. And they are now going to be put in a position where basically, are you willing to die for Israel in what the Pope and the military vicariate archbishop has said is an immoral war? That’s not going to work. That is not going to work.Kevin Barrett: Well, maybe those 20-somethings need to get drafted to be sent to Israel to liberate Palestine. That’s a war that some people would say might actually be a just war. But here, let’s check out our— we have a long list of these Trump versus Pope slides this week. People, of course, had fun with this. But this obviously is retouched. But the guy really did look sort of like Epstein in the original. And above Trump’s head, we see that bald figure with the horns and these sort of demonic wings or something. And what’s that about? Because that actually wasn’t in the image that existed before Trump tweeted this. So the very first time that anybody saw this image with that demon above Trump’s head was in Trump’s tweet of the image. Somebody retouched it, probably not Trump himself. And so here’s Trump trying to explain what happened.Donald Trump: Well, it wasn’t depicted. It was me. I did trust it. And I thought it was me as a doctor and had to do with Red Cross as a Red Cross worker there, which we support. And only the fake news could come up with that one. So I just heard about it, and I said, how do they come up with that? It’s supposed to be me as a doctor making people better, and I do make people better. I make people a lot better.Kevin Barrett: Okay, so Trump is a doctor, and so this is an image of Trump as a doctor. And then here he is tweeting against the Pope. He’s weak on crime, terrible for foreign policy, on and on and on. Yeah, like you said, this just seems politically totally self-destructive and crazy. I mean, he’s losing his marbles, if he ever had any in the first place.E. Michael Jones: But on the other hand, what he’s doing is introducing a religious dimension to politics, which is an interesting gambit to take because then it brings back what exactly is this country’s relationship to religion? That’s a complicated question because we have never had an established religion, although we do have an established religion de facto. It’s kind of proof you can’t get along without an established religion. So instead of saying up front that it’s this or that or the other thing, we have the Congress now celebrating a Holocaust memorial.Kevin Barrett: Okay, we’re back after some technical difficulties here at False Flag Weekly News, doing the Trump versus the Pope section with Dr. E. Michael Jones. So, Mike, you were just talking about the poor political judgment shown by the White House.E. Michael Jones: Right. By introducing these specifically religious themes, you’re undermining the fundamental operating system of the American Republic, the de facto, which is basically that the Enlightenment is above all religions. That’s the premise. You have it in plays like Nathan the Wise, a classic play by Lessing about the discussion between Saladin, King Richard the Lionhearted, and a Jew. And the Jew is Lessing, and he’s the de facto smart guy in the room. But basically the whole point of this is that religion is compared to a ring. The true religion is a ring that God has given, but he gave many rings. Nobody knows whether it’s the true ring anymore, so we all have to pretend that we’ve all got the true ring. But what you’re doing is elevating the Enlightenment above that type of discussion that rational people—it’s like the Masonic lodge. We understand all the hoi polloi believe in God, but we have a superior understanding. That’s the de facto hidden grammar. And so therefore we will go along that line. He broke that mold by identifying himself with Jesus Christ. By doing that, you are doing exactly what that Jew David Gelernter did, the Yale professor who wrote a book called America: The World’s Fourth Great Religion. So you are making it into an idol that is going to alienate people who take Christianity seriously or any religion seriously. And there’s going to be a pushback. And then you’re going to look into what’s the real story here, and that’s going to lead back to Baal.The Ayatollah Khomeini was right when he said America was the great Satan. The real hidden grammar, that’s that figure in the middle there. I don’t know who put it in, but it’s like this demonic figure that now has people talking about this. He started a discussion that he really did not want to start. You don’t want to start this discussion. But being impulsive the way he is, he got himself involved in something that is going to lead where he doesn’t want it to go.Kevin Barrett: Indeed. He’s giving ammunition to the Iranians who are saying that the Americans are on the side of Baal. And we’ll talk about that in a second. But let’s see, we’re getting ahead of ourselves. There’s so much to talk about with this Pope versus Trump stuff. So you were suggesting in your tweet that it looks like Trump is suffering from tertiary syphilis or whatever other kind of dementia seems like as good a guess as any.E. Michael Jones: Yes. So I said this. There’s a book out there called Pox by a lady named Deborah Hayden. I reviewed it when it came out years ago. And it’s an interesting book because it talks about a lot of figures. The common denominator is they all had syphilis. Now, most of the time, this is obviously before penicillin, but it had a huge effect. And so what they began to realize was that tertiary syphilis, which is the stage after, like 20 years after you’re infected, shortly after you’re infected it seems that the disease goes dormant. But what it does is those spirochetes will move up, and they can take control of your brain. And that occurs about 20 years later. So this is theoretically possible. We know that Bill Gates contracted a venereal disease from the Epstein episode. We know that Donald Trump wasn’t a model of chastity. I don’t know. It’s always difficult diagnosing syphilis because it always masquerades as something else.Kevin Barrett: You’re not a doctor, but at least you know you’re not a doctor, unlike Trump.E. Michael Jones: Now wait a minute. I am a doctor. I have a PhD in America. I’m that kind of doctor too. And that makes me an expert on African AIDS because that was a complete fiction. So I gave that talk in Africa. So the question is, the reason I mention this is because after studying it for so long, they came up with actual symptoms. And one of them is delusions of grandeur. Grandiosity is one of them. It’s called pressure of speech, another symptom, which is basically you constantly talking, but the normal filters that you have are completely missing. And so you say things that are completely inappropriate, like open the f*****g straits on Easter Sunday. Happy Easter and open the f*****g strait. This is not appropriate speech in any way, shape, or form. It is certainly not appropriate speech for the president of the United States. And so what happens is he’s bringing about a discussion of this. It’s completely antithetical to his own self-interest and beyond his control. That’s what I think is happening. It lends credence to people like Emmanuel Todd, the French philosopher who was talking about the decline of the American empire because of the evaporation of Protestantism.Kevin Barrett: Yeah, I agree. I think he’s the best French intellectual out there these days. So here’s Carrie Prigine-Mahler tweeting that Iran defends Catholics more than U.S. politicians do, pointing out that Pazeshkian is standing up for the Pope against Trump. So we can see who’s on the side of God, who’s on the side of Baal here. And you’re pointing out in this tweet, of course, that it’s a big problem for Vance, the Catholic who’s supposed to be Trump’s heir apparent.E. Michael Jones: Right. By the way, just to get back to Carrie, there were two archbishops on that religious freedom panel, and they both threw her under the bus. Barron did it first. She was hoping for support, and Barron threw her under the bus. But the one woman on the committee was a Muslim who came to her defense. So again, we’re seeing tectonic plates shifting.Kevin Barrett: Absolutely. Your call for a Muslim-Christian alliance is definitely timely. So this isn’t the first time Trump’s been inappropriately tweeting about the Popes and religious figures and offending Christians. He actually claimed that he should have been given the job of Pope at one point and tweeted this picture. You can’t make this stuff up. And here we get to the Baal part of it. So somehow that image above Trump in the version that he tweeted is this Baal figure, which is— I was looking at a movie or something. But the question is, who put it there? Because this picture of Trump healing the sick existed before Trump tweeted it, but it didn’t have Baal in it. And so the version that Trump tweeted does have Baal in it. Is Trump putting Baal into his tweets for some reason just to make us think he’s even crazier and more demonic than we thought he was? And he says he’s a doctor, but nobody believes that.So it’s very, very strange. Here’s one version of it that each of those figures matches up with somebody in Trump’s life, more or less, whether it’s Soros, Jeffrey Epstein, Mark Levin, Ivanka, Laura Loomer, Randy Fine. And this is likely to get Trump chased from the White House. Normally, I think Jesus, peace upon him, only used physical violence against Jewish bankers, but he might make an exception with Trump. Marjorie Taylor Greene says this is the Antichrist spirit, and that ties in with that Baal. Now, who would put Baal in this picture and have Trump tweet it? It’s hard to figure out.So Mike, what do you make of this Baal imagery?E. Michael Jones: Well, there’s a connection that he certainly would not want to make. But what happened after Roe v. Wade got overturned? Four hundred Jewish organizations came out and said that abortion was a fundamental Jewish value. What was Moloch or Baal? That was child sacrifice. What did the Jews do? Their feet were still wet from walking across the Red Sea when Moses delivered them from the Egyptian captivity. They immediately started worshiping Baal or Moloch. So this is the story that’s coming out. It seems to be a coherent story, but the only mystery here is who’s connecting these dots. Which goes back to that figure there. Who put that figure in there? Did AI put that figure in there? Was that intentional? Did Trump put it there deliberately? We don’t know. We just have to meditate. But there is a coherence to this story that I think is coming out. And it’s the opposite of the story that Trump would intend for his own political purposes.Kevin Barrett: Well, that’s for sure. First he picks a fight with the Pope right after using foul language on Easter, and then he puts Baal into his tweet right when the Iranians are out there burning effigies of Baal and saying they’re at war with the Epstein class, which worships Baal. So he’s playing right into this narrative against him. And social media is full of these takeoffs on great religious art, imagining that he’s Jesus or the Pope or whoever he thinks he is this week. And again, he says he’s a doctor. He says he heals people. So nobody’s believing that. And finally, Ken O’Keefe here is pointing out that the Epstein class behind Trump, these are the people who hate Mother Mary and hate Jesus.And this spat has gone on all week. It didn’t stop. Trump went off on the Pope, went off on him again. The Pope responded very temperately and cogently. And then Trump just went off on him again, more than once. I can’t even count how many anti-Pope statements Trump made this week. So it seems like the Antichrist spirit is manifesting itself in the White House.And I wrote a piece about this. Anyway, it’s back and forth. And I don’t think Trump’s going to call in a military action against the Vatican. That would be going too far.E. Michael Jones: I think that’s going too far, but this is an attempt. So what about the Antichrist? It has a tradition in Scripture. The Book of Revelation was written during the time of Nero, the emperor of Rome, who was persecuting Christians. So what you see here is that the Antichrist is a type. There will be an Antichrist, an actual figure that comes at the end. But I don’t think it’s Trump because he’s not deceiving anyone. And the Antichrist will—Revelation says even the elect will be deceived. He’ll be such a plausible figure. Trump is not plausible, but he is acting according to a scenario that repeats itself throughout history. Nero, he was an Antichrist. He persecuted the church. The same thing was true of Julian the Apostate, another Roman emperor who also persecuted the church. It was Persia that stopped Julian the Apostate. And I see it as the same role that Iran is playing right now. We are incapable of breaking the rod of tyranny. We, the American people, are incapable of doing it. We have a political process that has installed these people. And when God allows the people, warns them through the prophets and they kill the prophets and ignore everything they said, he eventually says, I’m taking it out of your hands now. You will be punished from the outside. He sends Nebuchadnezzar and that drags them into the Babylonian captivity.This is something similar to what happened to Julian the Apostate. He was going to work with the Jews to bring about his Middle East foreign policy, which is basically I’m going to conquer Persia. And he attacks Persia. The attempt to rebuild the temple, which is always an Antichrist project, failed. And he went ahead and attacked Persia anyway. And Shapur II destroyed his army in a kind of miraculous way. And so Trump—here we go again. Julian the Apostate is retreating back through the desert to Rome. A figure comes out of a sandstorm with a lance and stabs him. And the last words that Julian says is, Thou hast triumphed, O pale Galilean, and he dies. So we see all these uncanny replications of current situations.Kevin Barrett: I can’t imagine Trump saying anything as coherent as “Thou hast triumphed, O pale Galilean,” but other than that it’s a pretty close parallel.E. Michael Jones: Well, he’s still in that delusional phase. And I’m sure if you talk to Julian the Apostate before the guy with the lance showed up, he would have been talking pretty much the way Donald Trump is talking now. He probably had generals who were telling him, look, we can’t invade Persia. They’re these big mountains. It’s not going to work. And he just ignored them in that kind of manic phase where the delusion just before the bubble pops. And then suddenly the whole thing disappears.Kevin Barrett: Yeah, that’s a plausible analysis. So they did figure out who supposedly first sent Trump this picture, but that hasn’t answered the question about who put Baal in it. So the guy who did it was some crazy Trump supporter from Florida who’s given him money before and gotten him in trouble before. And so here’s the Baal part of the picture that somehow got inserted using Photoshop or what have you. And again, it’s a kind of a mystery how it got there. In any case, Trump’s tertiary syphilis or delusions of grandeur, narcissism, whatever it is, it’s obviously getting worse by the week, if not by the day.Kevin Barrett:And he’s lashing out at everybody, not just at Jesus, not dressing up as Jesus and lashing out at the Pope, but he’s also going off on Joe Kent and Tucker Carlson, calling them sleazebags, saying they have low IQs. I’m pretty sure all of those people have considerably higher IQs than Trump does.And then Marjorie Taylor Greene is talking about how Trump all but gave her son a death threat, saying it would be her fault if somebody killed her son because of her not being a Trump loyalist. So he’s really out of control. But his people around him are stepping in it too.Vance and Hegseth this week—this is what you mentioned earlier, Mike. Vance told the Pope he had to be very, very careful in getting involved in matters of theology, which is definitely one of the more bizarre statements from a Catholic vice president, wouldn’t you say?E. Michael Jones: Yeah, he was badly advised here. He was badly advised. He should have tried to educate the people and say, well, you know, we need some type of moral input to foreign policy because you’re trying to achieve the good through action, which is the purpose of practical reason. If you completely absent yourself from moral theology, you’re going to have an incoherent and irrational foreign policy, which is precisely what we have now. So he could have said that, but he just did not rise to the occasion.Kevin Barrett: Right. Well, he’s in a tough position. Trying to defend Trump at this point is really kind of a fool’s errand, I think. Here was your tweet about this. So yeah, you pointed out that Vance flubbed his lines because he didn’t understand the dramatic changes that are taking place as we transition to the Fourth Republic. You would think if anybody in this administration had a clue about that, it would be Vance. But for whatever reason, he seems almost as clueless as the rest of them.You can’t underestimate the—what should I say—the coup, the great achievement of the CIA during the initial period after World War II, when they were just getting started, like ’53, the attack on Mossadegh. They created the anti-communist crusade, and the Catholics were all on board. They got the Catholics on board. It was a guy like C.D. Vance, who was working for both the CIA and Time-Life, great in creating these propaganda campaigns. In 1953, the same year that the coup in Iran took place, he said that the CIA had lost its greatest salesman because Stalin had died.Now you got the allegiance of all of these Catholics behind the government, the United States government, at the very time that the government was actually attacking them through the destruction of Catholic neighborhoods. It was an orchestrated government campaign that I documented in my book, Slaughter of Cities, Urban Renewal as Ethnic Cleansing.Now Trump is doing the exact opposite. You can’t afford to alienate a big group of people like this, and that’s precisely what he did. And Vance isn’t helping him. Now Hegseth is taking it even a step further. Kevin Barrett: Again, these are all weird sorts of almost blasphemies, right? Trump dressing up as Jesus really is a blasphemy, and using foul language on Easter is blasphemous. Then Vance telling the Pope that he should stay out of matters of theology is kind of borderline blasphemous. It’s certainly offensive at least. But then here’s Hegseth reading this fake Bible verse from Pulp Fiction during a sermon at the Pentagon. The context here is that this fake Bible verse is spoken by Samuel L. Jackson’s character. He’s a hitman, and he’s about to brutally murder some kid and blow his brains out all over the screen. Disgusting, horrific scene. And Hegseth is preaching a sermon and uses that line from Pulp Fiction. I mean, this is like the Baal on the picture of Trump cosplaying as Jesus. These people seem like they can’t stop blaspheming.E. Michael Jones: Well, this is a sect that is based on a radical distortion of the Bible. We’re talking about the Schofield Notes to the Bible, which got published by Oxford University Press, gave it a lot of prestige that it didn’t deserve because the Untermeyer family had those connections. Then that became the basis of Christian Zionism. But the problem is, they’re so overt in promoting this, you get pushback from the Catholics. “Wait a minute, that’s not my religion.” Suddenly you’re exacerbating the Protestant-Catholic split, for example, at the very time you should be smoothing it over and trying to provide a united front against the common enemy, which is supposed to be Iran. It’s completely counterproductive. You don’t want to introduce religious division at a time of war.If you go back and look at the term Judeo-Christian, it basically came into being during World War II because they wanted some type of united front against the Nazis. The Jews were being persecuted, the Holocaust narrative—blah blah blah—but that’s when that term was created. It was part of the propaganda campaign to unite the American people against a foreign enemy. But they’re doing the exact opposite now. They are creating religious division by this religious overreach that antagonizes people like the Catholics, who say, “Wait, that’s not my religion.” Then the Pope jumps in and backs up that claim, and suddenly you’ve got an impasse. You’ve destroyed the unity of the United States. We can’t project power. You’ve broken apart the MAGA coalition by highlighting the very religious differences that you would want to obscure or put in the background to have a successful political coalition. So it’s completely tone deaf. But maybe that’s God’s plan. Let’s allow these people enough rope to hang themselves, and they will bring about the exact opposite of what they intend, but what God intends.Maybe that’s what God intends. I did a piece where I said we know that God wants peace—I wrote this article, it’s in Culture Wars—we know that God wants peace, but does God want a ceasefire? Maybe God wants a permanent peace that will entail the removal of this cancerous regime in the Middle East. Maybe that’s the only possible solution that will bring about peace. We have to keep this in mind when we’re looking at the global picture.Kevin Barrett: Well, to the extent it’s a religious war, all of these things are making the Iranian narrative sound much more plausible. They say they’re fighting against Baal. They say they’re fighting against the Epstein class, which worships Baal and whose headquarters of their global crime ring is occupied Palestine. That’s looking all too plausible. All of this blasphemy—whether it’s Trump pretending to be Jesus and then lying, or Hegseth uttering fake Bible verses from a horrific scene in a horrific movie—it’s making the American political class look like they’re run by Baal, run by the Antichrist.E. Michael Jones: This was kind of the genius of Ayatollah Khomeini, who called America the Great Satan and introduced that type of religious discourse into the political world at a time when the United States was basically a technocratic operation: we have superior knowledge, superior weaponry, superior this, blah blah blah, and religion has absolutely nothing to do with it. That was the genius, and now all of these people are reinforcing the idea that Khomeini launched in 1979. It’s uncanny.Kevin Barrett: Yeah, I think you’re ahead of the curve in your discussions of this topic, the reason that America has a satanic streak. So here’s the scene from Pulp Fiction that Hegseth borrowed his supposed Bible line from. There’s Samuel L. Jackson about to shoot somebody point blank in the head, and Tarantino shows that in all of its bloody glory. That’s where he got the speech—Samuel L. Jackson’s speech right before he shoots this kid in the head. This Hegseth with his bizarre tattoos and stuff—he’s definitely from Baal.Well, here’s our music video of the week in honor of Pete Hegseth...What shall we do what the drunken HegsethShall we do what the drunken HegsethShall we do what the drunken HegsethEarly in the morningHe was drinking on the Fox set before the showtime.He was drinking on the Fox set before the showtime.Early in the morning.Married at the strip club in his uniform.Married at the strip club in his uniform.Married at the strip club in his uniform, early in the morning..”Okay, that’s our tribute to Pete Hegseth.And finally, the question arises: is Trump crazy, or is he just the Antichrist? You once said, Mike, he’s not very plausible, so he probably isn’t the Antichrist—probably just channeling the Antichrist. The New York Times is thinking he’s crazy. A lot of people have been asking these questions, going back to Bandy Lee publishing the book about him right as he entered his first term almost 10 years ago. But now we’re hearing it among all kinds of people, including his own advisors, allies, retired generals, diplomats, foreign officials—they say, yeah, he’s crazy. They’re not saying tertiary syphilis, but maybe they should be.Kevin Barrett: Here’s my post suggesting he’s channeling the spirit of Antichrist, as is Hegseth, and even Vance when Vance is telling the Pope to keep his nose out of theology. It seems to me that the spirit of Antichrist may be something other than the supposed actual character, the Antichrist, who’s supposed to show up as one single individual, whether it’s Dajjal.E. Michael Jones: Right. It’s always going to be the emperor who succumbs to his own delusions of grandeur. There’s always an element of insanity to that that doesn’t necessarily have to be physical dementia. It can be simply the result of consistently irrational behavior. Rational behavior is moral behavior. Morality is practical reason. If you live a life that is constantly divorced from reason, you could call it insanity. Why wouldn’t that be the same thing?So Aquinas says, for example, that lust darkens the mind. That’s a good way of dealing with this. Obviously, he’s not a model of chastity. If you dedicate your life to lust, eventually the light of reason will go out. When the light of reason goes out, it sounds like insanity. Or when ambition, pride—when you finally lose control of that battle and act according to that vice—you become irrational. That means a kind of insanity. There’s a natural progression that doesn’t have to have a physical cause. It can follow from simply absenting yourself from living a life according to morality and practical reason.Kevin Barrett: Absolutely. And if there’s any organic physical element, it could be syphilis—or too much Diet Coke. He supposedly drinks 15 or 20 Diet Cokes a day. I’m surprised he’s still alive.Even Tucker Carlson is noticing the Antichrist spirit associated with Trump—the leader who exalts himself above all deities and mocks faith. A dark time for Washington. Iran is pushing back. The House missed ending the war by one vote. At this stage, having it that close is pretty interesting. The blockade was getting worse. It doesn’t look like that’s been solved.Pakistan is siding with Iran. So the Americans have a supposed client state that seems more sympathetic to Iran than Washington. How the next round of negotiations will go—we’ll have to report back. It seems Ali Khamenei will go down in history as a bit of a chess master, as well as a grandfatherly religious leader, because it looks like the Iranians have got Trump checkmated, which is one reason he’s lashing out irrationally.E. Michael Jones: Yeah, I agree. He painted himself into a corner. This was unnecessary. He could have had what he wants now if he had let the JCPOA stand. He brought about his own demise and the demise of the empire under the delusion that he’s saving it.Kevin Barrett: Yeah, the law of unintended consequences is coming back to bite him. The Iranians downed another expensive piece of military equipment this week—a spy drone. I’ve seen these in the Aerospace Museum in Tehran. They’ve got rockets, launchers, and American drones they’ve shot down or hijacked.Trump is not doing well on social media. The Atlantic says he’s no longer a “Chad.” He’s losing the trolling contest to Iran, which is making short videos. The Iranian embassies are trolling him heavily. Iran is winning the social media war.E. Michael Jones: The Iranians always loved making movies. They’ve had that tradition. Now they’re just upping their game with short videos geared to short attention spans.Kevin Barrett: The allies of the United States are off the bus. Spain is the furthest off—refusing U.S. use of territory, shutting down connections with Israel, opening an embassy in Tehran. NATO is dissolving. Italy is stepping back. Australia had to make peace to get oil and gas. Trump is lashing out at allies.E. Michael Jones: Where does it end? He’s going to be completely alone.Kevin Barrett: Trump can always threaten Greenland or Tasmania.The war on Russia isn’t going well either. Europeans are escalating recklessly with drones. Russia is warning that strikes could trigger NATO’s mutual defense clause. But NATO will likely fall apart before that.E. Michael Jones: Germany is the anomaly—internalizing commands of its oppressors, continuing a war not in its interest, damaging its own industry. Eventually they’ll have to leave NATO and make peace with Russia…Kevin Barrett: Let’s talk about the Internet fringe material this week...This was the big New Yorker article, how the Internet fringe infiltrated Republican politics.And by Internet fringe, they basically mean people like us who have noticed that the Zionists are occupying not only Palestine, but also the United States of America. So all these young people are waking up to this.And so here’s the New Yorker sending a photographer to take these old-fashioned black and white pictures to try to make these young people who notice what’s going on in the world look weird and old-fashioned. And there’s the scary, scary picture of Nick Fuentes. A little double exposure there to make it exciting.“On his popular streaming show, Fuentes opines about the virtues of Adolf Hitler and the nuisance of women and minorities.”Right, right.E. Michael Jones: Look, I think Israel just listed the top 10 anti-Semites in the world.Kevin Barrett: Yeah, we’re going to get to that.E. Michael Jones: I know. I just want to complain about that.But what we’re talking about here is a controlled opposition of people that exaggerate or are not predictable and so on and so forth. And then they’re trying to establish, put this label on what is a growing movement of unhappiness with Jewish control of our culture.Kevin Barrett: Yeah, they’re trying to make it look weird and sinister. But the cool thing about this article is that it makes it clear that the majority of the young conservatives are hip to this. Like, I think they quoted something like three quarters or two thirds or whatever of the Republican Senate staffers now believe that Israel killed JFK and did 9-11.Well, they did.And so, wow, that means that we’re, I think we’re succeeding in our mission. You know, there were times in this truth jihad I’ve been doing since 9-11 that I got a little discouraged and wondered what the long-term historical record would show about this. But it does seem that the younger people are waking up, and surprisingly to me anyway.E. Michael Jones: Is that, by the way, is that Dinesh D’Souza?Kevin Barrett: Oh, this?E. Michael Jones: Yeah.Kevin Barrett: I don’t know. I don’t know Dinesh D’Souza that well. It looks sort of like him.E. Michael Jones: Fishback.Kevin Barrett: Oh, yeah, Fishback. He’s the guy who’s running for governor in Florida.E. Michael Jones: So a perfectly natural reaction to Jewish over-control in a place like Florida, where the governor goes to Tel Aviv to sign a hate speech bill that’s going to punish Floridians, and then they try to portray this guy as some type of...Demagogue or lunatic? No, this is a perfectly natural reaction.They’re desperate because the New Yorker has what? Lost its ability to control the mind of the intelligentsia? They’re part of that whole obsolete categorization story that is now trying, flailing desperately to regain relevance when they cannot. There’s only one relevant topic now, which is Jewish control of our culture. That is the only political issue right now, and try to disguise that, try to demonize the people who are smart enough to wake up to it. It’s not going to work. Not going to work.Kevin Barrett: Absolutely not. And this attempt to make these people look weird and scary, you know, that this black and white thing looks almost like it’s taken from the original George Romero zombie movie, The Night of the Living Dead. But they still came through with a certain... glamour might not be the word, but these kids, to me, they don’t look so bad. But they really worked in the New Yorker to get creepy black and white photos of them to make you scared of them.And of course, the Epstein thing is central to this, right? I mean, everybody knows Epstein was an Israeli agent collecting blackmail material on powerful Americans, probably including Trump, which is probably why we’re at war with Iran.And so the news this week on that front was that Pam Bondi tried to weasel out of her—what was it? She was summoned to testify in front of Congress. And by resigning or being fired or whatever she was, she supposedly weaseled out of it. Or so she says, so the Justice Department says, but apparently Congress doesn’t agree. So we’ll see how that plays out.And so that’s the Epstein news this week.Okay, Anti-Semitism Watch, our favorite part of the show. This was the top 10 anti-Semitic influencers in the world, according to this Israeli group, the Diaspora Affairs Ministry. They’re terrified of rising global anti-Semitism, conspiracy theories, and false claims about Jews and Israel. And I guess Dan Bilzerian got number one. He’s another quote unquote anti-Semite who’s running for Congress in Florida on a take back America from the Jewish Zionists who own it currently.So here’s the top 10 anti-Semites. And like I said, Mike, we used to get attacked by the ADL on a regular basis, and you probably have more recently than I have. But I’m feeling left out.E. Michael Jones: I am fairly left out there. So I’m just going to tell you the pushback I got response to this. And they’re saying that if someone wrote to me and said, look, if they put your name up there, someone’s going to Google your name and they’re going to find out that you wrote books and they may buy the book. And if you buy the book, they will be convinced that you’re not what they said you were. So they’re not going to put my name up. That’s what they said.I think it’s true. I think it’s absolutely true.Now, I don’t want to denigrate any of these people. I mean, God bless them for taking a stand for whatever. But if you have Mr. X podcaster, who is basically, that’s all he is, well, okay, put his name up. You’re not going to find anything. There’s not like some type of secret cache of information that will change your mind. It’s all pretty much what you see is what you get here.And that’s why I think people like this, I don’t want to, again, I don’t want to denigrate any of these people, but that’s why they’re being promoted. This is a kind of controlled opposition. They also are, in some sense, unpredictable. And so you never know exactly what they’re going to be saying and so on and so forth. And so I think that’s the common denominator here.The real strategy that’s been articulated was Ginsburg’s book, Fatal Embrace. The first stage and the most effective stage is called dynamic silence, where you don’t even exist anymore, according to these people. That’s the most powerful form of censorship. And this plays into that by the people who are left out.Kevin Barrett: Yeah, I think you’re onto something there. One of the commenters at the Unz Review said something like, well, maybe the reason that they’re not putting Kevin Barrett and E. Michael Jones and Ron Unz, especially, on this list is because anybody who actually reads those guys will learn something. And plus, they can win the intellectual debate. And some of these other people, well, maybe they can, but they’re not as likely to change people’s minds.Well, this was another anti-Semitism watch story this week. The Espresso, which is the most popular coffee—no, the most popular magazine in Italy—published this cover of that Zionist settler harassing the Palestinian woman with abuse as the headline. And just by publishing that, they got into big trouble. The usual suspects, the Israelis and their friends, accused the Espresso magazine of, you guessed it, anti-Semitism for publishing that picture.Leading to this tweet, imagine being so ugly that your own genocidal government condemns the publication of your photograph as a hate crime. That’s not nice, but it’s true.E. Michael Jones: So now it’s anti-Semitic to take a picture of a Jew or of an Israeli?Kevin Barrett: And, you know, it was certainly anti-Semitic to reveal the guy, the Israeli prison guard who raped the guy to death with a broomstick and turned into a national hero in Israel. You know, talking about him is anti-Semitic too.So yeah, this guy became sort of the poster child for Zionism for this week. A Syrian girl was noticing him, as were others. And Kim.com has a fair number of followers on X, and he’s not that enthused with these attractive Jews of the Holy Land either.Meanwhile, Netanyahu says that Europe is getting morally weak, so he used Holocaust Remembrance Day as the day to try to whip Europe back into line. Do you think he’ll succeed in the long term with this?E. Michael Jones: No, no. The Holocaust is a trope of the Third Republic, and it’s going to disappear. They overplayed their hand. It’s over. It’s not working anymore.Kevin Barrett: Spain and Italy are totally out of control, and the rest of Europe is on the way. Here in Spain, they are even burning effigies of Netanyahu. And of course, if you burn an effigy of a war criminal like Netanyahu, that would mean that you must be anti-Semitic. They blew it up, even. That’s even better than burning it.E. Michael Jones: So eventually, yeah, we’ll have to ask the ultimate question: is God an anti-Semite? That’s a theological question. And I guess J.D. Vance would say that it’s theological. The Pope should definitely not get into it.Kevin Barrett: So how about the Roald Dahl anti-Semitism scandal this week? The New York Times covered this new Broadway play that’s apparently a huge hit that’s basically designed to demonize Roald Dahl, the great children’s author behind Charlie and the Chocolate Factory and other classics.So this John Lithgow, the actor who plays Roald Dahl, he says he loves the role because it’s so monstrous. He wants to be a monstrous anti-Semite like Roald Dahl.But Mike, if you actually look at what did Roald Dahl say to get labeled as such a horrible, monstrous anti-Semite, it’s very, very tame and reasonable and errs on the side of being too philo-Semitic, in my humble opinion.So the fact that they’re crucifying this guy long after his death is really…it’s revealing of the way that they must be just totally panicking about the fact that the world is finally onto them.E. Michael Jones: Yeah, and why Roald Dahl? I mean, he was not a model of children’s literature as far as I’m concerned. He was a very subversive guy, a very unattractive guy, a kind of nasty guy that came out in his fiction, which is the type of thing that the New York Times used to promote to basically remove the innocence of children, or attack the innocence of children, or subvert that whole idea of children’s literature.Kevin Barrett: Interesting. Could be. But now it turns out that they’re going to claim he’s nasty in a whole different way. That used to be a good way of being nasty, to subvert the innocence of children. But now we’re going to say that he was an anti-Semite.And the interesting thing about this whole story was that they had to write stuff into the play that was not actually part of his biography to make it look like his career is being threatened. Because back when he was saying that the Israeli genocide of Lebanon in—what was it, 1981, 1983—the first Israeli invasion of Lebanon, when they just slaughtered like 30,000 Lebanese civilians, and he spoke out against that, and apparently at that time that didn’t get him canceled. You could still say things like that.And he said some things about, you know, this group of people has gone from being the persecuted people to the persecutors in record time. That’s anti-Semitic? Give me a break.E. Michael Jones: It reminds me of Donald Trump. What exactly is the point of attacking Roald Dahl at this point? Have you run out of other targets?Why are you attacking this man?Kevin Barrett: Well, yeah, I’ll tell you, Mike. I actually have an answer. I think it’s because, as you see from this play, in the play they had to invent stuff that didn’t really happen in real life involving him being in danger of being canceled by the literary establishment. Back then, before the Jews had completely taken over, he could say stuff like that and not be canceled. But now you breathe a single word that they don’t like, and you’re toast. And so they put that in there, and now they’re trying to put that message out that if you say a single word that we don’t like, you’re toast.E. Michael Jones: Yep.Kevin Barrett: Okay, well, Orban, who, by the way, was put into power by Netanyahu strategists, is out. That’s the good news, I guess, that one Zionist, namely Orban, who’s out, even though he had some positive aspects to his way of ruling Hungary, as well as negative ones, but he lost. Peter Magyar decisively beat him this week.And here’s the bad news. The future Hungarian PM is at least as equally Zionist-owned and operated. So one Zionist out, another Zionist—what’s it? Out with the old Zionists, meet the new Zionists.It’s like American politics. We go from left wing Jews to right wing Jews or, in this instance, from right wing Jews to left wing Jews.E. Michael Jones: So he’s a supporter of the European Union, which has held up 20 billion euros in aid. And he will free that up by introducing the homosexual agenda to Hungary. So, you know, back and forth, back and forth.Kevin Barrett: Right. One Jewish Zionist party versus the other Jewish Zionist party. And some people are blaming Vance for this because everything Vance does turns to whatever. He leads Iran negotiations, the talks collapse. He visits the Pope, the Pope dies. He flies to Hungary to Papa Orban, Orban loses in a landslide. He’s on a streak. Okay. Go, Vance.And finally, our last story of the week, will Trump actually try to have a cage fight or a, what do they call it, a UFC fight with the Pope? He’s building a UFC arena right at the front door of the White House. I mean, talk about vulgarity. I mean, this guy makes Jay Gatsby look like a very refined and cultured individual. What’s with this, Mike?E. Michael Jones: I think there are very few apertures that allow you to enter Trump’s mind. And one of them is real estate and the other is wrestling. I think that’s the two. That’s it. So that’s the way he views the world, and so we naturally would build this arena there.Kevin Barrett: Well, I don’t think there’s going to be a UFC fight between Trump and the Pope anytime soon. But you can’t put anything past Trump. So there you go. Anyway, whatever Trump does next week, we probably will have to go ahead and report it here on False Flag Weekly News.All right. Well, thank you, Dr. E. Michael Jones. Always great touching base. Keep up the fantastic work. People are going to be increasingly admitting that you’ve been ahead of your time for a long time.E. Michael Jones: Thank you. Thank you, Kevin. Good to talk to you. 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 linkI did Press TV rolling coverage interviews last (Friday) night and again this (Saturday) morning. The topic, naturally, was the “Hormuzian confusion” generated by Trump’s out-of-control mouth. The above video begins with a brief Press-TV-chosen highlight reel from the Friday interview, followed by a complete archive of my portion of the interviews. Below is the complete transcript. -KBFriday, April 17 interview: I think this is a historic change. We’ve seen what really amounts to Iran testing its nuclear option by showing its power over the traffic going through the Strait of Hormuz, and therefore its power over the entire world economy, including especially the US vassal states in the region. And Iran has successfully demonstrated that power. And that has apparently forced the Americans to push the Israelis back from doing what they wanted to do, which was to continue their genocide in Lebanon. And so that problem isn’t yet solved, but at least there is a slowdown in this aggression coming from the Israelis in Lebanon. And that was completely done by the leverage of Iran. And so I think this is a very positive development.And I wouldn’t put too much faith in what Trump says at any given time, because for one thing, he doesn’t appear to be fully in control of his mouth. Sometimes he deliberately lies, and sometimes it seems to be almost an unconscious process. So I wouldn’t consider Trump the best source on any of this. He’s going to be trying to lie his way out of the problem he got himself into by allowing Netanyahu to convince him to attack Iran. So I would listen to the Iranian leadership, and I would also listen to other third parties, including the Chinese and perhaps the Europeans, perhaps to a certain extent the Pakistanis. The upshot is that Iran has emerged from this brutal series of acts of aggression, this series of war crimes committed against it, actually much stronger than it was before. And the downside is that this is not going to play well with the genocidal maniacs in Tel Aviv. So there’s going to be a continued impetus for conflict coming from those quarters. But the good news is that, for now at least, it looks like the Americans might actually be reacting with at least a slight sliver of rationality, which essentially means admitting that Iran has them checkmated, and that’s going to change the region and the world forever.The blowback from this is obviously immense. And this may go down in American history as the worst decision made by an American leader and the stupidest war ever launched by an American leader. And that would be saying something. Had Trump and his people not decided to go along with the suggestion, or rather the order perhaps, of Netanyahu, and launch this bloody war by assassinating the leadership of the Islamic Republic of Iran and massacring those schoolgirls, the Iran side would never have done this. It would never have exercised this nuclear option of openly taking control of the Strait of Hormuz. That was always a defensive parameter. It was a defensive option that Iran would be able to use if it were attacked, if it ever suffered aggression at a certain level. And everybody knew this. It’s very strange why the American leadership didn’t get the message. The top military and intelligence leadership understood it, but apparently nobody around Trump was willing to stand up to him. Apparently he’s got a narcissism issue and he doesn’t like to be contradicted. And apparently he’s got a certain amount of influence over him coming from Netanyahu. So the Americans ended up making this very, very bad decision.Before this, they could convince their Gulf allies, or should we say the vassal states, that they could effectively protect them. And then they could steal protection money from those Gulf states. And that era now is over. This unilateral American control of the Gulf and of its energy resources and therefore of the backing of the petrodollar is now over. Iran has shown that it’s the ultimate power over the transit of energy and other materials through the Strait of Hormuz, and if necessary, the Red Sea as well. And that completely changes the geopolitical landscape, and not in a way that’s favorable to the United States. So the Americans will try to find a way out of this to minimize the damage and minimize the embarrassment. But ultimately this is a huge takedown for the American empire, and that means it’s also a very, very bad sign for the genocidal Zionist entity, which had really better deeply reflect on the course that it’s been taking, because it won’t be around in just a few years if it continues on the path that it’s on. It has always depended on the protection of the Americans, and American power is ebbing very rapidly.Well, you’re right, the European vassal states usually do anything that the United States orders them to do, no matter how stupid. But this was an exception because it was so stupid that it rose above the level of garden-variety American stupidity to a whole new level of utter and complete idiocy. Like that retired French general said, Trump was the captain of the Titanic selling discount tickets after the ship had already struck the iceberg. That is, they could see that this was not going to be successful by any possible definition. They knew, like everybody else knew, that Iran would likely close the Strait of Hormuz and exercise this nuclear option that would essentially force the other side to back down. And I think they also had maybe better intelligence. Well, certainly they had better intelligence than Trump. Trump’s intelligence was coming from Netanyahu. And what Netanyahu really believes, I have no idea. But in any event, the Europeans, like all the professionals in the field, knew very well that there was no way that murdering some people in a dastardly sneak attack on Iran was somehow going to magically transform Iran into a pliant, obedient Western vassal state that would acquiesce in the genocide of Palestine and in the theft of its materials and economy and resources. No way. It just wasn’t going to happen. And the Europeans knew that, and everybody else knew that.And apparently the reason that Netanyahu would have been willing to risk this kind of suicidal war from the Western American perspective is that he was gambling on some kind of huge regional war that would allow the Israelis to pursue their plans for greater Israel by massacring and expelling the remaining Palestinian population and completing their genocide, invading more territory from their neighbors and emerging from the smoking ruins of the entire region as supposedly the strongest power. I think that was Netanyahu’s dream, but that was never realistic. And the realistic people in all the other camps, including the Europeans, could see that this was a counterproductive effort from the American and Western perspectives. And also, of course, the Europeans found it absurd that Trump was asking them to send their navies to open the strait, when the American navy, which is more powerful than all of the European navies put together, was afraid to come anywhere near the strait. It was almost humorous in its ridiculous quality. And then Trump’s petulant crying and whining about how the Europeans wouldn’t help him open the strait just added to the irony, or really the dark humor, of the whole thing. So it was no mystery why the Europeans turned him down.The real mystery is why he thought that they would, and why anybody would ever imagine that they would. And in fact it’s also a mystery why the Europeans have gone as far as they have in listening to the Americans. In this one case they didn’t, but so often they do to their detriment. Why haven’t the Europeans taken Flint and Hillary Leverett’s advice and gone to Tehran a long time ago? They could have opened up productive trade relations. They could have undermined this whole American-Israeli war, and we would never have had this crisis, and they would have made a lot of money, and they would have actually beaten the Americans in this kind of competition for working with Iran’s vast, untapped economic potential. But Europeans may be stupid, they may be vassals of the Americans, but they weren’t stupid enough to buy those tickets on the Titanic after it had already hit the iceberg.Saturday, April 18 interview: Well, this isn’t surprising, because Trump is now becoming notorious for saying whatever comes into his head and then contradicting himself the next minute or even the next second. And so it’s really to be expected that the messaging coming out of the top of the American command chain is not going to be consistent and is not going to bear much scrutiny, certainly is not going to reflect reality. So I think we have to basically assume that the Americans are, as the Russians said a long time ago, non-agreement capable. That is, they’re incapable of clearly formulating an agreement and then signing it and sticking by it. They have a history of killing negotiators in the midst of the most promising moments in negotiations. And they have a history of going back on their word. Famously, of course, they promised never to move NATO one inch eastward after the end of the Cold War, and then they just kept on marching eastward, almost up to the gates of Moscow. And so I think they’re just as non-agreement capable with regard to this war on Iran as they were with regard to the post-Cold War war on Russia. And so just as the Russians learned they had to essentially use force and build up the military power and not rely on the word of these American leaders, Iran is learning that as well.Yes. Clearly this is going to put equal pressure on the American side. The American side seems to think that it can just randomly apply these kinds of bullying sanctions and bullying approaches to Iran in hopes of trying to restore some kind of sense of dominance, because essentially they are what we call in American idiomatic English sore losers. That is, they’ve lost and they are unable to gracefully admit defeat. Indeed, they’re unable even to gracefully admit it or to gracefully lie about it and try to claim some sort of victory, which is what a better leader might do. But instead they are lashing out with these kinds of self-destructive maneuvers that create chaos in the attempt to come to some kind of settlement.Obviously, Iran is going to continue to monitor and restrict shipping through the Strait of Hormuz for as long as the Americans keep their blockade in place. Obviously, the Americans should have known this, and perhaps they did, but if they did, then what were they thinking? I guess the American approach now has evolved from this Cold War period of trying to impose some kind of order on the world to the post-Cold War period of increasingly seeking to control the world by imposing chaos, that is by attacking other countries and creating conditions that are not conducive to peace and prosperity. And maybe the Americans hope that that will prevent the rest of the world from developing economically and technologically and catching up and overtaking them. But in this case it’s not going to work, because this level of chaos and destruction and this level of damage to the world economy, which is self-inflicted damage by the American side, is not going to be tolerated by the world. And the world is going to be pressuring the United States to try to behave more sensibly and rationally and predictably and settle this thing to get the goods flowing again.Well, yes, I think that since the Americans are non-agreement capable, and not only that but they have the Israelis sabotaging any efforts that they might make to get any kind of agreement, essentially Iran is going to have to, number one, simply match the American actions with its own actions. That is, if the Americans continue this blockade, obviously Iran is going to continue restricting the flow through the strait. And then secondly, I think that since the Americans have this monster, this monkey on their back, that is Netanyahu and the Israelis trying to stir up an ever bigger war, I think that Iran needs to get guarantees that aren’t restricted to just the word of the Americans, which isn’t reliable. Instead, I think Iran needs to find some kind of formula to have an internationally guaranteed kind of agreement, that is to get other parties involved in guaranteeing it with a higher, ironclad commitment that if this is broken, then the other parties are going to take specified actions against the party that breaks the deal. And I don’t know whether Russia or China would be available for that or whichever countries were involved. But I think that there has to be some balance here, because the Americans are unreliable. And again, they have this so-called partner of theirs, really this parasite that has eaten their brain and has taken them over, that is the Zionist entity, and that the Zionists want ever-increasing war. So the United States needs to find a way to balance that, or rather Iran needs to find a way to balance that by bringing in outside parties that can push as hard for keeping to an agreement as the Israelis are pushing toward always breaking agreements.Interviewer: All right, and let me ask you another question, since we’re out of the conversation. So we’re looking at the fact that we still don’t have an established date for negotiations to take place. Many are saying, don’t be fooled, that this is another way, especially when you have the Russian Security Council having issued a statement just a few days back, that this is just all a cover by the Israeli regime and the U.S. now because they want to really launch a ground operation. What do you think? Do you think that this is what’s unfolding right now?It wouldn’t surprise me if the American leadership is crazy enough to be thinking along those lines and to imagine that a ground operation, a land war in Asia, as the famous saying goes in the United States, never get involved in a land war in Asia. But the Trump regime is so unstable and so heavily influenced by Netanyahu and his minions that you can’t put anything past them. And not only that, but they can make money through this roller coaster ride of ups and downs in the stock market and the commodities markets and the futures markets, because their people, the insiders, know when Trump is going to say something that calms the market and makes everybody think that peace is coming, and then when he’s going to do something crazy that threatens the world’s economic future and causes the price of oil to go through the roof and the futures markets to shoot up and all that.So it’s entirely possible that the American leadership is so unstable and so influenced by the crazies in Tel Aviv that it actually is planning some kind of ground operation, perhaps another attempt to snatch Iran’s uranium and steal it, or perhaps something else, perhaps something symbolic, attacking the islands. But it’s hard to imagine that the United States could possibly be serious about really accomplishing anything with a ground operation against Iran. Because even though the United States spends 100 times as much as Iran in terms of military spending and should have that much more strength, as we’ve seen, Iran punches way above its weight and is more than a match for the American aggressor. Now, the Americans would have to muster as many as a million men to have any hope of trying to do a ground invasion, and that is politically impossible. So whatever Trump is planning along those lines would just essentially be making his defeat even worse and creating an even bigger crisis for the American empire. But that doesn’t mean they won’t do it.Stripe is Substack’s only processor and they debanked me, so you can no longer pay me through Substack. Now I am posting everything on Substack free and asking people to sign up for recurring donations at my Paypal donation page…or better yet, the free speech platform SPdonate. Alternately you can Paypal or Zelle to truthjihad[at]gmail(dot)com. Note that Zelle, unlike other methods, doesn’t charge any fees. 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 linkMakia Freeman, author and editor of The Freedom Articles, just published The Cult of the Chosen Ones. Below is a rough transcript of our conversation.Transcript:Kevin Barrett: Welcome to Truth Jihad Audiovisual. I’m Kevin Barrett. I’ve been doing radio for almost 20 years, and audiovisual for a little less than that. I try to bring on people who’ve done interesting writing, translating good writing into audiovisual. And we have a brand new book to discuss today on a topic that I’m interested in: I’ve got Makia Freeman here to talk about The Cult of the Chosen Ones. And guess what cult that would be? I can imagine. So, hey, Makia, how are you?Makia Freeman: Good. Thanks, Kevin. Thanks for having me on.Kevin Barrett: Okay. So, yeah, Cult of the Chosen Ones. It sounds like a science fiction novel. Who is it? The comedian Dave—what’s his name—(Chappelle) who talks about the space Jews, right? The cult of the chosen ones from outer space. You could do it science fiction, but it’s almost that crazy even just here on Earth. So why don’t you introduce yourself and then tell us how you came to write this book.Makia Freeman: Sure. So I’ve been studying the global conspiracy full time since 2007. I’ve written five books, and this is my fifth one. And it’s very comprehensively researched. It has 900 footnotes and 700 pages. And what I wanted to do with this book is tell the story of and connect the dots of how this cult that hides behind Judaism, how it actually arose and what happened, how it kind of gained strength throughout the ages. It came down from BC times through the Middle Ages and then up into Europe. And then it started really accelerating with these two fake Jewish messiahs, and then how the second one of them linked up with the Rothschild family. And then it started getting into all sorts of organizations and agencies and governments and creating things, and it took over the world. And so we’re seeing the effects now in our age.Whenever we see these big events like political assassinations or false flag operations, it’s this cult that’s behind it. Also, just if you look at the history of the 20th century and all these major events like these revolutions and things like that, you can find the hand of this cult behind it. So I wanted to connect all those dots and then bring it right up to the current times with the genocide in Gaza, the Iran war, and just show that it’s pushing forward towards its crazed agenda. And we still have time to stop it, but the amount of control it exerts over the world is really tremendous, unfortunately.Kevin Barrett: Right. Well, let’s talk about what precisely is this cult, right? Cult of the Chosen Ones. Your title makes it sound like that could be Judaism, which notoriously, of course, does have this notion of being God’s chosen people built right into it. But then we’ve also got Sabbatean Frankism, this kind of satanic messianic millenarian heresy that blew up starting several centuries ago and may be behind the Rothschilds. And then, of course, we have Zionism, this modern political movement influenced by both of those other two. So we have Judaism, we have satanic messianic millenarian madness of the Sabbatean Frankist variety, and then we have Zionism. So your cult of the chosen ones—which is it, or what is it?Makia Freeman: Well, ultimately, I believe if you really dig down deep into it, it’s a satanic cult. And it manifests itself through—definitely Sabbatean Frankism is a big part of how it’s played out in the world. But ultimately, I would say it’s even beyond that, because these are the people that we have all these references to Baal and Moloch and worshipping strange gods and child sacrifice and all of this from ancient times. And so it goes back even further than I traced in this book, thousands of years BC, and who knows when this whole thing started.But I pick up how it started to manifest itself within Judaism. Now, some people would argue that it actually created Judaism. Other people would say, well, no, it was more like a sect within Judaism that felt like they were the chosen ones. And this sect basically took over Judaism or it basically carried it forward. It depends really which source you listen to.Basically, this idea of the chosen ones is a very insidious idea, because if you think that you’re chosen, there’s supremacy baked into that idea. It’s hard to believe that you’re chosen and yet still believe that all humans are equal and afford people the respect and the rights if they’re outside of your little clique or group. It’s interesting when people that are non-Jewish interview Jews these days and they say, you know, tell me about this idea of the chosen ones, and I see a lot of backpedaling by Jewish rabbis and other Jewish scholars or experts. And they try to say, well, you know, it doesn’t mean that we’re better. It just means that we’re chosen for a particular mission. And everyone’s chosen for a mission. Everyone’s called to do something. And they try to kind of play it off like it’s no big deal.But ultimately, I don’t really see how you can believe that and then still treat everyone equally. I think it’s a real problem, this idea in the first place. And some people say, well, isn’t that just part of some Jewish books? We’ve got the Talmud and the Torah and the Kabbalah. No, it’s actually baked into all three of those Jewish holy books. Whichever one you follow, there’s always this idea of Jewish supremacy. And then when I see it play out, when I actually see some people talk about it, some Jews, it’s basically the basis for their worldview and how they conduct themselves in the world. They have their whole world split up into Jew and Goy, and they’ve got completely different systems of morality and respect for whatever class you’re in.And then I see other people that are called Jewish, that they’re so-called Jews, but they reject this chosen people ideology. A couple of examples would be Gideon Levy, who’s a great journalist who writes for Haaretz. I’ve seen his work and I’ve seen him speak, and he’s like, you know, this is one of our major stumbling points as Jews. We have to give up this stupid idea and just throw it away. And then other Jews such as Professor Shlomo Sand, who’s written a couple of really incredible books such as The Invention of the Jewish People, he also disavows this idea.So I want to be just clear that I don’t lump all Jews into this. Maybe there are some Jews that feel like they can still believe in this and at the same time treat everyone equally. But there are definitely some Jews who are like, this idea is kind of poisonous completely. And I think it’s an impediment to being a good person.Kevin Barrett: Well, theoretically, it would be possible to believe that your group had been chosen by God for service, to serve humanity and be even more humble than everybody else and work harder for the common good than anybody else. That actually would be a great idea. I would love that kind of group. But I think, unfortunately, it seems that mainstream Judaism has taken the opposite approach. And it believes that actually the Goyim cattle were created to serve the master race Jews. And so, yeah, it’s definitely not—the way it manifests in reality most of the time is not so good.And I think one of the most interesting and insidious aspects of it is the way that this community, which believes itself chosen, then has this really seething hatred of outsiders. It’s a really strong in-group/out-group. And of course all groups have some of that, right? We Green Bay Packers football fans hate the Chicago Bears, right? That doesn’t mean we’re going to necessarily mistreat people from Chicago, but this in-group/out-group kind of dynamic is common.However, it seems to have gotten kind of exaggerated with this particular group, and they’ve been very successful at infiltrating different societies and then seizing hold of really nice, lucrative economic or socioeconomic niches. And long-distance trade is really a good one for them, because if you’re infiltrating several different societies around the world, then you have a huge advantage in engineering long-distance trade with your co-ethnics and engaging in ethnic nepotism.So we have this group that hates outsiders, engages in massive ethnic nepotism to seize control of the most lucrative and most advantageous kinds of socioeconomic niches. And so that situation, of course, the outsiders, if they understand this, they’re going to push back. And so that’s not good. That’s not good for the Jews, right? Is it good for the Jews is the first question that Uncle Chaimie asks when he opens the Sunday New York Times and looks at the stories.So therefore they have to come up with storytelling and narratives to distract us and to essentially obfuscate what they’re really doing. And I think the biggest problem here is that for millennia they’ve been working on this talent for spinning these deceptive narratives to camouflage what they’re really doing—in other words, lying. They’ve become really, really good at lyin’ for Zion, lying for the tribal benefit. And then when they take over the media, as they have in the West, and impose their lies on the whole society, take over the money-printing system, that’s, I think, a big part of the problems that we’re facing today.But the lying and the storytelling, the talent for spinning things for tribal self-interest in order to protect their ethnic nepotism racket, seems to me to be kind of the core of the problem. What do you think?Makia Freeman: Yeah, I mean, they lie as easily as they breathe, unfortunately. So it’s a big problem.I would say if we look at what the definition of a cult is, part of the characteristics of a cult are that they get people away from whatever family or community they were once in and they get them into this new ideology or group. And then they start saying there’s normally an ideology and a charismatic leader or leadership. Then there are techniques and features like you bring the initiates into the cult, you indoctrinate them, you get them dependent on the cult, and you get them loyal to the cult. And you cut off their normal branches with friends or family or other people so that everything—they live and breathe the cult, and they don’t really have any of the frame of reference outside of it.And ultimately, where you can really control people is you get to the point where they’re willing to die or kill for the cult. And that’s what I really notice about this. When you look at the people that work for these pro-Israel-first positions where they only care about Israel and they don’t seem to care about anything else—and these aren’t people that just live in Israel. There’s a lot of these people in America, these rich Jewish billionaires that are funding both sides of the political spectrum, that are working in Hollywood or they’re working in the media. They’re in very high positions of power, and they’re like, all I care about is Israel.That becomes super dangerous then because they’re willing to kill or die for something which is a very questionable cause in the first place. And it’s very different to any other country. I mean, I heard Thomas Massie talking about this. He’s like, you know, when you look at dual citizens, say from Germany or Australia—I’m Australian originally, I’ve lived in America for a while—I like Australia, I have a fondness for it, it’s my home, but I can’t imagine ever wanting to kill or die for Australia in the way that these Israelis do. Some of them are so obsessed with Israel, Israel first. And I’ve never met anyone from Germany or from France or from a lot of other countries that has that kind of obsession. So it’s just a very interesting question as well to analyze. How did they get to this point? What are they brainwashing their kids to say or do? How do they get all these Jews to become so obsessed that they will kill or die for Israel?And then, of course, they’ve got the classic technique in addition to the lying that you’re talking about, just projection—psychological projection. Every time some of these guys open their mouth, like Netanyahu, and they accuse Iran or Hamas or Hezbollah or whoever it is, the enemy of the day, they accuse them of something, it’s always actually a confession in disguise. Because what they’re doing is projecting whatever aspect of their society or themselves that they don’t like. They then put onto their so-called enemy and direct the attention onto the enemy and away from themselves.A classic example is how they’re always calling Iran the biggest state sponsor of terror, when actually Israel is the biggest state sponsor of terror, or maybe something like Saudi Arabia, which behind the scenes works closely with Israel, on the surface pretends to be opposed or neutral, but behind the scenes they’re whipping up Takfiri Salafi jihadists to go and invade their neighbors, including attack Iran.So there’s the lying, there’s the psychological projection, there’s this cult-like behavior of killing and dying. They say their enemies would be really dangerous if they got a nuclear weapon. What country is one country that shouldn’t have nuclear weapons and has tons of them? A country of like a million people that has 400 nuclear weapons? Well, it’s all about Iran. Oh my God, Iran might get nukes.We’ve had several Israeli historians like Martin van Creveld basically say if Israel ever got pushed into a corner, they would use their nukes. We’ve had people like Jonathan Pollard talking about what happened in 1973 during the Yom Kippur War, describing how an Israeli jet came out onto the tarmac with nuclear weapons under its wings as a message to the Americans. Then the next day Henry Kissinger gave Israel the aid it needed.So we’ve had overt suggestions or even statements that Israel would use its nukes if necessary, while at the same time claiming Iran shouldn’t get nuclear weapons. And recently Trump has gone absolutely crazy with all of his bombastic threats and tweets. And yet the US has the second most nukes in the world as well. So how can these people possibly say with any kind of objectivity that nukes only belong in the hands of sane and rational and stable people when they act the way that they do?Another thing is the constant way that Netanyahu and Israel are always saying, well, these Arabs, these Muslims, they just teach all their kids to hate Jews right from when they’re born and they just want to kill us all. And yet if you look at some clips that surface on the internet, you can see what happens in these Israeli classrooms where they’re teaching kids, okay, Arabs are bad, what do you want to do when you grow up? Oh, I want to get a gun and kill all Arabs. Okay, good, we’ve done our job.Kevin Barrett: A Jewish friend of mine in the United States had a brother who immigrated to Israel specifically to “kill Arabs.”Makia Freeman: So I see the influence of this cult-like behavior on certain segments of Israeli society. Also, when people go to Israel from the West and interview people on the street, it’s not just the leadership. There’s a large segment of Israeli society that has been so brainwashed that they’re like, yeah, we support that. We should use nukes, we should start a war, we should genocide Palestine. I think the amount of open love of and display of hatred is really disturbing.Kevin Barrett: They made a national hero of the guy who is raping a prisoner to death with a stick. Huge demonstrations broke out and forced his release from prison. And it looks like all those people are going to get off scot-free because the dominant strain of thought in Israel thinks that they’re national heroes for sodomizing people to death with sticks. I mean, what a strange country.And then they project that and imagine that it’s the Arabs and the Muslims who are so full of hate. But I’ve honestly been hanging out with Muslims and Arabs for quite some time, and I’ve never met any who would ever say anything like, oh, I want to go somewhere and kill Jews. I’ve never heard anything like that. But it’s somehow normal that my Jewish friend’s brother would move to Israel to kill Arabs. There’s kind of a disconnect. And as you say, they’re totally projecting it, and then they’re broadcasting their projections into the media so all the consumers believe it.Makia Freeman: Yeah, it’s a big problem. But it’s interesting, because what I tried to do in my book is find Jewish sources. I tried to find Jews within Israel and those outside who could see this problem more objectively, who’d woken up from the brainwashing, or it never worked on them. And there are a number of Jews who don’t buy into this at all, whether it’s Norman Finkelstein or Gilad Atzmon. They’re openly critical. And it’s good to use sources like that, because then you can’t be accused of being anti-Semitic.Kevin Barrett: Well, you can be accused. Just wait and see.But when you’ve got Jewish people themselves talking about their inside view of the situation, it carries a lot of weight.Kevin Barrett: I agree. Some of the best critics of Jewish tribal ideology are Jews themselves or people who grew up as Jews. Some call themselves ex-Jews, like Henry Herskovitz of Ann Arbor, Michigan. And so there are a long list of people like that.And I guess I’m sort of like that with regard to my American upbringing. I grew up with a certain ideology in America and quickly discovered there were some serious problems with it—Vietnam, the Kennedy assassination, and ultimately 9/11. I’ve become a harsh critic of my American tribe. And there are Jews like that too. But the Jewish tribe is a lot more cult-like, more intense, more hating of outsiders than most other tribes, including Americans.Getting back to that cult status, what are some of the techniques that they use? Because you mentioned that cults take people and cut them off from their families and their normal culture. But with Jews, they grow up in a Jewish milieu. So how do you get the cult dynamic going without separating them from their earlier culture?I always thought that circumcision played a big role in this because there’s a school of psychology that John Bowlby founded called attachment theory. Bowlby and many other researchers discovered that the human personality is powerfully affected by its early relationship with caregivers, especially bonding with the mother. Disrupted attachment is correlated with serious life problems.So anything early in life that causes insecure attachment is likely to have a major impact. When you do circumcision at one week, which is extremely painful, and the mother allows the child to be taken away and mutilated, the baby will have a deep unconscious memory of this trauma. Then throughout life they’re enculturated with the idea of an evil outsider who wants to harm them. That image can connect psychologically to the trauma, creating projection onto outsiders.So it’s a form of trauma-based mind control, in my opinion. And I think banning circumcision in early life would fundamentally change things.I think there’s a lot to that, especially when you consider the invasive and disturbing nature of the ritual. So that could be a big part of the dynamics that allow for indoctrination.What are some other things?Makia Freeman: Well, not just within Judaism, but generally, manipulators always say get them as young as possible. Present a worldview early, often with elements of fear. For adults, people who feel unworthy or disconnected are more susceptible. Cult leaders identify emotional vulnerabilities and exploit them.It’s interesting to look at cases like James Jesus Angleton. Somehow he became deeply aligned with Israeli interests. He developed close ties, visited Israel frequently, even met Ben-Gurion privately. He was involved in major intelligence operations and cover-ups.Kevin Barrett: So how did they get him to that point? I think there are multiple factors, including Cold War anti-communism. He saw Israel as a bulwark against communism, and that ideological framing likely played a role.Makia Freeman: Yeah, you’re right. I think that does explain it. Let me say a couple of things in response. The first is that I actually found evidence—there’s a letter from one of the leading Rothschilds to Marx. I believe it’s either a letter or a receipt where he’s paying him some amount of money to help start writing a manifesto. So I think it depends how you look at history. You can see it as a natural flow of conditions where societies adopt ideas that become movements and evolve, or you can look at the role of manipulation.As a conspiracy researcher, I’ve seen a lot of evidence of how social engineers at the top manipulate the masses. So I have a bias toward the conspiratorial view. There may have been a natural movement—like the desire for wealth equality—but elites are very good at steering those impulses.They might see a movement forming and then say, “We need our agents to steer this. We need to shape the ideology so we can control it.”The whole issue with communism or socialism is that it sets groups against each other—the poor versus the middle class or factory owners—while ignoring the bankers and administrators who end up in control.In the end, whether it’s capitalism or communism, you still get a small group at the top running things. That’s the real pattern.Kevin Barrett: Right. I think those are somewhat separate issues. That kind of manipulation does exist. But there’s also the fact that human societies tend to be hierarchical.In smaller, tribal societies, hierarchies are more fluid and there’s more support for weaker members. But in large, complex societies, you always end up with structured hierarchies—leaders, bureaucracies, chains of command. That happens regardless of ideology—capitalist, socialist, or otherwise—and regardless of whether Jews are involved or not.As for Jews influencing socialism or communism, I think what may have happened is that they saw movements for economic justice and used them to weaken traditional social structures of non-Jewish societies. One way to do that is by attacking religion, which is central to social cohesion. The French sociologist Emmanuel Todd has written about this. I highly recommend reading him.There’s also the attack on family values and sexual morality, which weakens societies. You can see this in declining birth rates, though that’s a broader phenomenon.So yes, manipulation exists, but I don’t see it as a single, all-encompassing conspiracy controlling everything.Makia Freeman: Okay, yeah, I see that. One interesting thing is that when Jacob Frank came through Poland into Germany and Frankfurt, he made an alliance with the Rothschilds. There was also Adam Weishaupt, who started the Illuminati in Bavaria in 1776.I’ve seen evidence of Mayer Amschel Rothschild’s will, where he supposedly outlined goals like intermarriage within the family and targeting religion, monarchy, and political systems to achieve world domination.So I can see how a long-term plan like that could be carried out over generations.Kevin Barrett: Yeah, I think there’s some truth to that. The Sabbatean-Frankists may have more influence than people realize, possibly even in the creation of Israel. Their inversion of morality could explain what some see as extreme or excessive behavior. Ron Unz has talked about what he calls the “cartoonish evil” of Israel.There was also a recent case of an Israeli woman who came forward about ritual abuse involving high-level figures, and then died under suspicious circumstances. So maybe that gives insight into the type of networks involved.Makia Freeman: Yeah, that doesn’t surprise me. I wrote a book in 2023 called The International Satanic Network Exposed. I wasn’t focused specifically on Jews, but on a broader global network. There are victims from many countries—Australia, the U.S., and others—who describe similar patterns: abduction, rituals, abuse, involvement of powerful individuals. Some accounts describe these rituals taking place in churches or political buildings, involving elites. Victims say they were raised within these systems and later escaped.So I think Sabbatean Frankism may be part of it, but not all of it. There are people from different backgrounds involved. Ultimately, I think it’s a satanic network. Participants believe they gain power through rituals, possibly involving possession or interaction with some kind of entity. They believe they receive power or energy, and that this influence then shapes policies and decisions at high levels.Kevin Barrett: Interesting. So if Earth is influenced by these kinds of networks, what about the extraterrestrial angle? The former Canadian defense minister Paul Hellyer suggested that there may be a benevolent galactic federation, while Earth is controlled by corrupt human elites, possibly working with negative entities. Others argue the opposite—that extraterrestrial or interdimensional beings are harmful or deceptive, more like traditional demons. And then there’s the possibility that it’s all some kind of psychological or technological operation. So what do you think?Makia Freeman: I’ve studied it for a long time. I don’t think it’s just a psyop. There are too many witnesses—both from alleged ritual abuse networks and from UFO or abduction experiences. Some cases may involve secret military technology, but that doesn’t explain everything. There are documents and claims about government programs dealing with extraterrestrial phenomena—like committees formed after Roswell, MJ-12, and so on. There’s also the idea that control over this information was shifted from government to private contractors, limiting even presidential access.As for whether extraterrestrials are benevolent or not, the reports vary widely. Some describe neutral or ambiguous interactions, others negative ones. The most commonly reported beings are the greys and reptilians. Greys are often described as small, emotionless, possibly involved in hybridization programs. There are also claims—some even mentioned by public figures—that a human-alien hybrid program may be ongoing. Reptilian claims have been popularized by researchers like David Icke and others, with some witnesses claiming direct encounters. So I think it’s a real phenomenon, but complex, with multiple factors involved.Kevin Barrett: Right. I interviewed David Jacobs years ago. He concluded, based on extensive research, that something real was happening, including possible infiltration. But I remain agnostic. Hypnotic regression isn’t always reliable, and hard physical evidence is limited. As technology improves, we still don’t get clearer proof, which raises questions. So something may be happening, but it’s not fully understood.Makia Freeman: Yeah, that’s fair. Maybe when something undeniable happens, we’ll have more clarity.Kevin Barrett: Well, that’s probably a good place to leave it. If they land on the White House lawn, we’ll revisit it.Makia Freeman: Yeah, sounds good. Thanks for having me on.Kevin Barrett:Thanks for coming back. Where can people find your work?Makia Freeman: My website is thefreedomarticles.com. I’m also on Rumble, BitChute, Odyssey, Substack, Brighteon, and YouTube. I’ve written five books—my latest is The Cult of the Chosen Ones, available in print, ebook, and audiobook.Kevin Barrett: Great, I’ll include link. Thanks again.Makia Freeman: Appreciate it. 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 False Flag Weekly News link“Top Israeli leaders rape their own daughters with snakes to bring on their messiah.” -Shoshana Strook, abuse survivor (d. March 15, age 38)“You were using biological metaphors! Biological metaphors!! To describe an entire group of human beings! That is sick! Disgusting! Uncalled for!” -Webster Tarpley, screaming at Greg Felton, author of The Host and the Parasite: How Israel’s Fifth Column Consumed AmericaI well remember how, in June 2012, at the Vancouver 9/11 Hearings, Webster Tarpley unloaded on Greg Felton. We were having dinner after the conference’s final session, and Tarpley had not enjoyed the conference. He didn’t approve of topics like “no planes hit the Towers” and “9/11 may have involved extraterrestrials.” On those two issues, I saw Tarpley’s point. But what Tarpley hated most about that conference—which was organized by my friend Jim Fetzer, who enjoyed defying George W. Bush by more-than-tolerating “outrageous conspiracy theories”—was Greg Felton’s use of the host-and-parasite metaphor to describe the US-Israel relationship.Webster Tarpley is a smart guy who wrote a good book about 9/11. It’s subtitle tells us 9/11 was “Made in USA.” As he screamed at Felton, Tarpley insisted that the 9/11 truth movement had lost its way by increasingly blaming Israel. 9/11 was an inside job, Tarpley insisted. Hadn’t we spent many years copyrighting that phrase? Blaming Israel made it sound like an outside job! We were ruining our image, making ourselves look like a bunch of Nazis!I said: “Wait a minute, Webster. Your book explains how the 9/11 conspirators came in three flavors: moles, technicians, and patsies. The patsies, of course, were Muslims. But wouldn’t you agree that the moles were pro-Israel people infiltrating the US government? And wouldn’t you agree that the technicians who blew up the World Trade Center and remote-hijacked the planes were likely Israelis as well?”Webster sputtered a non-substantive answer. I pressed him: “The term ‘mole’ normally refers to an asset of one nation’s intelligence agencies who worms his way into a high position in another nation’s government. If the ‘moles’ you say did 9/11 weren’t working for Israel, which nation were they working for?” Webster’s answer: It was a “rogue network” or “invisible government” made up primarily of Americans, loyal only to their own rogue network, not to any government or nation. I cited Alan Sabrosky, the half-Jewish former Director of Strategic Studies at the US Army War College, who made headlines by coming on my radio show on March 20, 2010 saying that it was “100% certain that 9/11 was a Mossad operation.” Sabrosky said 9/11 was such a big, complex operation that it had to have been run by one of the world’s very small number of intelligence agencies with the resources to pull such a thing off. And there were only two candidates: the CIA and Mossad. The CIA, Sabrosky said, obviously wouldn’t do such a thing as an agency. But Mossad, using its extensive network of American moles in all relevant agencies, would. Indeed, Israel benefitted massively from 9/11. No other nation did. And Israel sympathizers run the media, which was instrumental in the coverup. Figuring out who must have been behind 9/11 was not rocket science.Tarpley responded that such talk was antisemitic. He said many CIA and military insiders hate Israel and falsely blame it for all sorts of things. He said the real villains were the Nazis and the WASPS, who created secret societies and rogue networks based on white supremacist and British supremacist ideologies. In other words, according to Tarpley, it was the enemies of the Jews who carried out the gargantuan 9/11 covert operation whose only geostrategic beneficiary was Israel. The Bush family, Tarpley said, was Nazi to the core. He had written about it. Blame Bush and his family for 9/11! And Cheney was even more central!I agreed that Cheney was more central than Bush, but disagreed about the rest. What’s more, I told Tarpley, I thought Greg Felton’s “host and parasite” metaphor described the US-Israel relationship accurately. Tarpley left dinner that night disgusted with me, and with the whole conference. He appeared less frequently on my podcast after that. In 2011-2012 Tarpley was a staple on the Alex Jones show. (Alex Jones loves conspiracy theorists who blame everybody but Israel.) In 2015 Tarpley waxed rabidly anti-Trump—a position that seems reasonable in retrospect, especially given Trump’s repeated attacks on Iran. In August 2016, Tarpley was sued for $150 million by Melania Trump, who took issue with his allegations that she had worked as a “high end escort” in the 1990s. Tarpley lost the first round, then settled in February 2017, paying an “undisclosed sum of money” and making a full retraction and apology. Now that Melania’s activities working for Jeffrey Epstein are on the brink of exposure, it looks like Melania may have to repay Tarpley that “undisclosed sum.”Back in 2015, Tarpley’s rabid distaste for Trump, who he saw as a prospective American Hitler, seemed exaggerated. Today, not so much. (The comparison may in fact be unfair to Hitler.)But I still think Felton is right, and Tarpley wrong, about Israel being like a parasite sucking the vital juices out of its American host. What’s more, I just published an American Free Press article upping the ante by positing Israel as a brain-hijacking parasite. Read it below, and if it offends you, be sure to let me know in the comments. -KBIsrael Hijacks America’s BrainBy Kevin Barrett, for American Free Press The bad news: 50% of the world’s human population hosts a brain-hijacking parasite. The good news: Toxoplasma gondii, an eukaryotic protozoa, primarily hijacks the brains of mice, not people. A mouse infected by T. gondi becomes passionately fond of cats. By rewiring the mouse’s brain, T. gondi facilitates its move from its host during one stage of its life cycle—mice—to the host of the next stage: cats.T. gondi isn’t the only brain-hijacking parasite. There is also the Costa Rican mind control wasp. Its larvae hijack spiders’ brains and make the spiders spin special webs for the wasp. The larvae then kill the spider and suck its juices dry from the inside before emerging into the web-house the spider built for them.If Israel is like T. gondi, then the USA is the mouse and Iran is the cat. But most people who compare Israel to brain-hijacking parasites, as more and more Americans do, see it as a mind-control wasp. Partisans of Israel devour America from within, hijacking its brain and forcing it to behave self-destructively on behalf of Zionism.Gen. Wesley Clark revealed that 9/11, an Israeli false flag, was designed to “take out seven countries in five years.” All seven of those countries posed problems for Israel, not the United States. By terrorizing Americans on 9/11, Israel hijacked our brains and forced us into a series of self-destructive wars in the Middle East.Today, Israel seems to have hijacked Donald Trump’s brain and frog-marched him, and behind him the rest of the country, into a disastrous war on Iran. According to polls, half of the American people believe Trump attacked Iran to distract from the Epstein files. Since Jeffrey Epstein was an Israeli agent tasked with collecting blackmail material on powerful Americans, and since FBI documents tending to confirm allegations that Trump raped young girls provided by Epstein were released just a few days after the attack on Iran, and were quickly forgotten due to the war, it is hard to avoid the conclusion that Trump’s brain has been hijacked by Israeli blackmailers.But Trump isn’t the only brain-hijacked American. His self-styled “Secretary of War,” Pete Hegseth, is an Israel-firster. So are other advisors including Marco Rubio, Mike Waltz, Mike Huckabee, Elise Stefanik, Jared Kushner, Steve Witkoff, John Ratcliffe, Stephen Miller, Sebastian Gorka, David Friedman, and Adam Boehler. About half of those people are Jews, whose brains have presumably been hijacked by tribal fanaticism since birth. But the other half are non-Jewish Americans who are acting self-destructively on behalf of a parasitical, genocidal foreign entity—an entity that despises them. How were their brains hijacked?A few Americans have been “turned” into Israeli spies. The most notorious is Jonathan Pollard, who badly damaged America by passing secrets to Israel, spent thirty years in prison, then was released by Obama to be feted as a national hero in Israel—including by America’s brain-hijacked ambassador, Mike Huckabee.But Israel also hijacks America, and gains access to its secrets, in subtler ways. Tucker Carlson recently reported that “Israeli officers have infested the Pentagon, roaming freely through the building, barging into offices and accessing classified material.” They are being given access to our secrets not by spies, but by people whose brains are so hijacked they don’t even know they’re spies.In an interview on “The Young Turks” on March 27, Trump’s former top terrorism advisor Joe Kent said: “I think most people who are kind of doing the bidding of Israel consistently, they probably don’t even view it that they’re doing what Jonathan Pollard did or they’re spying on our country…Because if you grow up deeply steeped in the culture that we’re in, especially working a lot in the Middle East and in the war on terror, you think, hey, the Israelis are our friends. And the Israelis take advantage of this. They really do. I’m sure they have more Jonathan Pollards. That wouldn’t surprise me at all. But I think the people that are actually more effective than the Pollards…in terms of just their ability to influence because of the access that we’ve given them.”In other words, Israel has eaten America’s brain. We have been brainwashed not just by the 9/11 false flag publicity stunt, but by countless Hollywood movies and TV productions and novels and textbooks and news reports and even defaced, distorted versions of the Bible, all produced by people whose primary loyalty is not to the United States of America.So when Donald Trump dodges a child-rape scandal by attacking Iran, and half the population knows he is a blackmailed traitor doing the bidding of a foreign regime and destroying America and the world, our brains are so hijacked that hardly anyone even blinks.Stripe is Substack’s only processor and they debanked me, so you can no longer pay me through Substack. Now I am posting everything on Substack free and asking people to sign up for recurring donations at my Paypal donation page…or better yet, the free speech platform SPdonate. Alternately you can Paypal or Zelle to truthjihad[at]gmail(dot)com. Note that Zelle, unlike other methods, doesn’t charge any fees. 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 TruthJihad linkTranscript:Richie Allen:Yeah, I mentioned my guest today is a friend of the programme. He’s a terrific broadcaster and writer. You’ll find his work at kevinbarrett.substack.com. He wrote a very, very well written piece on his Substack today (“Did Trump Just Make Iran Great Again?”) which he shared with me kindly before the programme, his take on what’s gone on. Let’s welcome him back. Kevin, it’s lovely to have you back on.Good news, I think. I think you are happy. At least I think that there’s not satisfaction, but there’s relief that we didn’t see an escalation in the bombardment of Tehran and other Iranian cities last night. Is that fair to say?Kevin Barrett:Yes, Richie. Hey, it’s good to be with you. And it’s good to have some relatively good news to share for a change. So yeah, I think it’s good news.Richie Allen:You see this—and I understand why you see it as you do, and I’m going to let you explain it. I’m going to get out of your way. You see this as a complete humiliation for the American government, for the U.S. administration, and something that has empowered Iran and Iran’s allies in the region. Explain why you think so.Kevin Barrett:Well, it appears that what happened was that Netanyahu visited Trump in early to mid-February and convinced him to do this, claiming that the Israelis had it all covered, that if the United States bombed Iran, assassinated some of their top people, that they could get regime change. They could get rid of the nuclear program. They could eliminate the threat of Iran’s missile program and their drone program. And they could take down all of Iran’s allies in the region, starting with Hezbollah and including the Houthis or the Ansarullah movement in Yemen, and of course, the resistance forces in Palestine, as well as much of the military in Iraq, which is part of the so-called militias that defeated Al-Qaeda and ISIS, even as the U.S. has turned out to be supporting those terrorist groups.So anyway, that was the plan. It was supposed to totally solve Israel’s problem by getting rid of the source of what it sees as the opposition to the greater Israel project, the expansionism and genocide. And Trump swallowed it. His advisors mostly didn’t. Apparently, Hegseth was the only one who really bought it. And the rest of them sort of threw up their hands and said, well, we’re not sure this is going to work—or actually, no, this isn’t going to work.But Trump, once he gets an idea in his head, apparently it’s hard to get it out. So they went for it. And the goals that were openly stated were, of course, maximalist and unrealistic. Here’s what they said they were trying to achieve by attacking Iran: First, a regime change that has put the Shah Jr. in power, get rid of the Islamic Republic. And the second goal was to eliminate the nuclear program completely. The third goal was to eliminate Iran’s missiles and drones. And the fourth goal was to eliminate Iran’s relationship with everybody in the region. Of course, finally, they were going to destroy Iran’s navy, which means the U.S. totally controls the waters around Iran.Every one of those goals blatantly failed. The only regime change was now we’ve got a different Khamenei who’s much more of a hardliner than his father was. Plus, he’s annoyed that they murdered his family. Iran still has a nuclear program, and it’s not going to give up enrichment. So Trump’s not getting a better deal there than he would have otherwise. Iran’s missiles and drones now are much more formidable than they were before the war, because they’ve been tested and they’ve been shown to be effective and there’s no way to stop them and take them out. Iran’s allies in the region are now stronger than ever, with Hezbollah bogging down the Israelis at the border of Lebanon.And then finally, most importantly, Iran runs the Strait of Hormuz. This is an epic geopolitical shift, and it wouldn’t have happened without the war. So this war was a complete disaster for the Americans and their Israeli sponsors. The pro-Israel lobby is going ballistic about the ceasefire because they can see that it’s an admission of defeat. They would have preferred to see things continue to escalate until the whole region was destroyed. They imagine that the Messiah will come back and save them and put them in charge of the region and the world if that happens. But that’s also pretty unrealistic.So as it turns out, Iran has just raised its status and power several notches and made sure that the Islamic Revolution and the Islamic Republic that it founded will continue. It’s got more legitimacy now than ever, not just with the Iranian people, but with the whole international community that can contrast the sane, reasonable, and effective leadership in Iran with these lunatics in Washington and Tel Aviv. Overall, it’s a rare case where the good guys seem to have won at least this round.Richie Allen:Kevin, two questions on that. What is known? I mean, I could check the BBC and CNN, but I wouldn’t believe it for obvious reasons. What is known about the health of Khamenei Jr.? Because we were told earlier this week, again by the mainstream media, that he might be unconscious in a hospital. And then I heard from an Arabic source that he wasn’t, that he was well. What’s the best information we have about his well-being now?Kevin Barrett:You know, I haven’t seen any really hard evidence around that question, but he’s been putting out statements. I thought I recalled some video statements as well as written ones. And so I don’t see any reason to be particularly concerned. But again, it doesn’t even really matter that much because Iran’s leadership, especially its clerical leadership, welcomes martyrdom. And, you know, somebody else will step up if you get killed. It just makes everybody else fight that much harder.So the idea that you can somehow stop Iran by assassinating people like this is really a huge misconception and a mistake. It’s crazy that the Israelis think they can achieve anything by doing this stuff.Richie Allen:Yeah, it’s for the birds. Something that moved me—and I’m a fairly hard, I wouldn’t call myself a hack, but I’ve been doing what I do for a very long time and I have a bit of a hard heart. I think I’ve been desensitised to a lot of things, which isn’t a good thing really. But I have to say I did wipe a tear or two away yesterday when I saw thousands of Iranian people coming out to ring fence the facilities, the power stations and that.What an amazing thing that was. And this was while they probably genuinely thought there was a good chance that, you know, U.S. and Israeli jets might blow them to pieces. It was an amazing thing, that, wasn’t it?Kevin Barrett:It sure was. And it really did demonstrate that the Western media propaganda claiming that the Iranian people don’t support their government and are oppressed and are just waiting for the chance to rise up and get rid of the Islamic Republic is a bunch of nonsense. And it always has been.The Iranian government probably has a lot more support than any Western government and has had that consistently since 1979. And now we can see it. We can see that the lies coming from people like Trump and Netanyahu claiming that, oh, if we just bomb Iran, then they’re going to welcome it, they’re going to cheer it, they want us to nuke them, they want us to come liberate their women—is nonsense.You go talk to even, you know, the westernized women who don’t want to wear hijab, and you can watch lots and lots of person-on-the-street interviews with those people confirming what I learned during my eight or nine visits there from 2012 to 2019, and then once again in like 2022 or something. People there are basically patriotic, and it’s only a tiny fringe that has any interest in trying to overthrow the Islamic Republic.And so now we’ve seen that in the strongest possible way—millions of Iranians in the streets supporting their government, supporting their armed forces, and even coming out and ringing these facilities that Trump was threatening to nuke. I mean, that shows a lot of courage and a lot of devotion. And I don’t think that the West, or rather, the media, is going to be able to fool Western people any longer into believing that Iranians are oppressed and they don’t like their government.Richie Allen:Are you confident that the ceasefire will hold, that the negotiations will be conducted in good faith and that a solid agreement will come out of it? Or are you like me, and you worry about a false flag—some big event may be staged by the Israelis, may be staged by the Americans that could derail it—and we might see the bombing of Iran again and the Iranians closing down the Strait again, and the Iranians firing on U.S. facilities in the region?How confident are you about these talks which are going to, I believe, Kevin, begin in Islamabad on Friday?Kevin Barrett:Well, I think that we have more reason to be optimistic than we did in the past after earlier rounds of this war on Iran, because now the Iranians have demonstrated what they can do. And what they can do is stay even with the U.S. on the escalation ladder, and perhaps even stay ahead of the U.S. and win that war of escalation—that anything the U.S. can do, the Iranians can do something at the same scale.And so this idea that they think the Americans are going to gain something by pretending to want a ceasefire and to want to end the war, get a deal, open up the Strait of Hormuz, and then somehow launch yet another sneak attack that’s somehow going to gain something—I’m not sure how that would work, because Iran clearly controls the Strait of Hormuz. The facts on the ground—or in this case, the facts in the sea—are obvious now.That is, it’s just a piece of cake for Iran to decide who gets to come through the Strait of Hormuz and who doesn’t. And given that, it doesn’t seem that the Americans—in particular the Trump administration—have much incentive to escalate. Trump has to worry about the coming elections. If the Republicans take a bad enough defeat and Trump is reviled enough, he could easily end up getting impeached, possibly convicted and spending the rest of his life in prison, or maybe even worse.So there’s not a lot of motivation really for anybody on the American side to try to use this pause to deceive the Iranians and once again launch some kind of sneak attack. What good would that do? The Strait would close again. The Iranians have shown they didn’t even have to use all of their capabilities. They didn’t have to close the Red Sea, which their Houthi allies can do anytime they want. And they certainly didn’t have to utterly destroy the life support infrastructure of the Gulf countries that are occupied by the U.S., which they showed they can do because their rockets can outlast and penetrate air defenses.So there’s nothing in it here for the Americans. There’s really nothing in it for rational Israelis either. But there might be a few Israelis who still have this notion that if we create a big enough war, preferably World War III, that somehow Israel, with its Messiah in charge, will crawl out from the radioactive rubble, blow up the Al-Aqsa Mosque, rebuild a blood-sacrifice temple, and rule the world, and every Jew will have 2,800 non-Jewish slaves. So there is that messianic, millenarian extremist ideology out of Israel that Netanyahu sort of plays games with. He plays footsie with those people.And so those people, yeah, you never know what they might do. But I think that the chances that they’re going to blow this up and get the war going towards escalation again are lower than the chances were after the past rounds.Richie Allen:You’re listening to Kevin Barrett. Here’s my take—well, I won’t give it to you. I’ll give you the Cliff version of it. I laid it out earlier in the programme. I’ve learned that two, sometimes three things can be true simultaneously.So I absolutely believe you’re right when you talk about these lunatic Zionists and their Greater Israel Project. For me to deny that would be foolish and I’d lose any respect that I might have with my listeners. It’s absolutely bang on the money. There’s no doubt about that, that this is real. It’s an agenda that’s been there forever—well, through the 18th, 19th, 20th centuries, maybe going back further than that.But I also laid out a little bit of a theory earlier on, and that is that sometimes it helps to look at the effect rather than the rhetoric. So we know the rhetoric because you laid it out brilliantly earlier on. They said they wanted to destroy the nuclear program, whether weapons or domestic energy. They wanted to destroy the ballistic missiles and all of this stuff. That was the rhetoric.But if we look at the effect of it, the effect has been a massive global economic shock. And I make the argument quite often on this programme that this kind of disruption, these kind of crises, are not incidental—that one of the payoffs of these huge events is consolidation of power.Governments gain—somehow they gain the rights to or the justification for bringing in emergency measures. Central banks tighten control over spending, what can be spent and who gets the money. We know the huge corporations do okay, but the small competitors, the high street stores, disappear completely. There is an inflation shock that screws with everybody’s savings. Food prices go up, transport goes up.And I believe that there is a definitive and fairly visible agenda for a new way of living for humanity where we live in a kind of technocratic world where pretty much everything we do is controlled and monitored. And I see what’s happened in the last few years with the COVID thing and now the genocide in Gaza and now this terrible terrorism against Iran. And I just think—because I don’t believe Trump is making any decisions of his own volition, I think he’s a puppet—I see that what you’re saying is true. I can’t argue with it. But I also see this other thing happening, which is the impoverishment of people all over the world. And I wanted to ask your thoughts on that.Kevin Barrett:Yeah, that’s a good point, Richie. I think there’s some truth in what you’re saying about these crises being used by various forces to consolidate their power. And historically, I think we can see that with the way that booms and busts in capitalism—which are natural because bubbles blow up and then they pop—that’s just the natural ebb and flow of the psychology behind money in a capitalist society.And so that’s always been around. And then certain forces have figured out how to ride those waves and make money on them. And there’s all sorts of evidence that certain big financial powers either knew that the Great Depression was coming or even made it happen or at least made it worse and bet on it and made money on it. A little bit in the same way that somebody knew 9/11 was happening and bought put options on American and United Airlines and Morgan Stanley and these companies that were guaranteed to crash due to 9/11.So yeah, people make money and consolidate power on crises. They know that there will be crises coming, and then they sometimes manufacture their own crises or intensify other, natural crises. Naomi Klein wrote about this in The Shock Doctrine. And it was funny that she didn’t talk about 9/11, which is kind of the ultimate manufactured crisis designed to bring in dystopia.So yeah, I think there’s a fair bit of truth to what you’re saying. But I also think that in this particular case, what’s going on is not so much that there’s one group that’s trying to tighten the screws on all of humanity, although that’s possible. But what meets the eye more is that we’re going through a transition geopolitically, which is typical of periods when rising powers eclipse falling powers and reshuffle the power structure to decide who’s going to be top dog and rearrange the pecking order.There’s often some kind of a war and a crisis. We’ve seen this in the past when the U.S. eclipsed the British Empire with World War II. The British were being challenged by both Germany and Russia, but then the U.S. came out ahead after World War II and emerged with all the power and most of the gold and so on, and set up the United Nations and other institutions to operate in the American imperial interest.And that worked for a while when the U.S. still had half of the world’s GDP and owned all of the world’s gold. That changed, and now the U.S. manufactures a small fraction of what China manufactures. The global south is rising, and the U.S.-occupied Western empire is falling, and yet we still have these outmoded institutions like the Security Council at the UN and these other institutions that the U.S. created that don’t reflect the global power reality that is emerging.And so in that situation, with that mismatch between the institutional power and the real power, a huge reshuffling has to happen. And that will bring crises and economic shocks and wars. And somebody’s going to bet on those. Somebody’s going to make money on those. But I think the underlying historical process is more one of a geopolitical shuffle than sort of one particular conspiratorial force being in charge of all of the shocks and consolidating absolute power from them.Richie Allen:It’s a great answer. And there’s no winning or losing this. I don’t deal in winning or losing anyway when it comes to debates. You put that very well.I suppose for me, I just look back to, particularly from 2020 onwards, Kevin, and like you and I would have rubbed shoulders over the years with great people like Jim Mars, for example, and David Icke in particular and others, who were talking about centralized control of large swathes of the planet, of civilization, and that this was a plan going way back in time through secret societies, the Club of Rome, the round table groups, all this sort of stuff.And I used to listen to this stuff with interest and also with scepticism—it’s healthy to be sceptical and you’re absolutely right as an academic to be sceptical. But I think that when these people were telling me years ago, look, a time will come when it will become very difficult for people to own their own property, and this will be a global thing. It won’t just be a Western thing.The day will come when the technology will exist to roll out mass surveillance and control. You know, that people will be coerced and encouraged into taking medication that they don’t want all over the world, and that there might be punitive measures introduced if they don’t go along with it.I look at it and I see whatever happens—whether it’s the mass murder of Palestinians, the slaughter of people in the Middle East—that it serves these agendas as much as it does anything else. I don’t deny for a minute the reality of Iranians, people who want to live in an Islamic Republic because this is what they believe and this is what they like. I don’t deny the reality of the lunatic Zionist mentality that wants to own the entire region and to do the things you described earlier on. These are realities that people are living.But at the same time, I can see all over the world authoritarianism is on the rise everywhere, where people are being arrested for things they say, where people are being punished for thought crimes, not for actual crimes, where they’re bringing in digital currencies and telling me that I can’t go to Kevin and Rabia’s house and give you a couple of books for that old sofa that you don’t use anymore.All of this stuff, Kevin—it was creeping, now it’s stampeding. And these horrible things, these mass genocide events that we’re talking about, they accelerate these things. And that’s why I’m not stubborn in my beliefs or my worldview. I see this accelerationism towards this dystopian technocracy, and I see everything that happens feeding into it.I won’t press this point. You have the final word on that, and then I want to ask you about something else.Kevin Barrett:Yeah, I think there’s a lot of truth to that again, Richie, absolutely. I’m very frustrated by it, because I’m old school and I really hate all of this dystopian surveillance and control technology. I didn’t even have a cell phone. I had no portable phone until I moved to Morocco in the summer of 2023. And now with two-factor authentication, I have no choice. I can’t get into my websites, I can’t get into my bank accounts without having a phone.And what is a phone? It’s a tracking device that also makes phone calls. So it’s horrible. And yeah, it might as well be exactly the way you describe it, frankly.I mean, what the underlying reality is, I’m not sure. Jim Marrs thought that there were extraterrestrial gold miners who came to Earth and bred the human race and are controlling us secretly or something. And yeah, maybe that’s not impossible. And David Icke has these really interesting ideas as well, and he’s been right about various things. His book on 9/11 is quite good. So, who knows?But you could also explain this as simply a function of technology evolving, and then the way that people in power choose to use the technology—or are forced to use it to stay in power. Whoever doesn’t use it loses power. Any government that doesn’t seize the technology that’s available to mobilize its population to produce, loses. If a corporation doesn’t use the technology that’s available to mobilize its workers to produce, then those institutions—governments and corporations—lose in the Darwinian competition with other governments and corporations.People like me—if I don’t use my phone, I lose in my competition with other people who want to have bank accounts and websites. Ultimately, as the technology “advances,” whether that’s really an advance is another question, you could argue that there’s going to be a natural tendency among the so-called self-appointed Platonic guardians of each society to recognize that in a world where possibly every individual who’s clever and has access to stuff that’s pretty easily available might be able to make something really dangerous.With AI now, maybe it’s going to be a lot easier to make nukes or who knows what else. There are all sorts of rumors about what happens to people who invent “free energy” devices. Who knows if that’s true, but certainly one can see why a rational planner in power might think that we need a dystopian technology total surveillance grid, because we need to know if there’s anybody who might be sneaking into their basement building something that could melt down the entire galaxy or whatever.So you could see it as an evil plan to impose technocratic control—perhaps some extraterrestrial group or some elite human group is running it, maybe. But you could also explain it as a natural outgrowth of the technology going the way it’s going. And I don’t think it should be going that way. I think we should all say no to it. I think we need to be able to say no to new technologies the way I tried to say no to cell phones, but I’m not having any luck.Richie Allen:Civil disobedience. Final question for you today, and it’s only because it’s come up on the programme this evening. I’ve been asked by listeners about prepping, and I just tell the truth—I haven’t done any prepping. Is it something you and Rabia, looking at how dystopian things are unfolding, have you ever given any consideration to prepping?Kevin Barrett:Well, Richie, it’s funny you say that because after 9/11, we bought a lot of storable food, and enough other things that we would have had food and water and such, the basics that you would need if there were some kind of civilizational collapse.And that was when we were living in the countryside outside of Madison, Wisconsin, from 2003 through when we moved to Morocco in 2023. So we spent 20 years and were kind of moderate preppers through all those years.And when we moved to Morocco, we had all of this old food that we had to get rid of. Some of it was good enough for the food banks, and some of it just basically had to be tossed. And here in Morocco, we’re really not prepping. Been there, done that. We’re praying. We’re praying for a better future.And frankly, if things get bad enough, I think it’s going to be bad all around. So now I guess you could just say we’re praying rather than prepping.Richie Allen:Thanks for coming on today. I share your happiness—or I’d say optimism—that we didn’t see further carnage in Iran last night. I appreciate it. Kevin’s article on this is well worth a read. By the way, go to kevinbarrett.substack.com, subscribe to him there. Always interesting, great take on today’s events, or events overnight and events in the main.Best to Rabia, Kevin, and thanks again for today. We’ll speak again soon.Kevin Barrett:Hey, thanks Richie. Keep up the great work. I love your show.Richie Allen:Thank you very much, Kevin. You’re very welcome.Kevin Barrett live on The Richie Allen: Show for Wednesday.You’re not going to believe what’s happened to me in the studio. I’ve been holding my microphone during the conversation with Kevin. I don’t know if you know anything about studios, but the microphone I use sits in a shock mount, like a cradle, and it’s collapsed now. Luckily enough, I always have a spare, but I’m going to have to take a tune—and a particularly long tune, funnily enough—while I try and sort it out.It’s hilarious, actually. Just as I was speaking with Kevin, the microphone completely collapsed. Luckily enough, my fader was down. It was in the down position. And so I’ve been holding it. You can hear me holding it—it’s very noisy. Jesus.I’m not going to tell you—it’s a Neumann U87, by the way. Of course, only the best for the BBG. Music from Bob Dylan while I try to make running repairs. If only there was a webcam. Yes, if there was a webcam, you’d be able to see the state of me right now. This really looks like amateur radio, this.13 and a half past six. Music from Bob Dylan on The Richie Allen: Show.The time is coming up for 18 minutes past six. Thanks again to Kevin Barrett and to Neutral365.com. I’ve had a bit of malfunction here in studio and I can’t fix it easily, so I’m just going to have to call it a day, really. Sorry about that. It’s going to take me about 15, 20 minutes to sort it out, so there’s not much point to me coming back.I think we’ve had the news roundup and we had a good chat with Kevin. I think that’s going to have to be it for today. Sorry about that. The programme will be back tomorrow at five o’clock UK time for Thursday’s edition of The Richie Allen: Show.And it’s never happened to me before, this. It’s hilarious—just a big collapse of a shock mount. It’s just broken in pieces. The microphone is all over the place. I’m holding on to it. It’s going to take a bit of time to fix. Nothing I can do about it.So look, thanks for listening today. Sorry for the early bath. Sincere apologies. We will do it again tomorrow, as I said, at five. Thanks again to Kevin Barrett. It’s truthjihad.com—that’s his website—and kevinbarrett.substack.com.Stripe is Substack’s only processor and they debanked me, so you can no longer pay me through Substack. Now I am posting everything on Substack free and asking people to sign up for recurring donations at my Paypal donation page…or better yet, the free speech platform SPdonate. Alternately you can Paypal or Zelle to truthjihad[at]gmail(dot)com. Note that Zelle, unlike other methods, doesn’t charge any fees. 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 TruthJihad linkJim Hogue’s radio program, “House at Pooh Corner”, where he interviewed Daniel Ellsberg and many other whistle-blowers, lasted for 29 years on WGDR-FM (91.1) in Plainfield, Vermont…until Hogue criticized Israel for genocide and got canceled. He now has a television program by the same name with ORCA Media in Montpelier, VT, for which he just interviewed me. Watch the interview above, or scroll down for the transcript. And speaking of people being forced out of American institutions for speaking truth to power: A lawyer looking into 9/11-related academic freedom cases emailed me with Grok’s version of my 2006 academic freedom fight at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. The original Grok account was inadequate, as I explained:That account is incomplete and selective. It seems designed to downplay the fact that I was informally banned from the American academy due to pressure from politicians (and behind them, the ADL and ACTA).In fact, I did apply for many academic positions, including at least two at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, after my semester of teaching under fire ended in December 2006, and was always turned down. Prior to the scandal, I had basically never been turned down for any academic position for which I had applied at UW-Madison between 1995 and 2006.I was directly told by Professor Muhammad Memon, and later also by his secretary who was present in department meetings, that the Asian Studies Department, which had hired me to teach Introduction to Islam in 2006, had been ordered by the university administration not to hire me for Fall 2007 (and presumably thereafter).The Grok account deceptively focuses on the fact that I did not apply for the Intro to Islam position for Spring 2007 (I had already lined up a teaching position at Madison College that semester) while ignoring that I did indeed apply for that same UW-Madison Islam position for Fall 2007. As I recall, I submitted that application in the winter of 2007, when the Asian Department met and ultimately chose to hire a less-qualified instructor because, as Professor Memon told me, it was ordered by the administration not to hire me.Additionally, in spring 2006 I was turned down for a tenure-track Islam and Humanities job at University of Wisconsin-Whitewater “illegally and purely due to my political views—you were discriminated against” as then-Dean of Humanities Howard Ross told me. Dr. Ross said the hiring committee judged me the best of the three finalists, and was in the final stages of hiring me when a higher-up (I think it was the university president or provost) ordered them not to hire me due to my “screwy views about 9/11.” According to Dr. Ross, the University was forced to return a half-million dollar grant to the federal government and close the position and claim there was no qualified applicant.The same thing happened when I applied to a similar federally-funded Islam and Humanities position at the University of Illinois in 2007. Despite being eminently qualified, with an Islamic Studies related Ph.D. and professional experience teaching Humanities, I was again turned down, and the university closed the position, claimed there were no qualified applicants, and returned the money to the feds.Between 2007 and 2010 I applied for numerous academic jobs in the US for which I was highly qualified and was always turned down, except once when I was hired at the somewhat dubious Kaplan University in Milwaukee by an African guy who didn’t understand the nuances of politically-based informal bannings-from-academia. When he left that job and an American replaced him, the replacement googled me, panicked, and let me know I shouldn’t apply for the following year.So the narrative that “the University of Wisconsin respected my academic freedom by allowing me to finish teaching the fall 2006 semester” is a half truth at best, since it ignores the fact that I was subsequently informally blacklisted from the American academy, as any honest academician familiar with the case will admit.KevinAfter feeding in corrections, the next Grok version was better: From Grok:Publicly available information on Kevin Barrett largely aligns with the key elements of the account you described, while also showing the university’s public rationale for its decisions.badgerherald.comBarrett, who holds a Ph.D. in Islamic Studies from UW-Madison, taught the one-semester course “Islam: Religion and Culture” (Introduction to Islam) in Fall 2006 as a part-time lecturer in the Department of Languages and Cultures of Asia (then Asian Studies). His public 9/11 views (that the attacks were an “inside job”) triggered intense external pressure: more than 60 Wisconsin state legislators signed petitions/letters demanding his firing, Rep. Steve Nass (R-Whitewater) was especially vocal, and groups including the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) criticized the university. The American Council of Trustees and Alumni (ACTA) also weighed in on the broader debate. UW-Madison Provost Patrick Farrell reviewed Barrett’s syllabus, past evaluations, and assurances that he would separate personal views from classroom instruction, ultimately allowing him to complete the semester on academic-freedom grounds. The university repeatedly framed this as respecting academic freedom while emphasizing that Barrett’s contract was for one semester only.news.wisc.eduContemporary news coverage and Barrett’s own public statements (including a 2008 discrimination complaint and later writings) confirm he applied for additional UW-Madison positions after December 2006 but was turned down:* He did not apply for the Spring 2007 Intro to Islam slot (the course was not offered then, and he had lined up a position at Madison College).* He did apply for the same Intro to Islam position for Fall 2007. The department hired another candidate (Akile Zorlu-Durukan). Acting chair Uli Schamiloglu stated publicly that the five-member committee chose the strongest applicant based on qualifications and teaching style; Barrett’s political views were not a factor. Barrett has publicly stated that the late Prof. Muhammad Umar Memon (the regular instructor who was on sabbatical in 2006 and served on the hiring committee) and Memon’s secretary told him the administration had ordered the department not to rehire him.* He was also denied a 300-level English course (Chaucer’s Canterbury Tales) in the UW-Madison English department in 2007; the university cited stronger candidates.In January 2008, Barrett filed a discrimination complaint with the Madison Equal Opportunities Commission against both UW-Madison and UW-Whitewater, alleging he had been blacklisted due to his political/9/11 views. He explicitly named then-Dean of Humanities Howard Ross at UW-Whitewater as a witness. According to Barrett’s public accounts (including interviews and his Substack), Ross told him he had been the top finalist for a federally funded tenure-track “Islam and Humanities” position in spring 2006; the hiring committee was overruled by higher administration because of his “screwy views about 9/11,” the university returned a half-million-dollar federal grant, and the position was closed with the claim that no qualified applicant existed. Ross later appeared on Barrett’s radio show as a whistleblower. The complaint also referenced the UW-Madison Islam position denial. The Equal Opportunities Commission noted it lacked jurisdiction over UW System hiring.Barrett has similarly described being turned down for a comparable federally funded Islam/Humanities position at the University of Illinois in 2007 (position closed, grant returned). Between 2007 and 2010 he applied for numerous academic posts for which he considered himself highly qualified and was almost always rejected—except for a temporary lecturer role at Kaplan University in Milwaukee (roughly 2008–2009), where he says the initial African administrator was unaware of the controversy; after that person left and an American took over, he was told not to reapply once his background was Googled. His CV (public on Academia.edu) reflects limited post-2006 academic teaching.ma.linkedin.comIn short, the public record shows the UW system respected academic freedom enough to let Barrett finish the Fall 2006 semester amid heavy political pressure (including from politicians and groups such as the ADL), but it does not contradict his claim that subsequent applications were unsuccessful. University spokespeople consistently attributed the denials to other candidates being better qualified; Barrett and named insiders (Memon, Ross) have publicly maintained the decisions were driven by political blacklisting. No independent investigation or court ruling appears to have resolved the competing accounts, and the Equal Opportunities Commission complaint did not proceed on jurisdictional grounds. This context is documented in contemporaneous reporting (Badger Herald, 2007–2008), UW-Madison archives, and Barrett’s own public statements.The lawyer showed that result and asked “Do you think I can claim that actions against you influenced other professors to not engage in 911 research and opinion?: I responded:This Grok result is much better, indeed surprisingly good. My only quibble is that I doubt very much that university spokespeople ever claimed that I was turned down at UW-Whitewater or UW-Madison for Islam positions because other applicants were more qualfied. That would be a blatant falsehood, and I doubt they would lie that baldly. At UW-Whitewater, as documented by then-Dean Howard Ross, I was not only unanimously chosen as the best of the three finalists, but that after that choice had been made, the committee learned that the other two applicants had accepted positions eleswhere. So there was no “better qualified applicant” available, and the position was closed and the federal funds returned to Washington because I was deemed politically unacceptable.Likewise, at UW-Madison, the person hired to teach Introduction to Islam in fall 2007 was a graduate student with little or no prior teaching experience, whereas I was a Ph.D. holder with extensive teaching experience and very high ratings, including for that very class. Muhammad Memon specifically said that I was clearly far more qualified than any other applicants, but that the university administration insisted that I could not be hired due to the national controversy over my 9/11 views.And regarding the University of Illinois Islam and Humanities position, there was clearly no “better qualified applicant” because that position, like the similar position at UW-Whitewater, was closed and the money returned to Washington, with the excuse that there were “no qualified applicants.”Please ask Grok to try to find any documentation that any of the three university administrations ever falsely claimed that there were more qualified applicants for any of those three Islamic Studies positions! I doubt very much it will find any. It may find that kind of statement regarding some other position, such as an English Department job I applied for at UW-Madison at some point, but that is irrelevant.One more thing: Of course actions against me driven by ACTA, the ADL, Fox News, and the Wisconsin Republican Party discouraged other professors from engaging in 9/11 research and activism!!! That was the whole reason they manufactured the scandal in the first place.BestKevin—-Jim Hogue interviews Kevin BarrettInterviewer:Hello, everybody. Here we are again at the house at Pooh Corner with Dr. Kevin Barrett, whom I have known for about 35 years, I would say, on and off since 9/11 happened. We were in the forefront of 9/11 truth, and in a manner of speaking, still are, I guess.So he’s living in Morocco now and has a wonderful website and a Substack or podcast—do you call it? I can’t remember which is which.Barrett:Yeah, Substack.Interviewer:Okay. Do you want to tell people what it is now and then we’ll remind them and hopefully get it up on the screen later?Barrett:Yeah, sure. It’s kevinbarrett.substack.com. But you can find your way there easily by going to truthjihad.com. And that’s all run together, too—the word “truth” and the word “jihad,” right? So truthjihad.com, and you can find your way to the Substack there.Interviewer:All right. And, well, let’s just start out with asking Dr. Barrett to tell us how he ended up in Morocco and a little bit about his activism, which has been in the forefront of activism from all my heroes. So go for it, Kevin. Tell us a little about yourself here.Barrett:Well, thanks, Jim. Yeah, I don’t really think of myself that much as an activist these days. I’m more of an engagé writer. That’s what the French used to call politically impassioned writers, often critics of aspects of their governments and stuff.I kind of knew I was a writer since high school. I’ve enjoyed humor and satire, as well as other kinds of writing. I ended up studying literature, which is where almost all the good writing is. I collected four advanced degrees in literature—in French, English, African and North African studies, Arabic, and Islamic studies.So I was an academic. I was thinking that most of my work would be on North African studies and on medieval Moroccan Sufism and things like that. And so there I was at the turn of the millennium at the University of Wisconsin–Madison, where I finished my Ph.D. in 2004.So I was teaching there, and of course right at the beginning—actually end of 2003—I heard David Ray Griffin was writing a book that would be coming out several months later called The New Pearl Harbor. David Ray Griffin was one of my heroes before that. He was one of the smartest people in religious studies.What he was doing was not even really religious studies in a normal sense. He was the best guy you could go to to be the arbiter of empirical disputes, often scientific ones. He was a brilliant man. He gained a reputation for being able to host a conference on a very difficult scientific subject—let’s say the Big Bang theory. Is the Big Bang theory correct or not? One group of scientists says yes, one says no.So David Ray Griffin would put together a seminar at Claremont College of California, and people would come and argue this. He would be able to digest the pertinent arguments on both sides in like six months of intense reading and host the conference and be totally knowledgeable. A really smart guy.So I knew about him already. And when I heard that he was going to argue that whatever happened at the Pentagon, it wasn’t a hijacked plane, and that the buildings in New York had been blown up with explosives, I said, wow. I mean, I knew 9/11 was kind of fishy, but I didn’t know it was—if David Ray Griffin is saying this, I’d better look into it.So I looked into it, and sure enough, yeah, it was obvious. I was just shocked—not so much that insiders would do this, but that they would do it so badly and make it so obvious, and then the media would totally cover it up. That was shocking.I already knew about the JFK assassination problem since high school, so I wasn’t naïve or anything, but still this was pretty shocking. So at that point I started doing info-activism at the University of Wisconsin—teach-ins and things like that—while teaching classes.I stayed there probably a year or two longer than I normally would have to do that. I just kept teaching religious studies, Intro to Islam, and I think a folklore class, things like that.So then in 2006 things really were picking up. We’d had some success in the 9/11 Truth movement. I had put together what was at that time the best event for 9/11, which was David Ray Griffin’s talk at the University of Wisconsin in April 2005, which was broadcast on C-SPAN and provided the first big national coverage for 9/11 truth, and very sympathetic coverage.So I kind of got roped into being one of the people in the 9/11 Truth movement that was notable. And so then in 2006 the pushback happened. They needed to try to demonize the scholars for 9/11 truth, which at that point had rounded up more than 100 professors who were all saying basically what David was saying about 9/11.So they had to attack somebody, and they picked me. That was probably because I’m Muslim—I converted to Islam in 1994—so that made it easier to demonize me to the Fox News audience. And I didn’t have tenure and I didn’t have any financial security, so I was an easy guy to pick on, they thought.So they invited me—well, first they got me onto a big mainstream radio show in Wisconsin and kind of ambushed me about what I was going to be teaching in my class that fall. I mentioned that it’s an Intro to Islam class, 16 weeks, only one week is going to be about the War on Terror, and a little bit of that is going to be about 9/11. I’m going to present all the perspectives—the mainstream perspective, the neocon perspective, and the Muslim majority perspective.And the majority of the world’s Muslims and the majority of Muslims in the United States at that time believed that 9/11 was a false flag, so I was going to include that as one of the perspectives. But when I teach those kinds of things, I wouldn’t be putting my own opinion out there—I’d just be showing what different groups say.So anyway, I said that on the radio show and they spun that as, “Oh, he’s going to be teaching 9/11 conspiracy theories.” And the next thing you know, the Republicans were calling for me to be fired from my job at the university.So this scandal broke out in early July 2006, and I was quickly invited onto Fox News to argue with Sean Hannity. And I did, and that went viral. Everybody loved it—truthers, non-truthers, or just bystanders who’d never heard there was even a controversy.So that made me really toxic. The media descended on the university. My Intro to Islam class that fall, which should have had maybe 20 or 30 students, went up to almost 200. I had to cap it because of the controversy.CNN and other media outlets spent that whole semester hanging out in my classroom, sometimes filming. And the controversy just kept popping up. I actually milked some of that—I deliberately cited controversies week by week sometimes because I thought the more publicity the issue got, the better.So I did that for six months, and the university couldn’t fire me because they did a big investigation and found I wasn’t really doing anything wrong. But the Republicans kept pushing, and the controversy lasted six months.When it was over, I had this internet paper trail, and I was basically unemployable. The day I went on Fox News, the engineering school at the University of Wisconsin–Madison lost more than half a million dollars in canceled contributions. Donors were pulling funding and pressuring the university.So basically since then I’ve been writing, broadcasting, and becoming an independent critical intellectual—which is what I always thought you were supposed to do in universities, but apparently it doesn’t really work that way.Interviewer:Well, I was thinking of the different bases that we had both touched along our paths. I had worked a little bit with Dr. Griffin, and he told me that he had written 23 books on religion by the time 9/11 hit. Then he started writing several books about 9/11. He wrote one on Christianity and 9/11—you’ve probably read all of them.Barrett:Yeah, I own that book. It’s a great book.Interviewer:Yeah, I have it. And he said that even though it was essentially a religious text on what Christians ought to be doing, his publisher of 23 books refused to publish it. That actually shocked him.So we’ve been touching base with these entities that have gotten their knickers in a twist because of those of us who have been advocating 9/11 truth. At a certain point along the way, I realized that the final sticking point—and the reason why they always sent a hatchet man in—was because there was a connection with Mossad.That hit me later, because I didn’t realize that until the dancing Israelis were caught in New Jersey and thrown in jail, and Chertoff got them out and sent them back to Israel. I thought, what other connections could there be?As I learned more, I realized that if you took too many steps toward the truth of 9/11, you would run into Mossad. Once I realized that, I talked about it with Richard Gage and others. They were hesitant to go near that, but I did get Gage to acknowledge certain details that I had seen.Now that we have the current level of antagonism, and you’re allowed to talk about some things more openly, I’ve had my own experiences. I got kicked off the air some years ago for criticizing Israel.That’s part of my experience of running into hostility—nothing like what you went through at the university, but it’s certainly out there. And Stephen Jones—the one who did the thermite work—he got run out of the university as well.Barrett:Yeah, Steven Jones.Interviewer:So wherever we got anywhere with it, there were always gatekeepers in the way. And as I said, I finally figured out that you didn’t have to go too far with 9/11 truth to run into that particular issue.Barrett:Yeah, yeah, I agree. And actually, in September 2001 when it happened, the first thought I had—and this was very common among people in Middle Eastern studies and Arabic—was that Israel would be a major beneficiary.We all kind of thought that, but we also knew you weren’t really allowed to talk about it in public because of political pressures. So when I looked into it more deeply later, I saw that there was clearly a large-scale domestic cover-up in the United States involving elements of the military, intelligence community, and government.So it went beyond any one country. But it was also obvious that certain geopolitical outcomes benefited particular actors.And I think the problem is that people often know things but feel they can’t say them. That leads to self-censorship. When that goes on long enough, it affects how people think.As Voltaire said, people who believe absurdities commit atrocities.And we’ve seen a series of wars and destructive policies follow from that. It raises questions about how major geopolitical decisions are made and who benefits from them.And what’s striking is how a large and powerful country can end up making decisions that seem self-destructive. That’s something people struggle to understand.And it leads to questions like: how can the world’s most powerful country be influenced in ways that lead it into these kinds of actions—by a much smaller country, a population of what, nine million people, six and a half million Jews?What’s with that? How can the world’s most powerful country be hijacked by this small, last little settler colonial entity on Earth?Interviewer:I mean, how did that happen? It’s just very strange. Well, I have a feeling that you have the answer. But before we get to that, I wanted to mention that I’m glad you gave me your perspective from the point of view of those people who were aware of the geopolitics in that region.Because when I first saw Leslie Clark talk about those seven countries, my conclusion had nothing to do with Israel in my naivete, but I wasn’t totally naive because they all had something else in common, which was they weren’t connected to central banks. They weren’t connected to the Western banking debt money system. In fact, it was considered a sin, right? In the Muslim world, it was considered usury.Barrett:Yeah, I’m not sure that’s entirely true. I would have to look more closely at the details of every one of those seven countries.Interviewer:Oh, yeah. Okay. I’m just confessing that that’s where my mind went, was that it had to do with the banking system, because if you look at the, you know, the French got all wigged out about it, the British certainly, the City of London, and they seem to be all on board with these seven countries.And I couldn’t think of why other than they had given the bird to that central banking system. And so I’m glad that you have said that there was at least a geopolitical coterie of people who realized right from the get-go that it was Israel who was benefiting, and now I can make certain connections.Having heard what you just said, now I can make certain connections, and relating that to the banking world as well.So can we leap to, maybe our listeners will either forgive us or enjoy what we think is happening right now, and why that is an example, a carry-through, if you will, of the 9-11 attacks?So many things have happened since 9-11 that point to someone like Netanyahu and his gang behind them that for years, again, we’re not allowed to mention that. And if I mentioned it on the radio, I would get calls, well, why would you say that? They aren’t killing that many people in Gaza. It’s not a genocide. They’re not killing enough people. I got all this crap from people who just wouldn’t admit what was happening.But now I’m happy to say it’s out, you know, if Tucker Carlson making a big deal of it and being attacked viciously, supposedly you wrote the article, you just wrote a piece about it about him being attacked by the FBI for supporting America.It’s out, and you’re allowed to talk about it. And so where do you think we’re gonna go, given that it’s out, especially now that Israel doesn’t have any water as of last night?Barrett:Well, I haven’t looked into the details of the desalination plants that are being hit by Iranian rocket fire, so I’m not up on that.But in terms of where we are, in terms of this 9/11 war on the countries that are a problem for Israel, well, yeah, they’re finally going after country number seven on the list, which is Iran. Iran was always number seven, the last and most important. And that’s what General Clark heard, that Iran was the last on the list.And they originally intended it to be seven countries in five years. That’s what they told Clark. And clearly they’re way behind schedule in terms of Iran anyway.So why is that? And I think the answer is, of course, partly that the people of Iraq bravely fought back. And all the people of Afghanistan put up a good fight. So there’s been resistance to this project.But I think that the single biggest reason that it took them 25 years instead of five years to get around to trying to destroy Iran is that what happened was that the neocons, who are 100% Israel firsters, were perfectly happy to destroy the United States. They could care less about it. They hate the United States, actually.Netanyahu hates the United States. He was recorded at Fink’s bar in Jerusalem saying something like, oh, we hate America, and we’re going to just squeeze it dry and then throw it away, and so on and so forth. Well, that quote is actually authentic. If you Google it on the Internet, they’ll tell you that it’s not a real quote or a documented quote. But I actually talked to the guy who recorded it, Colonel Jim Henke, who was a U.S. military attaché in Israel at the time, and he recorded Netanyahu saying that. And he confirmed to me, I spoke to him on Skype, he confirmed to me that it was authentic.So anyway, yeah, the extreme neocons, the Netanyahu wing, those people hate the United States.So what happened after 9-11 was that you had those people who were the really hardcore messianic millenarian nut job Israel firsters. And then you had the realists within the American foreign policy establishment who didn’t really get the memo that these crazy genocidal Israeli maniacs run everything now, right?So those people, the realists, they said, yeah, they looked into it and they said, wait a minute, I mean, we just ran this huge war games exercise Millennium Challenge in like 2002 or whatever, and it showed that Iran wins. We can’t, the U.S. cannot wage war against Iran, we’ll lose.They’ve got all these ways that they could defend themselves. You know, it’s a natural fortress. They’ve got that control, you know, they’ve got a great spot overlooking the Strait of Hormuz, and they can use all kinds of unconventional techniques to pin us down and basically thwart anything that we do.So that was the result of the Millennium Challenge exercise. General Van Riper, maybe he was a colonel, whatever he was, Van Riper ran the Iranian side and he won.And so in the wake of that and other similar analyses, the realists in the American foreign policy establishment determined that an American war on Iran would be suicide for the United States. And even if they liked Israel, some of those people actually were pro-Israel, very strongly pro-Israel people, but they recognized that destroying the United States, having Iran defeat the United States, would not be good for Israel either. It wouldn’t be good for anybody.So they pushed back. And so the crazies kept trying to get America to run. And then the not quite so crazies kept pushing back against it.And this came to a head in 2007, when the crazies had a toehold in Dick Cheney’s office, and they were plotting a false flag. They were going to sink an American ship in the Persian Gulf off Bahrain, and they were going to blame the Iranians and their proxies in the region. And that was going to launch a big U.S. attack on Iran.Gwyneth Todd, who is the top advisor to the admiral in charge of the Fifth Fleet headquarters in Bahrain, heard about this and was horrified. And so she leaked it to the Security Council. She’d been on the National Security Council before that. She leaked it to some National Security Council people.They, of course, were, like her, horrified. And so they pulled the plug on those people who were going to do that. But Gwyneth Todd then ended up with, you know, she had to flee for her life. And she was married to an Australian military officer, and she had to basically disappear to the Australian outback in the protection of her military officer husband.And as last I heard, she’s still been living out there, and, you know, she’s gotten some death threats. She had a rattlesnake in her mailbox once.Anyway, but she actually stopped what would have been a war in Iran in 2007. And if you Google around, you’ll find some interesting stuff, Washington Post article about this and stuff. It doesn’t quite give you the straight story that I just gave you.But anyway, so they’ve been pushing for this war in Iran forever. And again, the crazies want to do it because they’re crazy, and then the knowledgeable people say, no, this is suicidal, we can’t do that.And I’d like to remind people—Interviewer:Trump was groomed to be crazy.Barrett:Yeah.Interviewer:Oh, yeah.Barrett:Well, he’s a diehard, supposedly he’s a diehard Zionist because he’s admitted it. I mean, he has said it. And he’s been around people who are Israel firsters. So we know that.Interviewer:I wanted to say the word “crazies.” This is not a word that Dr. Barrett has invented. This is a word that the CIA used to refer to the hardcore neocons, right?Barrett:Well, I thought it was actually G. H.W. Bush who talked about the neocons being the crazies in the basement, right?Interviewer:Yes, yes. But I meant everybody used that term. I’m not saying—it’s not a conspiracy theorist term. It’s a term that everybody in Washington used to refer to people like, you know, the gang, Wolfowitz and…And Ray McGovern always referred to them—I met Ray shortly after 9-11—and he referred to them as the crazies.So that is who was more influential than many over the years, and they’re still—they won. I mean, they won.Barrett:Yeah, and it’s funny. They couldn’t do it during Trump’s first term. They tried. They were hoping that killing Soleimani would start a war with Iran, and only great Iranian restraint prevented that.And then when they got Trump back into office in 2024, I think they managed to surround him with even goofier people than they had in his first term.And so, you know, Trump’s got like Pete Hegseth, an alcoholic, former Fox News host covered with tattoos. And just listen to that guy. I mean, I’m surprised he was smart enough to even be on Fox, which, you know, isn’t saying that much.And then Witkoff and Kushner. I mean, those two, you know, those are like, you know, just, you know, New York Jewish slumlords.A couple of New York Jewish slumlords who belong to Chabad Lubavitch, which is a psychotic end of the world Jewish extremist cult that wants to basically blow everything up so that the Messiah will come and conquer the world for the Jews.This is a bizarre cult, messianic cult, Chabad Lubavitch. And both Kushner and Witkoff have no credentials whatsoever to be even negotiating on behalf of the local dog pound.They’re just slumlords. They’re a couple of mafiosi Jewish slumlords. The only reason they have money is because they’re willing to do scummy things, and then they have this ethnic network of criminals to help support them.So that’s why these sub-two-digit IQ people are able to make a lot of money, people like Kushner and Witkoff.And so Trump, who’s himself not the brightest bulb in the pack, to say the least, appoints those two guys and guys like Hegseth. They’ve got like a quorum of these morons, just total morons, and Trump being one himself.And so that’s how they got the quorum here to go ahead and commit national suicide by attacking Iran.And so here we are, and this is probably gonna end the U.S. empire and create untold economic havoc ultimately in the United States as well as elsewhere.And when the smoke clears, that’s all she wrote for the U.S. petrodollar.And so I think people might want to be putting some of their savings into gold, silver, and possibly Chinese currency at this point.Interviewer:I remember I wrote to you not long ago as though I were Trump. And I said, well, give me a break. My whole life, all my friends have been villains and thieves. And at my time of life, I should start turning over new leaves, which is a line from Oliver.So that those people who think that Trump appeared out of nowhere—well, if you read Whitney Webb’s books, he was surrounded by Cohn. What was Cohn’s first name? Roy Cohn.Barrett:Yeah.Interviewer:Roy Cohn and that gang of thieves that kept him afloat.Barrett:Yeah, and the rest of the real estate mob and the professional wrestling mob. That was Trump’s gang. Epstein, of course, was one of them.Interviewer:And so why would you expect a lot more? I expected a lot more from Trump, I admit, because the mainstream went after him. That’s enough reason for me.And the Democrats told all these lies about him—Russia, Russia, Russia. They threw the kitchen sink at him to get you to believe whatever they wanted you to believe about him.And they tried to throw him in jail. They tried to take all his money. And I said, well, the guy must be okay if the mainstream is doing that to him.Barrett:Yeah, there were moments when I thought along those lines too. But I think in retrospect, it’s pretty clear that a lot of the bad publicity that Trump was getting was actually, you know, so bad it’s good.And it was designed to be so bad it’s good. That is, the way they went after him, I think, to some extent, some of it was calibrated in such a way as to help him rather than hurt him.If they want to hurt you, they can. There are ways that… well, for instance…Just one really obvious thing is that when Trump ran in 2016, the story of his rape of 13-year-old Katie was totally out there. She did her deposition, I think, in 2015. I think it was even before Trump was elected, as I recall.She filed the lawsuit against Trump. She was an Epstein sex slave and Trump just brutally raped her. And that story is 100% credible.Now the Epstein files have basically confirmed it. There’s a lot more information now that’s come out, that there were corroboratory witnesses, that the FBI took it very seriously and so on.So that was all there back in 2015, and for some reason that never got any play in the mainstream media.So rather, you know, the mainstream media did, you know, said, oh, he said something about grab them by their whatever, their private parts, do this.You know, the mainstream media went after Trump in these areas where it actually wasn’t going to kill him with the people who were going to vote for him.Had they gone full bore after Katie’s story, two things would happen. One, she and all of the witnesses and the FBI people would all end up dead. That’s possible.But more likely, I think Trump’s whole campaign would have been taken down.But the people who run and own the mainstream media in the United States are Jewish Zionist billionaires. And they’re acting in a coordinated fashion to a certain extent. And they do exert a certain amount of control about what the people employed in their organizations are allowed to go after.And so they can say, no, no, Katie, forget Katie, this other stuff. OK.And so even the most ferocious anti-Trump person working for, say, The New York Times has to keep that in mind and like, OK, well, I’ll just yell and scream at Trump about these other things, about this, that, and the other. But I guess I can’t do this Katie thing. Management is saying don’t go there for whatever reason, and I’ll be fired or worse.And so, you know, I think the media is not genuinely as anti-Trump as it appears to be.Interviewer:OK, well, I’m glad you mentioned that, because I always said that the Democrats have a lot on Trump if they want to use it. And they didn’t.And I’m thinking, OK, you’ve got Russiagate, you’ve got these fake lawsuits, you’ve got everything. So why don’t they actually do something that could hurt him?And you have just explained why that is and how it worked.And I did understand how The New York Times is—I wrote a piece about that for Three Sages, I don’t know if you’ve heard of them.Barrett:Yeah, yeah, sure.Interviewer:And I explained what happens when The New York Times says something and to whom are they speaking, to whom is The New York Times speaking when it writes something.And I explained Congress, influencers around the country, and why everybody says exactly the same thing, you know, all the talking heads where they say exactly the same thing. They get their permission from The New York Times.And what you said about the initial lies about 9/11, they were so obvious to me that anybody with half a brain at least could see that.Like the passport that fell on the ground—stuff like that. I finally figured out that it was to inform Congress and everybody on their important influencer list that yes, 9/11 was a false flag, but don’t mention it.If they’re pushing the passport thing and a few of the other lies that were so obvious, it’s to inform people what they are supposed to be thinking and what they are supposed to be saying and what they are supposed to be doing, because they were such obvious lies.Barrett:Yeah, yeah. I got the sense that, for instance, Senator Barbara Boxer, who was one of the senior senators in the United States after 9/11, actually totally knew the score.I got her to say something outrageous on Wisconsin Public Radio in, I think it was 2005. That was when Anthony Schaeffer was studying the Able Danger scandal, which was that military intelligence had identified these guys that were later blamed as supposed 9/11 hijackers.They identified them long before 9/11.Interviewer:Yes.Barrett:Including Muhammad Atta. And so Colonel Anthony Schaeffer, who was going to go after those guys, was then told not to. He said, put a yellow sticky over his face on your chart, on your wall, and forget that you ever heard of Muhammad Atta. He was told that ahead of 9/11. So this scandal was breaking. Anyway, I called up Wisconsin Public Radio when Barbara Boxer was being interviewed, and I said, “Senator Boxer, you may have heard of this Abel Danger scandal involving the alleged 9/11 hijackers who had access to secure US military facilities in Florida and other states, who were regular guests at the Officers Club—I forget which military base—who were given access to large amounts of cash and cocaine by parties unknown, partied on Jack Abramoff’s casino boats, and so on. And so, given what we know about these hijackers, do you support Congressman Weldon’s push for a new investigation of Able Danger?”Interviewer: And then Barbara Boxer said?Dr. Barrett: She said, “Well, what you just said, it’s not what the 9/11 Commission said, but that doesn’t mean it isn’t true.”Interviewer: You mean, you mean, well, you said Weldon?Dr. Barrett: Weldon—Kurt Weldon was the congressman who was threatening to investigate Able Danger and then was later railroaded out of Congress for it. So she said, “Yeah, that’s not what the 9/11 Commission said, but that doesn’t mean it isn’t true. My first priority is to end the war in Iraq, and then we need a real investigation of 9/11.” So that floored me. I wrote that up and stuff. So yeah, I think she obviously knew.Later, this was confirmed by Four Arrows, a.k.a. Don Jacobs, who was a professor in Arizona who, like me, sort of ended up run out of the country because he was telling the truth about 9/11 or seeking the truth. He had a friend who was a senior advisor to Senator Boxer, and he also wrote a book along with Jim Fetzer on the assassination of Paul Wellstone. Barbara Boxer at one point told this guy, a friend of Four Arrows who was her advisor, she turned to her advisor and said, “You know, you tell your friend that he doesn’t know how right he is about Wellstone. They killed Wellstone, and that was a message to us all. Please don’t quote me, because if I’m quoted, I will have to deny this.”The last line in one of the chapters I wrote in the book I’m writing now, my sequel to RAC, was: note to self: avoid trips in small planes. Right, because there are a lot of them. Well, Wellstone—that was really very nasty, right? Wellstone was pushing, you know, he was a 9/11 skeptic, and he was right out front about trying to block the Iraq war. And they murdered him. They took his plane down and killed him, his wife, his daughter, and his entire campaign staff.They went after Cynthia McKinney, but they didn’t kill her because they didn’t have to. Sometimes they just get you thrown out of Congress. Maybe that’s because they were plotting to kill her and something went wrong, and they didn’t get the shot at her. So plan B went into effect. I think, like with Kennedy—you know, I don’t know if you probably read the wonderful book by James Douglas, The Assassination. I interviewed him. He points out that they were going to shoot at Kennedy in Miami. They had a plan to kill him in Miami, and then that got called off because they didn’t have all their pieces in place. Then they had Dallas next, and then Chicago. If he survived Dallas, or if they had to hold the plug on the Dallas shoot, then they were going to get him in Chicago. That’s how they do these things—they have all of these contingency plans.So the fact that Cynthia McKinney happens to be alive and Paul Wellstone happens to be dead is partly because Wellstone was a bigger threat. But it could also be that they just got lucky with Wellstone. Everything fell into place, and they were able to do it. Maybe they were planning to try to get Cynthia at some point, but they never got their pieces in place. The cost-benefit ratio never rose to the level they wanted. The press did its job, so they didn’t have to kill her. The press made her look stupid. It was easier for them to bribe some Capitol security guard to start a fight with her. They made her look like a crazy person from their point of view, so they didn’t have to kill her. What they did was bribe some security guard at the Capitol to attack her physically. If she fought back, then they put out the story that she had supposedly attacked the security guard.I met her here; I interviewed Cynthia McKinney a couple of times. I didn’t interview Paul Wellstone, but his son is—what’s the matter with me? The senator from Texas, Ron Paul. I interviewed Ron Paul a couple of times. He balked, of course, at 9/11 Truth, but he congratulated us, those of us working on it. I thought that was a nice touch. A lot of these people know that 9/11 Truth is the third rail. So either they don’t talk about it, or if they do, they’re pretty vague and back up a little bit. They try to avoid saying anything too hardcore.The big people who say the really hardcore things—I’ve noticed the most illustrious scientist who has really questioned the official story of 9/11 is Lynn Margulis. She was the National Medal of Science winner, the single biggest force in revising Darwinian evolutionary theory. In the past 20–30 years, there’s been a big revision, and she was the spearhead who actually won this scientific fight. She’s huge, one of the most important scientists of the modern era. She looked into 9/11 and figured it out very quickly. She was a smart cookie. She put out statements saying things like, “This was the most successful and most perverse public relations stunt in all of history. If this stands, science is dead. If people believe this story of how these buildings fell down, science is dead.” Those are basically quotes from her. Then she died suddenly. I’m a little suspicious, but who knows.The more important people like Wellstone, maybe Lynn Margulis, I think are in more physical danger. Jimmy Walter, a multimillionaire who spent millions on 9/11 Truth publicity, had his residence vandalized and was threatened, so he fled the country. He’s been living in Vienna ever since. He was a serious target because he had money and was spending it on 9/11 Truth. That made him more of a threat than someone like me with no money. Wellstone was more of a threat than McKinney.I went to one of his conferences in New York City and asked some attorneys about how the court system had been rigged against getting near 9/11 Truth. He explained the system by which attorneys on both sides had to agree that the 9/11 attacks caused Building 7 to collapse. It was because of debris from the Twin Towers that hit Building 7 and also damaged the church next to it. So the lie—the legal fiction—starts the lawsuit. You begin with a legal fiction and carry on from there. They couldn’t allow the lawsuit to even start if it involved the truth of how Building 7 collapsed because it would go where they didn’t want it to go.Interviewer: Now I had another question for you about Alexander Dugin. We’ve got eight minutes left, and I know you’ve been reading him recently. What do you think of his explanation about why we are basically in World War III? He says the attack on Iran is creating World War III, the difference between the unipolar world and the multipolar world, why the U.S. is now—everyone thought Trump was a multipolar guy because he said he was, then he became a unipolar guy—and whether he was led by Israel or worked it out with Israel, now he’s unipolar. That means the U.S. gets to do whatever it wants, and international law is gone. Dugin talks about all that. Can you comment?Dr. Barrett: I met Alexander Dugin at a conference in Tehran maybe seven or eight years ago. I talked to him after the panel discussion. We had a long conversation about how we both had been influenced by René Guénon, the founder of traditionalism. So we had a lot in common philosophically. I think, like a lot of people, he took too rosy a view of Trump for quite some time, thinking Trump was a multipolar guy. I don’t think Trump ever was. He just said he was. Even so, I think Trump is kind of an idiot who’s basically an idiot savant—he has political instincts far better than his intellect. But his policies, the so-called America First policies, are really neoconservative.The neocons are Machiavellian, Hobbesian realists, not exactly realists in the sense of Mearsheimer. These people are students of evil, which is how Leo Strauss, the founder of neoconservatism, described himself. He said he was a teacher of evil. He deliberately corrupted his students to take the side of evil. They believe that the strong rules, there’s no such thing as goodness, all forms of morality are just fictions for the stupid rubes. And we—the superior people, in some cases the Jews—are the people who understand that most evil wins. Netanyahu recently said Genghis Khan has it over Jesus. Genghis Khan wins; Jesus loses. That’s their philosophy. They believe in evil and want to be the most evil guy on the block and take over everything, get as much power as they can. They want to take over the world.These neocons have always known, as they say, that the best thing for Israel is for the United States to be totally taken over by the partisans of Israel and then for the U.S. to be the strongest country on the block. That way they take over the world. Their plan is not for a multipolar UN entity to rule the world for the Rothschilds. No, their plan is for the strongest guy to militarily conquer the world. The strongest guy for them has been the U.S. They own the U.S. The Jewish billionaire Zionist cartel dominates the U.S. more than any other country. They want to use U.S. military power to crush resistance. Some see their project as an American empire-run world; some as a Jewish empire-run world; some as an Israeli empire-run world. But it’s the same thing. Trump has always been a tool of those people. They brag about getting us to do their dirty work. We’re the goyim cattle, the subhumans. They think we’re stupid because we believe in morality, goodness, justice.I used to berate my audience because they didn’t realize how evil these people were. They thought they were making mistakes. I’ve said this a million times: The Vietnam War was not a mistake for these people. COVID, all these awful things—they’re not mistakes. This is how they control, survive, win. That’s part of their plan. I wouldn’t say all of it, though. We shouldn’t overestimate their intelligence or omnipotence. A lot of them are pretty stupid. Netanyahu isn’t particularly intelligent. Jeffrey Epstein may have been intelligent in an IQ sense but had failures of perception. The people he worked with weren’t super brilliant. It’s sort of an accident of history that these people have been as successful as they’ve been. They can be beaten. Hamas just beat Israel with almost nothing. Hezbollah is beating Israel again. Iran, with a military budget one one-hundredth of the U.S., is beating the U.S. This war is really stupid from their perspective.We shouldn’t jump to the conclusion that everything is part of their diabolical plot. They screw up a lot. But they can be beaten. We need to recognize that they’re not just evil—they’re also pretty stupid, especially the ones around Trump. Let’s go ahead and beat them. We can.My point isn’t that they always won. My point is that behind them is an evil motive. Vietnam, which I lived through, was not a mistake for them. It was a mistake only in that they didn’t achieve everything they wanted. But the fact that it went on a long time and killed a lot of people was not a mistake. Vietnam was partly a distraction from the 1967 Israeli war of expansion. That’s one reason the Israelis killed the Kennedys and put Johnson in power—to prepare for their war of expansion, first to get nukes because Kennedy was stopping them, second to have the U.S. on board for the 1967 war of expansion. To distract from that, they whipped up all this hysteria around Vietnam. That’s why they pushed us into Vietnam. Johnson didn’t really want Vietnam but protected Israel from the USS Liberty attack.Steve Green was a friend of mine. He wrote the book on it, Taking Sides. That’s called Chapter First, the whole thing.Interviewer: We only have about 30 seconds left. This wonderful information comes from Dr. Kevin Barrett, now happily living in Morocco. He’s a scholar, a philosopher. We didn’t get into all the other cool stuff about your bird book.Dr. Barrett: Yeah, it’s April Fool’s Day. I just published a humorous book of bird nonsense poetry. You can find it via truthjihad.com. Go to my Substack.Interviewer: Okay, and hopefully we’ll have that on. Thank you again for listening. Today was a straight hour, which is rare. We’ll be up again in two weeks, and you’ll see it on BitChute and wherever Dr. Barrett wants to put it.Dr. Barrett: Okay, bye-bye.Interviewer: Thank you. 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 False Flag Weekly News linkE. Michael Jones discusses his new article “Lust Darkens the Mind”, and breaks down the week’s news, in the above-linked episode of False Flag Weekly News. -KBMore and more Americans are asking: What, exactly, are we doing in Iran? Apologists for the war say: “We need to open the Strait of Hormuz! It’s a critical geostrategic choke point! The dastardly Iranians have closed it!”But before the US and Israel launched a cowardly sneak attack that murdered more than 150 schoolgirls, an 86-year-old Supreme Leader with terminal cancer, his daughter, son-in-law, little grandaughter, and many other innocent people, the Strait of Hormuz was wide open, and nobody was planning to close it. So if “opening the Strait” is the goal, the warmongers are trying to solve a problem that they themselves needlessly created.The war apologists then shift gears: “We need to protect the Gulf states and our military bases. The Iranians are pounding them!” But once again, that’s circular logic. Had the US not attacked Iran, US military bases occupying America’s Persian Gulf colonies would not be under attack. Nor would there be any imminent threat to the infrastructure, including the crucial energy infrastructure, of those colonies.“But if we stop escalating and retreat, Iran will emerge as a regional hegemon!” Again, that never would have happened if you had not attacked them in the first place.The apologists retreat to the fallback argument: “Iran was threatening to develop nuclear weapons!” But that is not true. Once again, by attacking Iran, the US and Israel created the problem they claim they’re trying to solve. Iran’s late Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Syed Ali Khamenei, had issued a fatwa forbidding all forms of WMD including nuclear weapons. But that fatwa was only valid during his lifetime. By killing him, the US and Israel removed the most serious obstacle to any prospective Iranian nuclear weapons program. The warmongers claim that by enriching uranium to 60%, far above what is necessary for nuclear energy or medicine, Iran showed it was pursuing nuclear weapons. They forget that the only reason Iran was doing that was because Trump had needlessly and stupidly shredded the JCPOA nuclear agreement. Under that agreement, Iran was strictly limited to enriching to no more than 3.67%, and the most intrusive inspections regime in history ensured full compliance. But if it wasn’t interested in nukes, why would Iran react to Trump’s betrayal of the JCPOA agreement by enriching to 60%? First, Iran wanted leverage to get sanctions relief. Neither Obama not Trump had honored the JCPOA’s provisions obliging the US to drop its economic sanctions. Iran felt the need to convey a clear message to the Americans: “We gave up something up by restricting our nuclear program, but you have to honor your promise to give something up too, by ending sanctions.”Secondly, Iran’s nuclear program presents a vague but meaningful deterrent to any prospective Israeli nuclear attack on Iran or its allies. With its robust nuclear program featuring plenty of know-how and equipment, Iran has put Israel in a position where it knows that if it uses nuclear weapons against Iran, Iran might rescind its WMD prohibition, engage in a crash program to quickly develop nukes, and retaliate. Thanks to Trump’s shredding the JCPOA, Iran now has plenty of 60%-enriched-uranium and could produce a dozen nuclear bombs fairly quickly in order to retaliate if it were itself attacked with nuclear weapons. (For details, listen to nuclear weapons expert Ted Postol.)So the nuclear issue, too, represents a case of US aggression creating the problem it pretends to be trying to solve. The self-proclaimed “very stable genius” Trump has taken a few minor non-problems and turned them into the mother of all quagmires.“We’ve taken away their incentive not to have a nuclear weapon. So we will start to worry as each week goes by, not because we have great intel, not because we’re human. It’s because of the opposite. We don’t have the exquisite intelligence we had with the Obama deal to know we had frozen the program. Now that we have Swiss cheese at best, And what we will see in the holes of the Swiss cheese are indications of nuclear development.” -Robert PapeSince all of the above-listed rationales for war on Iran are absurdly circular and transparently preposterous, it seems unlikely that any serious people in the American National Security State believe them. They must know that Trump’s war on Iran is inflicting catastrophic damage on US interests. And though they are not allowed to say it out loud unless they resign, as Joe Kent did, they undoubtedly know that the real Commander-in-Chief of this war is Benjamin Netanyahu, who is rolling the dice in what amounts to a long-shot gamble aimed at paving the way to a Biblically-inspired Greater Israel aspiring to regional if not global hegemony while expanding to occupy all of the land between the Nile and Euphrates rivers. In other words, this is a war for a global Pax Judaica, which would replace the Pax Americana that has prevailed since World War II, and in unilateral form since the collapse of the USSR in 1989.So the fact that this war is completely self-destructive from any conceivable US standpoint is a feature, not a bug. Operation Epstein Fury is really an Israeli war on the United States of America. Israel wants to destroy the Middle East and force the US out, so it can dominate the ruins. Ending US occupation of its Persian Gulf colonies will completely free Israel’s hand, which in the past has been at least mildly restrained from committing extreme actions, like the genocidal slaughter and expulsion of millions of Palestinians and the destruction of the al-Aqsa mosque, by US “alliances” with the Gulf satrapies.Presumably Israeli leaders think that since their ethnic-supremacist brethren dominate the Western banking system, they’ll be able to rebuild a power base that will be strong enough to expand their borders, dominate the region, and ultimately make Occupied Jerusalem the de facto capital of a Jewish-banker-controlled world. That would pave the way for the coming of an ethnosupremacist Jewish Messiah, who, according to Jewish eschatology, will exterminate most non-Jews, enslave the rest, and create an earthly paradise for Jews, each of whom will own 2800 goyim slaves.But as Alexander Dugin among others has pointed out, the Jewish messianic-millenarian vision that produced this war (and Israel itself, truth be told) makes no sense without the coming of the Jewish Messiah, a.k.a. the Antichrist. If the Messiah/Antichrist doesn’t show up, the whole plan falls apart. So the petty gangster Netanyahu, and his messianic-millenarian power base, are essentially gambling on the prospect of an Antichrist Messiah appearing and miraculously saving their genocidal kosher rear ends. And if past experience is anything to go by, that prospect seems unlikely. On many dozens if not hundreds of previous occasions, messianic-millenarian movements have gambled everything on the prospect of an imminent coming of their Messiah. And in every single case, they have lost. The last plausible candidate for Messiah-hood was Jesus, the antithesis of Jewish supremacist psychopathy, and even he hasn’t returned nearly as quickly as his followers expected.If the Antichrist doesn’t show up with miraculous superpowers, Israel too will find itself facing a quagmire. And that quagmire will get worse, not better, as the US inevitably retreats from West Asia. Without the protection of the kosher-nostra-occupied USA, a genuine geopolitical superpower, Israel will quickly collapse—unless of course a deus-ex-machina Antichrist Messiah arrives in the nick of time to save it. Apparently Smotrich and Ben-Gvir and Chabad Lubovitch think that if they murder enough children and sodomize enough people to death with sticks and slaughter a magical pink heifer, their devilish Messiah, gorged on the blood of innocents, will show up to save them. How Geopolitical Quagmires WorkI hate to say I told you so, but I have seen this quagmire coming for more than two decades. Iran has always been the last and most important country on the list of “seven countries in five years” targeted for destruction by the real perpetrators of 9/11. And it was clear to me, and to the serious decision-makers in Washington, that by attacking Iran, the US would lose far more than it could ever hope to gain. Only the insertion of the non-serious Israeli-owned president Trump, flanked by “experts” like Chabad real estate sharks Kushner and Witkoff, made this doomed war possible.One of the shrewdest and most insightful American strategic analysts, Robert Pape of the University of Chicago, likewise saw the Iran quagmire coming for more than two decades. Pape was one of the voices of relative sanity in the often-phantasmagoric discussions of “terrorism” that raged after 9/11. (Unfortunately he was never sane enough, or courageous enough, to publicly question the official story of 9/11.) As I wrote in my 2009 book Questioning the War on Terror: Are anti-imperialists and anti-colonialists who happen to be Muslim more likely to commit suicide terrorism than non-Muslims of the same political orientation? According to the best research the answer is no.Robert Pape is a University of Chicago professor who wrote Dying to Win:The Strategic Logic of Suicide Terrorism. Pape’s exhaustive study of every suicide attack between 1980 and 2003 concludes: “The data show that thereis little connection between suicide terrorism and Islamic fundamentalism or any one of the world’s religions.” Instead people of any or no religion use suicide terrorism as a weapon of last resort when their lands are invaded and occupied…It is a way for occupied peoples to increase the cost of occupation to the point that the occupier finally gives up and goes home. Pape points out that “what nearly all suicide terrorist attacks have in common is a specific secular and strategic goal: to compel modern democracies to withdraw military forces from territory that the terrorists consider to be their homeland.” Pape’s book suggests that if war is the terrorism of the strong, terrorism is the warfare of the weak.Pape’s otherwise-solid analysis uses an incorrect definition of terrorism. Following Zionist-owned imperial propaganda media, he considered terrorists to be people attacking imperial or colonial occupiers. But the actual definition of terrorism is “attacking civilians for political reasons.” And 99% of terrorism is committed by governments, mainly imperial and/or colonial ones. So the real terrorists are the occupiers. The heroes who stand up to them are resistance fighters—some of whom may attack civilians, in which case they, like their enemies, would be availing themselves of the military tactic known as terrorism.If Pape got terrorism mostly right, he has proved even more prescient in his analysis of the Iran quagmire. Pape has been simulating the likely progression and outcome of a US war on Iran for more than 20 years. Unlike Cassandra, the famous prophetess of doom, Pape did find some people to listen to him—namely the realist wing of the US strategic establishment. But Trump, Kushner, and Witkoff, egged on by Netanyahu, apparently weren’t listening when Pape explained why Iran would enjoy escalation dominance, ensuring an unhappy outcome for the US.Pape explains how quagmires happen: The aggressor, in this case the US, engages in wishful thinking by overestimating the chances of a limited military strike bringing about a desired political outcome. When, in January 2020, Trump and Netanyahu lured Iran’s greatest military figure and future president, Gen. Qassem Soleimani, to Baghdad under the false pretext of peace negotiations, then murdered him, they apparently imagined that such a dastardly crime would somehow produce a more pliable Iran. That, of course, didn’t happen. Then on June 13 2025, Israel launched a massive attack, murdering more than 20 senior Iranian leaders, leading to a 12-day war that the US joined at the end as a pretext to end the hostilities. The Israelis and Americans bombed Iranian nuclear sites, and Trump claimed that Iran’s nuclear program had been “completely obliterated.” But once again, the aggression backfired: Iran curtailed IAEA inspections, its 60% enriched uranium disappeared from Western radar, and the population rallied behind its government. On February 28, 2026, Trump, once again egged on by Netanyahu, apparently imagined that by murdering the Supreme Leader of Iran he could somehow magically bring about “regime change”—the fall of the Islamic Republic and its replacement by Baby Shah Pavlavi or the MEK terror cult. Predictably, the Iranian population rallied around their government, and the sacred memory of their martyred Supreme Leader and his family members, and wholeheartedly supported a war that will not end until Iran drives the US and its Israeli occupier out of the region.Pape wasn’t surprised that Iran has rallied behind the Islamic Republic rather than overthrowing it. Having studied every historical instance of attempts to coerce populations through strategic bombing, and to enforce regime change through air power alone, Pape observes that it has never, ever worked, and presumably never will.The failure of strategic bombing, Pape writes, sets the stage for the next phase of the quagmire or “escalation trap”: expanded bombing to include both military and economic targets. And when Iran shows it can match each such attack with proportional retaliation, the US will be tempted to move to an even more dangerous phase, by sending in ground troops. But to have a chance of militarily imposing its will on Iran, the US would have to send something on the order of a million ground troops—a political impossibility absent a colossal false flag orders of magnitude bigger than 9/11. And if Trump chooses to send a few thousand troops to Kharg Island, or on a treasure hunt for enriched uranium in the Zagros Mountains near Isfahan, such a fools’ errand is likely to end in disaster.If Trump, or more likely his master Netanyahu, were somehow able to overcome the rational elements of their security establishments and use nuclear weapons against Iran, both the US empire and Israel would be committing suicide by permanently imploding their global legitimacy. What’s more, Iran would not only mount a crushing response, ending Mideast oil production, rendering America’s Gulf colonies uninhabitable, and raining down fire and fury on Israeli nuclear sites, it would also probably embark on a crash program to develop nuclear weapons and use them to finish off the Zionist entity. Pape’s analysis shows that what he calls the “escalation trap” is based on two fallacies. The first and most obvious is the well-known sunk cost fallacy, the tendency to irrationally throw good money after bad. After all, if we’ve expended tremendous effort and expense to solve the Iran problem and everything we’ve done has only made it worse, why not keep doubling down?The other relevant fallacy is the belief that military power in general, and air power in particular, can magically solve political problems. Despite abundant historical evidence to the contrary, a certain wing of the strategic establishment has never stopped hoping that ever-improving bombing yields and accuracies would eventually amount to a magic wand that decision-makers could wave at political problems to make them go away. That hope, Pape explains, has always been chimerical, never more so than when applied to the current Zio-American war on Iran.Robert Pape is not the only American strategic thinker who understands these things. Presumably JD Vance, Tulsi Gabbard, Joe Kent, and plenty of others who’ve haunted National Security Council meetings grasp the gist of them. But getting Trump, a pathological narcissist and megalomaniac, to understand them, when such an understanding would amount to admitting defeat (and perhaps inviting Netanyahu to make good on “golden pager” blackmail threats) is probably just as impossible as regime-changing Iran. That’s why the reality-based, non-messianic-millenarian wing of the American deep state needs to embrace the slogan “regime change begins at home”…and act on it with ruthless alacrity.Stripe is Substack’s only processor and they debanked me, so you can no longer pay me through Substack. Now I am posting everything on Substack free and asking people to sign up for recurring donations at my Paypal donation page…or better yet, the free speech platform SPdonate. Alternately you can Paypal or Zelle to truthjihad[at]gmail(dot)com. Note that Zelle, unlike other methods, doesn’t charge any fees. 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 False Flag Weekly News linkDear Trump, you senile old pedophile, what in Epstein’s name were you thinking when you gave the order to attack Iran? Or more pertinently, since you’re incapable of anything remotely resembling thinking, who in Epstein’s name were you listening to, and why were you listening to them?Last week you blurted out that Jared, Steve, Pete, and Marco assured you it would be a cakewalk. But your military and intelligence chiefs advised against it. So who are you gonna believe, a pair of Jewish real estate shysters, an alcoholic former Fox News host, and an oily Israeli-owned gusano political operative—or your military and intelligence chiefs?You have a problem, Mr. Senile Pedophile President. Several, actually. First, you’re a complete moron. Second, being a moron, you have no choice but to rely on others’ ideas, since you have none of your own. And third, you are a pathological narcissist, so you only listen to people who flatter your vanity. And since you’re a moron with nothing whatsoever worth being vain about, your flatterers lie outrageously. That’s why you’re surrounded by the most pathetic gaggle of lying ass-kissers ever to cluster like flies around a piece of human s**t.I repeat: Everyone around you is lying to you. It isn’t just your fellow imbeciles like Kushner, Witkoff, Hegseth and Rubio passing on made-in-Israel whoppers about how easy it would be to conquer Iran. Even your military and intelligence chiefs lied by understating how bad an idea attacking Iran really was. They knew you liked the idea, that Jared and Bibi were egging you on, and that if they told you the honest-to-God truth you would flip out and maybe even fire them. So they sugar-coated it. They said “well, it’s a lot harder than it looks, and there’s a big potential downside, but if Jared and Bibi are right and the Iranian people really do thank you for killing their Supreme Leader, and they replace him with somebody who loves America and Israel, that would be great! Let’s hope and pray we don’t need a plan B, because there really isn’t much of one. But hey, we’re the greatest military in the world, and you’re the greatest Commander-in-Chief, so we’ll do our best.” If they even brought up the Strait of Hormuz, they probably said something like: “Well, I guess we can cross that Strait when we come to it.” And the problem is actually even worse than that. It isn’t just that everybody’s lying to you. It’s that you’re lying to yourself. You’ve been lying to yourself so long it’s become second nature. As a pathological narcissist, you have a built-in filter that adjusts every word and image and emotion that passes through your consciousness in such a way as to crank out maximum self-aggrandizement. For you, anything you’re involved in, anything you can take credit for, is the biggest, most beautiful thing that anybody’s ever seen. Nobody’s ever seen anything like it! You fancy yourself “a very stable genius” with a “very, very large brain,” meaning you’re too damn dumb to know how stupid you are. Everybody who doesn’t flatter and obey you is “vicious,” “horrible,” “the absolute worst,” or, as you recently termed Iranians, “deranged scumbags” with inferior DNA.So with your particular brand of psychopathology, Mr. Senile Old Pedophile-in-Chief, how are you going to admit defeat? Being congenitally incapable of admitting you were wrong, that you made a mistake, that you ever did anything less than brilliant, or even that you lost an election—you obviously will always claim that any election you lost was stolen from you, whether or not it actually was—how are you going to face up to the reality that Iran has well and truly kicked your sorry old senile pedophile ass? Especially when your advisors are afraid to tell you anything remotely close to the truth? The answer, of course, is: you won’t. You will keep throwing good money after bad, keep digging yourself deeper and deeper into the hole that Jared and Steve and Bibi convinced you to begin excavating, until you have destroyed yourself and your country, and possibly the world as well.Since I hate to end on such a gloomy note, let me offer you a way out: Declare victory and leave. Call a press conference and announce that you’ve made the biggest, most beautiful peace deal ever, bigger and more beautiful than anybody has ever seen: You’ve convinced those poor Iranian, Chinese, and Russian schmucks to assume the burden of providing security for the Middle East in general and the Strait of Hormuz in particular. From now on, American taxpayers won’t have to foot the bill! Beginning tomorrow, all US military personnel and as much equipment as we can pack up and carry will be leaving the region posthaste. Those Iranian, Chinese, and Russian suckers, maybe with some help from some other losers like the Turks and Iraqis and Gulf Arabs and whoever else wants to pitch in, will be stuck with the tab. Good riddance! And by the way, we’re also going to force the Chinese to provide security for Taiwan, and the Russians for Ukraine. This will save us trillions! Now we can get back to the business of making America, not the Middle East, great again. It’s an Epst…I mean, an epic, victory!Thank you for your attention to this matter, you disgusting senile old pedophile.SincerelyDr. Kevin BarrettPS I understand you have instructed your dwindling army of MAGAmorons to defend you against accusations of pedophilia by claiming that there is no evidence that you ever raped anybody under 13, and that since the global age of puberty onset for girls is considered to be between the ages of 8 and 13, your victims were not pre-pubescent, which means you are not a pedophile, just a rapist of very young girls. That issue came up during the latest episode of False Flag Weekly News, which I am sure you will enjoy watching.(01:11:05) Kevin Barrett: So here’s the key details of the 13 year old Trump accuser’s accounts, which are now verified during the fog of war—right after the war starts. And now they found those. “We accidentally incorrectly coded the documents as duplicative, so that’s why we withheld them illegally. So now you can see them while the war is distracting everybody.” And so this is about that 13-year-old that got apparently repeatedly interviewed. And basically the South Carolina newspaper went out and tracked down the details of this woman and what she said and who her family was and their record and their history and all that, and everything added up. So it’s interesting that the mainstream news about how these documents were being illegally withheld come out three days before Trump starts this war. And now the actual papers, the files, come out like a week after the war starts.Wyatt Peterson: Yeah. Is this about Katie Johnson? Is that who?I think so. I wrote an article in 2019 titled “Doorway to the Cesspit” because I contended that all the information being released about Epstein is just a doorway, and if the further people pursue that, it’s going to lead them into areas of unimaginable horrors. And that seems to be where it’s gone in that time. Now, I put in that article a couple sentences about Katie Johnson and her accusations against Trump, alleging that she was raped by Trump and Epstein, and I allowed a friend of mine to convince me to take it out. He said there was no basis for it, Trump couldn’t possibly be a pedophile, and it was kind of at the time it was a little, you know, a little—it wasn’t as solid as it is now. So I took it out, but you know to my own detriment, because it’s clear I believe it’s probably true. I think this was probably not a one-off situation either. And no, he ran that whole thing, Miss Teen America. He’s Epstein’s best friend. He’s a total sleazebag. He’s got this long list of rape allegations and all kinds of mistreating women allegations.And so he runs this teen beauty pageant. I mean, come on. I mean, pedophile, maybe no. I mean, maybe he didn’t go after prepubescents. But a 13-year-old is barely post-pubescent. So, whatever. The word pedophile technically might not cover that. But the way it’s used as a pejorative is basically to describe a sleazebag who is, in a predatory way, preying on underage people sexually. And Trump absolutely is. Of course he is. Come on, guys.Yeah. Yeah, no question. 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

Original YouTube link Rumble link Bitchute linkFoad of FoadDebate writes: In my latest conversation with Dr. Kevin Barrett, we unpacked the hidden dimensions and far-reaching implications of Iran's new leadership selection, a development that has not only shaken domestic dynamics but has also sent shockwaves through the calculations of global powers. With his characteristic sharp insight, Barrett describes Western media attempts to delegitimize this choice as textbook war propaganda, completely at odds with the realities on the ground and the public embrace of Iran's revolutionary path. Dismissing Trump's interventionist rhetoric about the new leader being "unacceptable," he frames such statements as a theatrical display of a declining U.S. hegemony. Barrett emphasizes that the selection of Ayatollah Seyed Mojtaba Khamenei, given the impeccable ethical track record and integrity of his family, is not only a strategic necessity amid the current full-scale war but also a powerful promise to continue the steadfast revolutionary line that has stood firm against Western overreach.Structured Summary of the InterviewIntroduction and Topic: Leadership Transition in Iran (00:00:00–00:00:33)The interview opens with the host welcoming viewers and introducing the topic: the selection of Sayyid Mojtaba Khamenei as Iran’s new Supreme Leader following the death of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. The host asks Dr. Kevin Barrett to comment on criticisms from opponents of the Islamic Republic who argue that Mojtaba Khamenei’s appointment lacks legitimacy, particularly because he is the son of the previous leader.Barrett thanks the host and frames the discussion within the broader geopolitical context of the ongoing war involving Iran and its adversaries.Western Criticism and Allegations of Propaganda (00:00:33–00:03:02)Barrett argues that criticism of Mojtaba Khamenei’s leadership in Western media is part of a broader propaganda campaign connected to the war. According to him, Western governments and media outlets are attempting to portray events in a way that makes the United States and Israel appear successful while simultaneously undermining Iran’s leadership.He claims these narratives are intended to weaken Iran politically by questioning the legitimacy of its political system. Barrett argues that such efforts are unlikely to succeed because most Americans know little about Iran and therefore are not deeply influenced by these narratives.He also argues that within Iran, wartime conditions tend to increase unity around the national leadership rather than weaken it.Regime Change Narratives and Alternative Leadership (00:03:02–00:04:30)Barrett discusses what he sees as unrealistic Western attempts to promote regime change in Iran. He claims that the main alternatives often proposed by Western policymakers—the return of the Pahlavi monarchy or the leadership of the Mujahideen-e Khalq (MEK)—lack credibility and popularity within Iran.According to Barrett, these groups are widely disliked by Iranians, making them ineffective as potential replacements for the Islamic Republic. He therefore interprets regime-change rhetoric as largely symbolic rather than a serious strategy.He argues that the real goal of the war has been to damage Iran strategically rather than to genuinely replace its government.Domestic Legitimacy and Reputation of the Khamenei Family (00:04:30–00:05:03)Barrett emphasizes that the Khamenei family has a reputation in Iran for personal integrity. He states that Ayatollah Ali Khamenei was widely known for avoiding corruption and encouraging members of his family to maintain similar standards.Because corruption is a common issue in many countries, Barrett argues that the perception of honesty within the Khamenei family has helped maintain their credibility. He also notes that Mojtaba Khamenei is reportedly respected by the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), which plays a crucial role in defending Iran during wartime.For these reasons, Barrett believes the new leader is likely to have strong domestic legitimacy.Donald Trump’s Statements and U.S. Pressure (00:04:33–00:08:39)The host asks Barrett about statements by Donald Trump, who reportedly declared that Mojtaba Khamenei would be unacceptable as Iran’s next leader and suggested using a “Venezuela model” to change Iran’s leadership.Barrett strongly criticizes Trump and characterizes his remarks as attempts to intimidate foreign governments. He argues that powerful states sometimes try to pressure other countries into accepting leaders favorable to their interests.However, Barrett claims such tactics will not work with Iran because the country is politically and militarily resilient. He also argues that global respect for American leadership has declined and that Trump’s rhetoric illustrates that decline.Barrett further claims that the United States is losing influence in the region, citing difficulties maintaining control over strategic areas such as the Persian Gulf and protecting military installations.Impact of the New Leader on the War (00:08:41–00:10:27)The discussion then turns to whether Mojtaba Khamenei’s leadership will change the course of the war. Barrett explains that the new leader is believed to be aligned with Iran’s “principlist” political faction, which favors strong resistance to Western pressure.He contrasts this group with the reformist or pragmatic faction that previously hoped to improve relations with the United States and integrate Iran more closely into the global economy.Barrett argues that recent events have strengthened the principlists’ position because attempts at diplomacy with the United States have repeatedly failed.Distrust of the United States and Strategic Realignment (00:09:10–00:10:27)Barrett cites the collapse of the JCPOA nuclear agreement as evidence that Iran cannot rely on agreements with Washington. He argues that the United States negotiated the deal but later withdrew from it, which he believes damaged trust.He also claims that Iranian leaders have been targeted in attacks connected to diplomatic interactions, reinforcing the belief among many Iranian officials that negotiations with the United States are unreliable.As a result, Barrett believes Iran will increasingly align with countries in the Global South, particularly China, rather than seeking rapprochement with Western powers.Personal Stakes and Military Deterrence (00:10:27–00:11:01)Barrett suggests that Mojtaba Khamenei has a personal motivation to pursue a strong defense policy because members of his family were reportedly killed during attacks connected to the conflict.According to Barrett, this experience may reinforce the new leader’s commitment to strengthening Iran’s military capabilities so that similar attacks cannot occur again.He predicts that Iran will continue expanding its deterrent forces and military infrastructure.Historical Comparisons and Leadership Style (00:11:01–00:13:34)Barrett compares Iran’s current situation to two earlier periods in the country’s history.First, he references the era of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, when Iran faced the Iran-Iraq War during the 1980s. At that time, Iran was fighting for survival, and leadership required firmness and resilience.Second, he discusses the period under Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, when there was still hope that diplomatic engagement with the West might improve relations. Reformists believed that normalization with Western powers might eventually be possible.Barrett argues that the present conflict has ended those expectations. In his view, Iran has returned to a situation similar to the 1980s, facing what its leaders consider an existential threat.He believes Mojtaba Khamenei’s leadership will reflect this more confrontational geopolitical environment.Symbolism, Legitimacy, and “Barakah” (00:13:34–00:14:26)Barrett suggests that Mojtaba Khamenei’s rise to leadership during a time of crisis may strengthen his legitimacy among supporters.He refers to the Islamic concept of barakah, meaning divine blessing or spiritual authority. In some cultures, including Morocco, leaders who emerge during difficult times are sometimes believed to possess a special form of guidance or protection.According to Barrett, this perception may give Mojtaba Khamenei a powerful symbolic role as the son of a leader who died during a national crisis.Closing Remarks: Moral Framing of the Conflict (00:14:26–00:17:19)In his concluding remarks, Barrett frames the conflict in moral terms, describing it as a struggle between good and evil in world politics.He criticizes the actions of the United States and Israel and argues that their policies demonstrate extreme aggression and dishonesty. By contrast, he portrays Iran’s leadership as fundamentally sincere and morally motivated, even though it is not perfect.Barrett also describes Iran’s defense strategy as a “mosaic defense,” meaning a decentralized system in which many independent actors contribute to the country’s protection. He suggests that people around the world who oppose Western policies should consider themselves part of this broader resistance.The interview concludes with the host thanking Barrett for his analysis and insights.BREAKING: New Supreme Leader’s First MessageThe first message of the Iranian Leader was issued some minutes ago: In the Name of GodAt the beginning of my remarks, I must offer my condolences to our Master, may God hasten his reappearance, on the heartbreaking martyrdom of the great and eminent leader of the Revolution, the wise and beloved Khamenei. I also ask that His Eminence pray for each and every member of the great Iranian nation, indeed for all Muslims of the world, for all those who serve Islam and the Revolution, for the self-sacrificing ones, and for the families of the martyrs of the Islamic movement—especially those of the recent war—and also for this humble servant.The second part of my words is addressed to the great nation of Iran. First, I must briefly explain my own position regarding the vote of the esteemed Assembly of Experts. This servant of yours, Seyyed Mojtaba Hosseini Khamenei, learned of the result of the vote of the esteemed Assembly of Experts at the same time as you did, through the broadcasting of the Islamic Republic of Iran. For me, to sit in the place that was once occupied by two great leaders—Imam Khomeini the Great and the martyred Khamenei—is an extremely difficult matter. This seat carries the legacy of one who, after more than sixty years of striving in the path of God and renouncing all kinds of pleasures and comforts, became a shining jewel and an exceptional figure not only in the present era but throughout the history of the rulers of this country. Both his life and the manner of his death were intertwined with a grandeur and dignity born from reliance upon the Truth.I had the opportunity to visit his body after his martyrdom. What I saw was a mountain of firmness, and I was told that the fist of his healthy hand had been clenched. Those who are knowledgeable about the many aspects of his personality must speak at length about him. In this brief moment I suffice with this summary and leave the details for more appropriate occasions. This is the reason why sitting in the seat of leadership after such a person is difficult; bridging this gap will only be possible through seeking assistance from God Almighty and through the support of you, the people.It is necessary to emphasize another point which is directly related to the essence of my words. Among the great qualities of the martyred leader and his great predecessor was bringing the people into all arenas, continuously enlightening them with insight and awareness, and in practice relying upon their power. In this way they actualized the true meaning of the public and republican character of the system, and they sincerely believed in it. The clear effect of this was seen in the past few days when the country was without a leader and without a Commander-in-Chief. The insight and intelligence of the great Iranian nation in the recent events, together with its perseverance, courage, and presence, caused friends to admire and enemies to be astonished. It was you, the people, who led the country and guaranteed its authority. The verse that I cited at the beginning of this text means that no sign of God ever disappears or is forgotten without God replacing it with something similar or even better.The reason for citing this noble verse is not that this humble servant should be considered comparable to the martyred leader, let alone superior to him. Rather, the purpose of mentioning this verse is to draw attention to the proper and prominent role of you, the beloved nation. If that supreme blessing was taken from us, in its place once again the Ammar-like presence of the Iranian people was granted to this system. Know that if your power does not manifest itself in the arena, neither leadership nor any of the various institutions—whose true function is service to the people—will possess the necessary effectiveness.For this meaning to be realized more fully, first of all remembrance of God Almighty, reliance upon Him, and seeking intercession from the pure lights of the Infallibles (peace be upon them all) must be regarded like the supreme elixir and the rare philosopher’s stone that guarantees various openings and a definite victory over the enemy. This is a great advantage that you possess and your enemies do not.Second, unity among all individuals and groups of the nation—unity that usually manifests itself especially in times of hardship—must not be damaged. This can be achieved by overlooking points of disagreement.Third, effective presence in the arena must be maintained—whether in the form that you displayed during these days and nights of war, or through various effective roles in social, political, educational, cultural, and even security spheres. What matters is that the correct role be properly understood and implemented as much as possible without harming social unity. One of the duties of leadership and certain officials is to remind different segments of society of these roles. For this reason, I emphasize the importance of participation in the upcoming Quds Day ceremony of 1447, in which the element of confronting the enemy must be taken seriously by everyone.Fourth, do not neglect helping one another. Thanks be to God, this has always been a characteristic of most Iranians, and it is expected that in these special days—when naturally the situation may be harder for some members of the nation than others—this spirit will manifest itself even more strongly. I also call upon the service institutions to provide every possible assistance to those members of the nation and to the grassroots relief structures.If these matters are observed, the path toward days of greatness and glory for you, the beloved nation, will be paved. The nearest example of this, God willing, could be victory over the enemy in the present war.The third part of my remarks is to express my sincere gratitude to our brave fighters who, at a time when our people and beloved homeland have been unjustly attacked by the leaders of the front of global arrogance, have blocked the enemy’s path with their powerful strikes and have removed from them the illusion of being able to dominate or possibly divide our dear homeland.Dear fighting brothers, the demand of the masses of the people is the continuation of effective and regret-inducing defense. Likewise, the lever of blocking the Strait of Hormuz must certainly continue to be used. Studies have also been conducted regarding the opening of other fronts in which the enemy has little experience and where it will be highly vulnerable; their activation will take place, if the war situation continues and according to considerations of expediency.I also extend my sincere thanks to the fighters of the Resistance Front. We consider the countries of the Resistance Front to be our best friends, and the cause of resistance and the Resistance Front is an inseparable part of the values of the Islamic Revolution. Without doubt, the cooperation of the members of this front shortens the path to overcoming the Zionist sedition; as we have seen, courageous and faithful Yemen has not abandoned the defense of the oppressed people of Gaza, and the self-sacrificing Hezbollah, despite many obstacles, has come to the aid of the Islamic Republic, while the resistance of Iraq has bravely followed the same path.The fourth part of my words is addressed to those who have suffered some form of harm in these past few days—whether those who have experienced the martyrdom of loved ones, those who have been injured, or those whose homes or businesses have been damaged. First, I express my deep sympathy to the families of the noble martyrs. This comes from a shared experience I have with them. Besides my father, whose loss has become a public grief, I have also entrusted to the caravan of martyrs my beloved and loyal wife in whom I had great hopes, my devoted sister who had dedicated herself to serving her parents and finally received her reward, her young child, and the husband of another sister who was a learned and noble man. What makes patience in the face of such tragedies possible—and even easier—is attention to the certain and definitive divine promise of a great reward for the patient. Therefore one must be patient and maintain hope and trust in the grace and assistance of God Almighty.Second, I assure everyone that we will not abandon the revenge for the blood of your martyrs. The revenge we have in mind does not concern only the martyrdom of the great leader of the Revolution; rather, every member of the nation who is martyred by the enemy constitutes a separate case in the file of revenge. A limited portion of this revenge has already taken tangible form, but until it is fully achieved this case will remain open above the others—especially with regard to the blood of our children.Third, the wounded of these attacks must certainly receive appropriate medical treatment free of charge and benefit from certain other advantages.Fourth, as much as the current conditions allow, sufficient measures must be defined and implemented to compensate for financial damages to property and personal belongings. These last two matters constitute binding duties for the responsible officials, who must implement them and report the results to me.Another point that must be emphasized is that we will in any case demand compensation from the enemy; if they refuse, we will take from their assets as much as we deem appropriate, and if that too is not possible we will destroy an equivalent amount of their assets.The fifth part of my remarks is addressed to the leaders and influential figures of some countries in the region. We share land or maritime borders with fifteen neighboring countries and have always desired warm and constructive relations with all of them. However, the enemy has gradually established various military and financial bases in some of these countries in order to secure its dominance over the region. In the recent aggression some of these military bases were used; therefore, as we had clearly warned beforehand, and without targeting those countries themselves, we attacked only those bases. From now on we will inevitably continue to do so, although we still believe in the necessity of friendly relations with our neighbors. These countries must determine their position regarding the aggressors against our homeland and the killers of our people. I recommend that they close those bases as soon as possible, because by now they must have understood that America’s claim of establishing peace and security has been nothing but a lie.This will enable them to strengthen their bond with their own peoples, who are generally dissatisfied with cooperation with the front of disbelief and with its humiliating behavior, and thus increase their wealth and power. I repeat that the Islamic Republic system—without seeking domination or colonialism in the region—remains fully ready for warm and sincere relations with all its neighbors.In the sixth part of my remarks, I address our martyred leader. O Leader! By your departure you have placed a heavy sorrow upon all hearts. You had always longed for such an end, and finally God granted it to you while you were reciting the Holy Qur’an on the morning of the tenth day of the blessed month of Ramadan. You endured many injustices with authority and patience without showing the slightest displeasure. Many did not recognize your true worth, and perhaps much time must pass before the veils and obstacles are removed and some aspects of it become clear.We hope that from the elevated station you have attained among the pure lights, the truthful ones, the martyrs, and the saints, you will continue to care about the progress of this nation and all the nations of the Resistance Front and intercede for them, just as you did in your worldly life. We pledge to you that we will strive with all our strength to elevate this banner—the principal banner of the front of truth—and to achieve your sacred objectives.In the seventh part I thank all the distinguished figures who have supported me, including the Grand Marjaʿs of emulation, various cultural, political, and social personalities, and the people who have participated in great gatherings to renew their allegiance to the system. I also thank the officials of the three branches of government and the temporary Leadership Council for their good management and actions.I hope that God’s special blessings in these blessed hours and days will encompass the entire nation of Iran, indeed all Muslims and the oppressed people of the world.Finally, I ask our Master—may God hasten his noble reappearance—during the remaining nights and days of Qadr and the blessed month of Ramadan, to request from God Almighty decisive victory for our nation over the enemy, as well as dignity, prosperity, and well-being for the people, and elevated stations and eternal peace for those who have passed away.Peace, mercy, and blessings of God be upon you.Seyyed Mojtaba Hosseini Khamenei21 Esfand 1404 (March 2026) 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 False Flag Weekly News linkIn this week’s False Flag Weekly News, Helen Buyniski and I discussed Helen’s new article Grand Theft Reality. We also discussed Trump’s moronic war on Iran, which is rapidly turning into the mother of all fiascos for the US and its Israeli master.Since we began the show discussing how AI slop is devouring the world, I decided to send out two items, a satire and a summary, one written by a human, namely me, and the other by an AI. Can you tell which is which?-KBTrump Wants Epstein to Pick Iran’s New Supreme LeaderDissociated PressIn a White House press conference this morning, US President Donald Trump demanded that Iran allow Jeffrey Epstein to select its new Supreme Leader.“If Iran picks a leader who has never raped 13-year-olds in front of Mossad spy cameras, Bibi will force the US back into war in a few years,” Trump explained.Asked how Epstein could participate in the selection process given that he supposedly hanged himself, Trump chortled. “Jeffrey is alive and well, I can assure you. He’s living in a specially-outfitted Iranian-missile-proof child-rape-bunker in Tel Aviv. He can fly to Tehran at a moment’s notice with underage sex slaves and cameras, lighting equipment, viagra, and other essentials for filming Iranian leaders raping children, just like he filmed me.”Trump ordered Iran not to appoint the late Supreme Leader’s son, Mojtaba Khamenei, who has been profiled by US and Israeli intelligence as someone who would never rape children in front of Mossad spy cameras.Trump said the US and its Israeli masters have long been grooming candidates for leadership positions in Iran, adding: “But most of them are dead. The Iranians keep executing them when they get caught raping children. Can you imagine! The Iranians are crazy. What a bunch of losers. They’re a vicious group of terrible people. The Middle East and the world won’t be safe until Iran has leaders who rape children for Israel like ours do.”In Tehran, a spokesman for the Council of Experts responded by texting a photo to the White House. The photo is currently being studied by the intelligence community in hopes that it will yield clues about whether the Iranians might be open to Trump’s Epstein overtures.False Flag Weekly News – SummaryOpening and AI Discussion (≈00:00–05:00)The episode begins with host Kevin Barrett welcoming journalist Helen Buyniski back to False Flag Weekly News. They briefly promote the show and invite viewers to support it financially before turning to the main discussion: artificial intelligence and its growing influence.Buyniski has written a new article titled Grand Theft Reality, which critiques the rapid expansion of AI-generated media. She argues that the scale of content production made possible by AI systems allows organizations to flood social media with competing narratives and alternate “realities.” In the time it takes a human to perform a simple task, AI systems can generate massive amounts of persuasive content.The two compare this phenomenon to science-fiction imagery from writers like H. P. Lovecraft. They argue that AI creates an illusion of intelligence because it excels at language manipulation, but does not actually understand meaning. According to Buyniski, language models merely reproduce patterns in text rather than comprehending the concepts behind them.Barrett notes that AI can be useful for certain purposes—such as language learning, translation, or studying linguistic patterns. Buyniski agrees, but warns that such capabilities also create the illusion of consciousness. When AI systems are tested in simulated scenarios, she claims, they may make extreme decisions because they do not understand moral context.AI Economics, Surveillance, and Privacy (≈05:00–11:00)The conversation shifts toward the economics and infrastructure behind AI technology. Barrett and Buyniski discuss the enormous valuations of technology companies involved in AI development, suggesting that the sector may represent a speculative bubble. They mention companies producing specialized computer chips required to train and run AI models and claim these resources are being priced in ways that limit independent experimentation.Buyniski argues that AI technology has created a new kind of data-harvesting economy in which companies encourage people to feed personal information into automated systems. Many enthusiasts, she says, openly share sensitive details with AI tools in exchange for convenience.She criticizes the idea—often promoted in the tech industry—that privacy is obsolete. Instead, she views this trend as part of a broader normalization of surveillance.Another issue discussed is “model collapse.” The hosts explain that AI systems learn from existing text on the internet. As more AI-generated content fills the internet, future AI systems increasingly train on material produced by other AI systems rather than original human writing. According to their interpretation, this process could degrade quality over time, producing more repetitive or less meaningful output.They also claim that large data sources like Wikipedia have begun selling data to AI companies, potentially complicating the distinction between human-generated and AI-generated information.The segment concludes with discussion of WorldCoin, a biometric cryptocurrency project associated with Sam Altman. The system involves scanning a person’s iris to verify that they are human. Buyniski criticizes the concept as an intrusive attempt to create a global digital identity system, possibly tied to future universal basic income programs.Transition to Geopolitics and War Coverage (≈11:00–14:00)The discussion transitions to global politics. Barrett introduces what he describes as the show’s central theme: a developing war involving Iran, the United States, and Israel.The hosts show a satirical AI-generated video contrasting Iranian confidence about resisting invasion with a caricature of American Gen-Z soldiers being drafted. They argue that the video demonstrates one positive use of AI: satire.This leads into commentary about the cultural attitudes surrounding war in different societies.Reports of Military Escalation (≈14:00–18:00)Barrett references several analysts and writers who claim that casualty numbers in the conflict may be higher than officially reported. He cites commentary suggesting that attacks on U.S. facilities in the Middle East have caused greater damage than acknowledged publicly.They also discuss claims that political leaders are escalating the conflict without proper constitutional procedures. According to Barrett, Congress voted against reclaiming its authority to formally declare war, which he criticizes as an abdication of responsibility.At the same time, the hosts note shifts in American political rhetoric. They point out that some politicians have begun criticizing Israel more openly than in the past, reflecting changing public opinion. Polling data showing growing sympathy among Americans for Palestinians is mentioned as evidence of this shift.Economic and Strategic Implications (≈18:00–23:00)The conversation turns to economic consequences of the conflict. One major issue discussed is the Strait of Hormuz, a crucial shipping route for global oil supplies. If the strait were effectively blocked, oil prices could surge dramatically, potentially disrupting the global economy.Barrett and Buyniski argue that the war could strain American military resources. They discuss the heavy use of missile defense systems such as Patriot and THAAD interceptors and speculate that stockpiles might be depleted quickly in a sustained conflict.They also debate political leadership and decision-making. Buyniski suggests that leaders surrounded by loyal advisers may develop unrealistic beliefs about their own power or military capabilities.Broader Geopolitical Effects (≈23:00–27:00)The hosts expand their analysis to the broader geopolitical environment. They suggest that other global powers—particularly Russia and China—may benefit strategically from a prolonged conflict in the Middle East.Higher oil prices could strengthen Russia’s economic position, while American military resources might be diverted away from other theaters such as Ukraine.They also discuss reports that Iran has targeted regional radar systems and military infrastructure, which could degrade U.S. and allied defensive capabilities.The hosts argue that Iran’s decentralized military command structure may make it difficult to defeat quickly. Rather than collapsing if leadership is attacked, they claim the system allows different units to continue operating independently.Damage, Propaganda, and Economic Strain (≈27:00–29:00)The conversation ends with discussion of damage inside Israel and the economic impact of the war. Barrett claims the Israeli economy is suffering significant weekly losses and that media censorship prevents the full extent of destruction from being widely seen.They reference an article suggesting that the war could become a historical turning point comparable to the 1956 Suez Crisis, which signaled the decline of British and French imperial power.In that crisis, economic pressure from the United States forced Britain and France to abandon their military intervention in Egypt. Barrett argues that the current conflict might reveal similar limits to American power, particularly if economic strain grows severe.Concluding PerspectiveThe hosts conclude by suggesting that economic factors—rather than purely military ones—may ultimately determine the outcome of the conflict. They speculate that global financial pressures, shifting alliances, and rising energy prices could reshape the geopolitical landscape.In their view, the combination of technological disruption from AI and geopolitical instability from military escalation illustrates a broader period of global transition.Stripe is Substack’s only processor and they debanked me, so you can no longer pay me through Substack. Now I am posting everything on Substack free and asking people to sign up for recurring donations at my Paypal donation page…or better yet, the free speech platform SPdonate. Alternately you can Paypal or Zelle to truthjihad[at]gmail(dot)com. Note that Zelle, unlike other methods, doesn’t charge any fees. 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

Red Pill Diaries Youtube link Rumble link Bitchute linkLast night’s interview with Rasheed Muhammad of The Red Pill Diaries covered the background, current status, and likely future of #OperationEpsteinFury. Audio and video above, transcript below. -KBWe are now live, and I want to thank each and every one of you for joining me on another edition of the Red Pill Diaries. I’m your host, your brother and your friend, Rasheed. And without any further ado, I’d like to bring in a person that I personally think knows a lot about the situation with Iran because he’s done a lot of guest appearances on Press TV, and he’s done a lot of writings and everything. I gotta bring in Professor Kevin Barrett, and I’d like to say to you all, Bismillahirrahmanirrahim.As-salamu alaykum, Rashid. How are you doing?I’m doing pretty good. Yes, sir. And shukran for joining me today on the platform. I know there’s a lot going on, but I know that you can probably make a little heads or tails of what’s going on. Could you please give us your perspective on what is taking place in West Asia right now?Well, this looks like it could be the big one. That is, the war that brings down not just the U.S. empire, but 500 years of European world hegemony. I wrote an article to that effect a few days ago. I think that the Zionist crazies have bit off more than they can chew this time. And basically what we have is Operation Epstein Fury with blackmailed child rapist Trump being pushed into a politically disastrous war that’s also going to be militarily and economically disastrous.It comes at a moment that the United States empire is facing a crisis. It’s been eclipsed by China in terms of manufacturing, economy, technology. And its vassal states in Europe have been killed off by the stupid American war on Russia through Ukraine. And there’s a huge economic bubble that’s about to pop. This AI bubble is looking extremely fragile. And you put all this together and then you have this war that they can’t win because Iran can shut down the Gulf and keep the oil from flowing, drive the oil prices higher, higher and higher, and keep pounding American bases. The Americans are going to run out of ammunition in a couple of weeks. And at that point, Iranians can just finish off all those bases. And so it’s a completely bizarre situation. It’s a head scratcher as to how the strategic geniuses have managed to march Western civilization over the cliff. But there you have it.And, you know, I remember when we’ve talked several times and we’ve had multiple conversations together. And I remember one time on the first show that we did, first or second show, you were telling me just how filthy Trump is and how in bed he is with all of these, quote unquote, people from the swamp. Why do you think that nobody tried to pay heed to you when you were telling the people how Trump made his money? How did he rub elbows with all of these other people? Because you said this on my show. You were telling people about Hillary Clinton. You were telling them about Joe Biden, and you really told them about Trump. Why didn’t they take heed? Why did they believe in the no more wars, no more eternal wars, and that I’m going to make America great again? And when you answer that, I’m going to get off the screen for a minute. I hear my car alarm going off, and I want to shut it off while you’re talking.Okay, great, I’ll do a monologue for you then, and you can get that alarm taken care of.Yeah, so why won’t the Trump fanboys wake up and figure this out? Well, a lot of them are. More and more of them are. But I’ve been screaming from the rooftops about 9/11 since the end of 2003, about Epstein since 2008. Catching on to things a little bit before most people do is, I guess, part of the job description. So, but yeah, with Trump, it was pretty obvious that there was a huge swamp issue around him from early on.And I have to credit my colleague, Gordon Duff at Veterans Today, for this. Gordon is kind of all over the map on a lot of things. And I don’t agree with him about certain things. And he’s got a bit of PTSD from a very crazy career in the Marine Corps and the CIA Black Ops Division. And he’s for real. I’ve seen his Rolodex. I’ve seen him pull up these high-ranking people for me to talk to on Skype and stuff. So he’s not like some crazy guy pretending he’s a CIA vet. He’s a real CIA vet.And anyway, back in 2015, when Trump started running for office, Gordon just pulled up all this stuff. And then Katie, the 13-year-old that Trump so brutally raped, sued him. And that court case was there in like 2016, 2015, or 16. And the story of Roy Cohn and how he created Donald Trump as a made man in the kosher Nostra Jewish Mafia was being splashed all over the pages of Veterans Today back then. So I’ve got to credit Gordon for pointing me in the right direction there. But it’s really all out there. That information is not a secret.It’s just that when you find mainstream sources about Trump being formed by Roy Cohn, a precursor to Epstein, about Trump going to parties with Roy Cohn when Trump was in his 20s, and Cohn was in his 50s or 60s or something. And at those parties, Cohn was systematically raping children. J. Edgar Hoover and his boyfriend, Clyde Tolson, were at some of those parties, and they would be raping little boys. And Trump was at these same parties. And I don’t know which sex he was raping or what precisely he was doing. I don’t think I really want to know. But the fact is that the mainstream sources will tell you that Roy Cohn was Donald Trump’s mentor. He taught Trump everything Trump knows about both how to operate as a money launderer for the kosher Nostra, which has been Trump’s job description forever, and also about how to never back down, but just attack, attack, attack, and then make sure that you win the game by stabbing your opponents in the back through nefarious means, like using the mafia to kill them, threaten them, et cetera, et cetera.That’s how Trump, or rather how Cohn, operated. He was a lawyer, but he won his law cases not in the courtroom, but by seeing to it that people were murdered and threatened. And J. Edgar Hoover actually would get orders from Meyer Lansky that he would then relay to Roy Cohn. And Roy Cohn would order the takedown or sometimes the killing of high-ranking American politicians. So that was who Cohn is, and he’s Trump’s mentor. So Trump is as dirty as they come. And, you know, Trump’s beauty pageant, Miss Teen America beauty pageant, was obviously an Epstein-type thing. The mainstream exposed that Trump would walk into the dressing room to see the 15-year-old girls nude. But what the mainstream wasn’t telling you was that he was inviting them along with Jeffrey Epstein to Mar-a-Lago. I would be very surprised if Katie is the only 13-year-old that Trump brutally raped. I would be very surprised if there weren’t many dozens of them. And they’ve been terrorized and silenced and killed off and things like that. But yeah, Trump is filthy. And he always has been.And he talked a good line. But he talked a good line because he was, as the FBI file says that was released just recently in the Epstein article, “Jared Kushner is the brains behind Trump’s presidency.” Not just Kushner himself. Kushner is part of the Jewish organized crime syndicate that dominates America. His father went to federal prison. These people are gangsters. And Kushner works with these people, Chabad Lubovich, Jewish fanatical Zionist extremist gangsters. Those people created Donald Trump. They gave him his lines, scripted the lines for him. And he’s politically talented, so he winged it a lot and did pretty well with saying the things that would make him look like a populist. So he’s always been just a phony, a fake populist created by the same Jewish organized crime syndicate that did 9/11 and that’s running the U.S. empire into the ground.I was watching a video where his funders, Madeline, I think, um, um, I can’t forget her husband. I can’t remember her husband’s name, but he was a billionaire and she’s a billionaire. Sheldon and Miriam Adelson.And he was saying how many times that they would visit the White House. And then she said that he was the first Jewish president and that he puts Israel first. And I mean, it seems like with this right in your face, it seems like his base should have had a lot of blowback against him.Yeah, well, his base is waking up. Parts of it are waking up. There are more and more people who used to be in the general Trump world camp who have turned against him. I think Tucker Carlson was MAGA-congruent there for a while, and now he’s telling the truth. And same with Candace Owens. Even some folks at Infowars are starting to scratch their heads and wonder about this. I know some Infowars people have been putting out some good stuff. I don’t know if Alex Jones is ever going to break out of his trance and break his Zionist control. But anyway, the base is waking up, though there’s a certain element of the base that has fallen for Trump’s cult of personality. It’s just like with Stalin and Mao and Hitler and Napoleon and these leaders that cast a sort of a spell. And Trump casts a pretty stupid spell. And you have to be pretty stupid, really, to totally fall for it. But, you know, people do.I have a few friends who have. I don’t know if my good friend Rolf is going to be like the last Trump fanboy standing, I think, among my circle of acquaintances. Maybe he’s already—maybe this war is waking him up, too. But yeah, I think this is going to be disastrous for Trump politically because he’s going to lose a big chunk of his base. And then the Democrats are going to have a giant club to beat him with when the economy blows up.So speaking of that stuff, let’s transition into what is going on, the attack on Persia, the attack on Iran. Why did they leave the supreme leader undefended to be taken out?Well, it wasn’t that they left him undefended. It was that the Supreme Leader, Ali Khamenei, said they said, we want to keep you safe and evacuate you and take you to a safe place. And he said, no, you can’t do that. I’ll do that when you figure out a way to evacuate all of the 30 million people here. And so he didn’t want to be safe. He just wanted to live his life. And they killed him in his house where he always is, where everybody knows he is. He has a house and he has an office. And the office is kind of connected to the house. And he never left there. He never went to any basements. He didn’t go scurrying down in the basements like these cowardly cockroaches do, like Netanyahu does, like Trump certainly would if and when he comes under threat. May God bring that threat to him as soon as possible. But no, the Supreme Leader of Iran is a deeply spiritual man who wasn’t afraid of death. And so he just kept living his life. And he actually hoped to be martyred. He even said not long before that that, “my body is falling apart.” I think he had cancer even. “I’ve been praying that I would die a martyr’s death in Islam.” As you know, if you die a martyr, you’re destined for the highest station of paradise. And so he was a sincere believer and is now in the highest station of paradise.People told me that right after the martyrdom of the Ayatollah, Trump went through Italy to try to do a backdoor deal for a ceasefire. And this is a regular out of the U.S. playbook. They will murder top officials and then they’ll seek a de-escalation or whatever, just like they did with Soleimani and everybody else. But Iran told them, no, there will be no ceasefire. I think that would be politically unacceptable if they were to agree to a cessation because of the level of arrogance of the United States, Israel, and the UK when they not only murdered the supreme leader of Iran, but they did it during Ramadan. What do you have to say about that?Yeah, well, being murdered during Ramadan, that’s the best time to be martyred from the perspective of the Supreme Leader. Yeah, we might be having an internet issue here, so I apologize for that. But yeah, Ramadan, that’s the time that Imam Hussein was martyred, and it’s the best time to be martyred. And that’s the time that it’s going to make the biggest splash.And so the whole Shia world and all of us Sunni people who are paying attention and understand what’s really going on in the world are blown away by this heroic martyrdom. And we’ll spend the rest of our lives avenging it or just following in the heroic footsteps of this great man. And so they made a terrible mistake by doing this. And there’s no way that Iran is going to back down now. And there’s no way that any real Muslim is going to back down now. I mean, this is it. We’re locked. We’re loaded. We’re going in, and we’re not going to ever stop.Yeah, we are having a little technical difficulty, everybody. It’s not us. It’s not us on this end. So I just want everybody to know that. But again, is Iran just beginning to ramp up retaliatory strikes, or are they playing for the long run to hit hard and to hit consistently and to do as much damage as they can to bring Israel and the United States to their knees?Yeah, I think Iran is going to just keep going because they can gradually wear down the American and Israeli defenses. And soon, whether in a week, two weeks, three weeks, those stocks of anti-missile systems are going to be exhausted, and Iran will be able to pummel American assets in the region at will and utterly annihilate them, and also pummel Israel at will. And at that point, the Israelis and Americans are going to have to beg for mercy. They may try to escalate, but then they’ll lose even worse. So yeah, I think Iran has a very strong hand to play here.And of course, Trump could try to get drawn into another forever war and try to send in ground troops. And how that would go, I don’t know. But I think the odds are that any way you slice it, this is going to end up with the U.S. retreating from the region. And very likely the dollar will collapse and we’ll be in a new world where China is the world’s most powerful nation and the U.S. is just another second-ranked superpower.I was reading last night that France, Britain, and Germany are talking about lending aid to the United States to help defend Israel. If this were to happen, do you think that Russia would then be forced and China would be forced to intervene a little more openly because the interests there are so profound, especially for China in its building road and Russia in its north-south corridor?Yeah, Russia and China both have strong motivations to make sure that Iran doesn’t lose, and indeed to let the Americans get drawn in to this quagmire and exhaust themselves and implode their empire. And so I think the Russians and the Chinese didn’t really need to prevent this. I think they were operating according to the famous dictum, “never interrupt your enemy when he’s in the middle of making a fatal mistake.” And so now they can, however deniably, help Iran and create other problems for the U.S.Ron Unz made a really interesting suggestion recently that this would be a good time for China to blockade Taiwan, not to invade or attack Taiwan militarily, just to blockade it the same way Trump is blockading Cuba and Venezuela, which are, of course, precedents. China has a much better international legal case for blockading Taiwan than the U.S. has for blockading Cuba or Venezuela. And if China were to blockade Taiwan, with all the U.S. naval assets in the Persian Gulf, the U.S. would be in no position to fight. And Taiwan would basically go down in a couple of weeks under a blockade.So essentially what would happen is that the power on Taiwan would shift from this crazy secessionist party that’s in political power to the military in Taiwan, which is under the control of people who are much friendlier to mainland China. And so we would get a peaceful reunification of China and Taiwan. And the fact that the U.S. couldn’t stop that would essentially be the game changer. That would be the end of the U.S. as the planetary hegemon.A lot of people don’t see this, but you mentioned something that I’ve been talking about for the longest time, that when they attack Persia or Iran, that Iran will give them hell in West Asia, and this will be the linchpin for the collapse of American and British power in West Asia, or what they term as the Middle East. Are you in agreement with me that this will be the thing that completely pushes America and Britain out and change the geopolitical dynamics of West Asia if the war intensifies and continues?I think that’s very likely because, as I said, I think Iran can continue to keep the Gulf closed and can continue to pound all U.S. assets, including its U.S. vassal states, the Gulf states, because they’re going to run out of this extremely expensive ammunition, the anti-missile systems and their air defense systems that are currently unable to stop all the missiles. They stop a certain percentage of the Iranian attacks. The Iranians are starting their attacks with the older stuff, with the less effective stuff and including lots of decoys. And then they force the Americans and Israelis to use up their air defense systems, their Iron Dome-type anti-missile missiles and things like that, shooting at these decoys and shooting at the old stuff. And so the Americans and Israelis are going to run out of those munitions long before Iran runs out of its missiles.And in this case, actually, I think the Gulf states and the U.S. military bases in the region are worse defended than Israel is. I mean, Israel is going to get really pounded. But the number of long-range missiles the Iranians have is just in the relatively low thousands. And the number of shorter-range missiles that they have is in the hundreds of thousands. And so those longer-range missiles are necessary for hitting Israel. And since they just have thousands of those, they’re not in that situation where they have infinite firepower to use against Israel, although they have an awful lot. They have enough to really be the equivalent of a nuclear deterrent. They could utterly obliterate Dimona and spread nuclear radiation all over Israel, and that’d be the end of Israel. So Israel probably is well advised not to try to escalate to the nuclear level, or that’s what’s going to happen to them.But the American assets, these American military bases around the Gulf, are going to be totally undefended. And Iran’s going to have hundreds of thousands of missiles to hit them with. So that and the ships of the Gulf, of course, which are also soft targets. So essentially, Iran can remove the American military presence from the region. And yeah, that’ll be a game changer. And I think politically in the U.S. it’s going to be a real shock, and it could be the end of the Trump regime. And how that all shakes out in terms of what happens to the American empire, I don’t know. But all of the indicators are that the empire is heading down one way or another, at one rate of speed or another.You know, there were shootdowns of F-15s, and one of America’s allies, I forget which one of the fiefdoms or sheikhdoms or whatever, said that they mistakenly shot down the F-15s. Well, Iran lodged a complaint, a diplomatic complaint, saying that because Iran said that they shot them down, and they said, well, they want that country to explain that if they made a mistake and shot those planes down, what were the planes doing operating over their airspace? Because if they are the ones that shot it down, then Iran has the legitimate right to pound the government. So Iran is waiting for the response from that government that said that they shot the U.S. planes down.Yeah, this thing is going regional, and it’s going regional fast. How much longer do you think that the United States can deploy assets to protect Israel? Because it seems more that they want to protect Israel more than they want to protect their own troops and these other bases.Well, that’s right. And the Gulf governments are already complaining loudly about this. They’re saying that the Americans are using all their assets to defend Israel, and they’re not defending us. They’re saying, we thought we were under an American security umbrella. And it turns out that there’s no umbrella, or if there is, it’s tattered. It’s got a lot of holes in it. The Americans are working their hardest to try to put the real umbrella up over Israel. And so the Saudis, the Kuwaitis, the Emiratis, the Omanis, the Qataris, these people are very unhappy right now for good reason. They’re seeing their ill-gotten gains going down the toilet because, you know, they threw their chips in with the Americans. And that was the wrong move morally and geostrategically in the long term.They allowed the American empire, which has been increasingly run since World War II by crazed Zionist Jews, to break up the region into these small units and then control those smaller broken-up units. For example, there’s no country called Kuwait. Kuwait is just hardly anything. There’s no such thing as Kuwait really. It’s just one region of the Iraq province of the Ottoman Empire, which was part of the Ottoman Caliphate. And the legitimate government of that, the Islamic government, was the legitimate government, and the caliph was its legitimate head.And likewise, Bahrain and perhaps Qatar are part of the Persian Empire, they’re part of Iran. They don’t exist as countries. What they are is that the British and Americans just broke them off and found some corrupt little gangsters to prop up as their supposed potentates, their emirs and their sultans, and made them their puppets. And so these are puppet states for this evil empire. And those states are going to have to decide whether they’re ready to move on to the next stage and not be puppets. And that’s going to be the end of some of these states, in my opinion.Saudi Arabia—maybe Saudi Arabia will be around in another 10 or 20 years. It’s big enough and wealthy enough that that’s possible. But these other ones, I don’t think so. Maybe Saudi Arabia actually will absorb the Emirates. Currently, the United Arab Emirates is basically just a cat’s paw for the Zionist crazies. The Emirates is just totally run by Israel. That’s all it is. It’s a branch of Israel. Saudi Arabia, not so much, but they’re still heavily indebted to the American empire. They’re implicated in this American empire. And so they’re vulnerable now.Iran can not only target their oil infrastructure and make them go broke very quickly because they won’t be able to sell any of their oil, but also, if necessary, Iran can destroy their desalinization plants, just like it can destroy Israel’s big desalinization plant. And if they do that, those countries are toast. They’ll become uninhabitable desert. And so they’re totally vulnerable. They’re not being protected by the American empire. And so a new order, a new security arrangement is going to have to come out of this. And it’s going to be a post-American empire arrangement. It’s going to be a post-Zionism arrangement.And I think going back to Arabia, I don’t think the House of Saud could withstand that because, remember, financially, they have fornicated with the great w***e America, and their bank accounts or the recycled money has to go through New York. So if the empire falls, a lot of the money and assets that they’re holding in the United States goes along with it if they don’t unload it.And I recall the Holy Quran giving a warning to the mother city. And we know what the mother city is. We know it’s the holy city of Mecca to get its act right. With these corrupt sheikhs and the House of Saud, maybe Arabia will stand, but not Saudi Arabia, because that is just a name, a family name that was imposed upon the Arabian Peninsula. As I tell people, there was never a book called Lawrence of Saudi Arabia. There was a book of Lawrence of Arabia, and the corrupt House of Saud stamped their name on it after they made a deal with the British, the French, and the U.S. or whatever.So I think all of these fake leaderships are going to start crumbling and falling under the weight of corruption, under the weight of war, under the weight especially, you know, how America works when she’s in trouble. To deflect her trouble, she will then dime out everybody that helped her and all of the backdoor deals. And maybe this will cause other people to come to the streets to demand the fall of these leaders. Do you have any thoughts on that?Yeah, I think that’s a good forecast. You know, I recently finished rereading Abdul Rahman Munif’s first volume in his Cities of Salt trilogy. And Abdul Rahman Munif was, I think, a Lebanese-Saudi dual citizen who lived in so-called Saudi Arabia, which, as you said, is really just Arabia.And it was actually a mid-level British bureaucrat who came up with the name of Saudi Arabia. The British handed it to the Ibn Saud family.And so anyway, this novel by Abdul Rahman Munif, actually the Cities of Salt trilogy, describes—it’s a historical novel about the moment when the Americans first came to the Arabian Peninsula. And the arrival of the Americans there was just a curse. And it’s quite a wonderful book.Reading it, you realize that the characters who saw the true nature of this curse that the Americans had brought were right. And Miteb al-Hathal, the mythical leader of the resistance, the guy who turns his back on the Americans and on the Emir and just disappears into the desert and becomes a myth of resistance—he was right. And by the end, everybody at some level realizes that they, the anti-American revolutionaries, were right. The people who said, “don’t let the Americans in here. They are evil. They are the Great Satan” (as the Iranian supreme leaders have correctly termed them). Those people were right all along.At some point, the people of Arabia are going to recognize this. They’re going to recognize that the great resistance fighter character in the Abdurrahman Munif book, Miteb al-Hathal, was right and that the other characters who kind of went along to get along and accepted the corrupt leadership of these moronic emirs and sultans, the House of Saud, and it was totally controlled by the Americans—those people made a mistake. And that ultimately the great revolt against the Americans and their puppet leadership, which comes at the end of the first volume of this Abdel Rahman Munif trilogy novel, it’s quite a beautiful description of this popular uprising against the Americans and against the Ibn Sauds.Unfortunately, of course, it doesn’t succeed in the long term. It succeeds in winning them a few concessions in terms of the American oil company’s ability to mistreat its Arab workers. But they should have just kicked the Americans out and gotten rid of their corrupt leadership.It’s sort of just like, we look back and say the Native Americans should have just butchered the Europeans, right? They could have kept that continent if they’d known how to just not let those Europeans get settled. Let the camel’s nose into the tent and you’re in trouble, right?And so…but maybe it’s not too late. The people of Arabia can push the camel’s nose back out of the tent.Yeah, I believe that this was unexpected. I believe the United States, because they’re so desperate—see, let me go back for a second and let me explain this just a tad bit for people. Because a lot of people say, well, Trump is not making any sense and his policies are irrational. And I continue to tell people that when you are desperate, irrational thinking is rational to the desperate mind.And so when we look at the American empire, she’s being overtaken by China economically. And China has become a near-peer power, if not surpassing the United States in most things that she dominated in. We see a resurgence in Russia. We see a rising Iran. We see a rising and liberated Africa. As Sergei Lavrov said, Africa in the coming years will be the center of the world because it has the largest population on the planet. And most people don’t know that that surpasses India and surpasses China. China is invested heavily in education there and infrastructure and schools there.We see even with Nigeria one of the fastest-growing populations and fastest-growing economies in the world. Then we see the United States having trouble in Latin America and the Caribbean.I think that desperation, because the empire understands that the time is not on its side. And when you are realizing that, oh my God, I don’t have the rent. Let me go out and try to get the rent. And when you can’t do that—Do you believe that that is a part of the miscalculation on the American government in the past? And we’re living in a time unlike any other time where we’re watching the collapse of one world and the merging in of another world.Yeah, I agree. The crazy policies that we’re witnessing are the result of desperation. That’s one of the ways that I and many other people strongly suspected that 9/11 was done by the Israelis in 2001, because at that time they were desperate. The United States wasn’t. Nobody in charge of the United States empire would blow up the Twin Towers and attack the Pentagon in 2001. It would make no sense for the U.S. empire to do that, drag itself into counterproductive wars in the Middle East. It made perfect sense for the Israelis to do it, though, because they were desperate.And so when you’re desperate, you do crazy things. And the Israelis are in a crazy situation. They’re driven by messianic millennialist maniacs who were trying to bring on their Messiah to conquer the Goyim and create a world where every Jew has 2,800 Goyim slaves and the Jews completely rule, having exterminated and enslaved all of the non-Jews. So there are people—that’s the driving force of the state of Israel, is people with that ideology. And then you’ve got the more pragmatic Israeli leaders who have to deal with that. And then they have to deal with the fact that this genocide of occupied Palestine is totally unacceptable to the entire region and indeed to most of the world.So they’re caught between this proverbial rock and the hard place of their own extremists, who are really the heart and soul of their project, and the region that’s never going to accept this, right? Indeed, why should the world’s 2 billion Muslims and, what, 3 billion Christians accept that their holy lands should be genocided by fanatical people who absolutely hate the prophets, who hate Jesus, who hate Muhammad? Why are we going to let those people take over our holy land, the holy land of 5 billion people, right? How many Jews are there on earth? Fifteen million, maybe. And of those, how many even care about Israel? Maybe half that at most. So you’ve got fewer than 10 million of these Zionist Jews who think that they’re going to genocide the holy land that’s holy to 5 billion people. Do the math, right? Ten million versus 5 billion. It’s not a very workable or viable project.So Israel was desperate in 2001. They were in a desperate demographic situation, a strategic situation, and so they were in a position to have to do something crazy—blow up the Trade Center, attack the Pentagon, blame it on their Muslim enemies, and hijack the American military into this all-out war against the region, and specifically against Israel’s enemies, and specifically against those seven countries in five years that General Clark told us that 9/11 was designed to take out.And so, yeah, desperate people do desperate, crazy things. And the American empire now is every bit as desperate as the Israelis were in 2001. The American empire, as you said, is facing a China whose real economy is far greater than the American real economy, whose technological capacity and productivity has eclipsed the U.S., and that all of this is rapidly being reflected in relative military power.So the U.S. suddenly is waking up and recognizing that over the past two decades it’s completely lost its hegemonic position without firing a shot. Well, actually it has fired some shots. It fired the COVID shot across China’s bow in 2020. I’m in full agreement with Ron Unz’s interpretation that COVID resulted from a U.S. biological attack against China and Iran. And, of course, that was covert biological warfare. They didn’t come right out and admit what they were doing. And it blew back on them. It didn’t work out very well in terms of stopping China’s rise. It may have slowed China’s growth a bit, but not enough to make a difference. So that was a crazy thing to do—unleashing an anti-human being virus, a biological weapon like that, that kills 0.5% or whatever, a small, very small percentage of people who it afflicts, but that’s enough to totally cause states of emergency to be imposed, right? It was designed for that.So these crazy American empire people do crazy things. And the Trump regime has even crazier people, I think, than the Democrats, who were pretty crazy themselves, right? The Ukraine war against Russia was a crazy thing to do. The 2014 Maidan coup and pushing a war on Russia through Ukraine—that was crazy. That was risking nuclear World War III against the world’s leading nuclear power. But I think Trump’s attack on China with COVID was even crazier. And Trump’s attacks on Iran leading up to this current all-out war, Operation Epstein Fury—that’s the craziest yet.Well, from your sources, what is it looking like in Iran right now, in that region right now? Because all we hear is the Western news press talking about how Iran is being battered and being destroyed while Israel is silencing media as much as they can to keep people from realizing that Iran is striking and striking hard.Yeah, the Western media doesn’t want its domestic audience to understand what’s really going on. They want to create the impression that, oh, it’s all going okay. And they want to stop people from turning against this war. And why does the media operate that way? Well, all media to some extent is going to line up behind their country when it’s at war. But also the American media are massively dominated by Jewish Zionist owners. The billionaire Epstein class that rules the West has bought up almost all of the Western media. And this billionaire Epstein class is basically like Jeffrey Epstein himself. These are rich Jews who care about what’s good for the Jews and what’s good for Israel. That’s their number one thing.And so the Western media is even more extreme in its counterfactual propaganda regarding these wars for Israel. And so, yeah, the Western media right now is pumping out all kinds of nonsense, as they always have against Iran. I would say the Western media’s lies about Iran are bigger than their lies about any other country. They’ve really deliberately gotten Iran wrong in an extreme way, a way that’s shocking even to people like me who are used to the propaganda.And their description of the war, trying to make it sound like Iran’s getting pounded—well, yeah, Iran is getting badly bombed, and that’s not going to have any effect at all. It’s not just the fact that Iranian Shia Muslims embrace martyrdom. And the more of them you martyr, the harder they’re going to fight, as we saw during the imposed war in the 1980s with Iraq. But this is actually true of all human beings. It was discovered during World War II that if you bomb populations, it doesn’t turn them against the war. It doesn’t turn them against their own governments. It reinforces their strong allegiance to their own governments and their dedication to their country’s war effort.This is what happened when Hitler sent his buzz bomb rockets against the British during World War II. It rallied the British people against Germany. And it’s what happened when the British and the Americans genocidally butchered Germans with these carpet bombings, air bombings, when they burned hundreds of thousands of people to death in Dresden and other German cities. Even these incredible, just utterly genocidal bombings did not turn the Germans against their own government. On the contrary, they reinforced the Germans’ will to fight to the very bitter end, which they did. Both the Germans and the British had their wills to fight intensified by these brutal bombing campaigns. And of course, the British-American campaign against Germany was vastly more brutal than Hitler’s bombing campaign against Britain.So it’s been well known among military historians and military analysts that bombing actually just makes populations back their government even more. And so when the Western media tells us, “oh, Iran is getting pummeled,” that’s not going to produce any hope that that’s going to lead to the Iranian people changing their minds and not backing their government’s war effort. Instead, what that’s about, really, it’s a lie. The basic picture that they’re drawing of the war, where they exaggerate the losses in Iran and try to ignore the losses among their own side, and especially in Israel, that’s for domestic consumption. That’s propaganda designed to try to prevent support for this war from completely collapsing.Because the support for this war—I don’t know if you’re aware of this, Rashid—this is the most unpopular war in the get-go of any war in human history that I am aware of. The polls showed only 27% approval of this war on its first day. This has never happened before. There’s always a rally-around-the-flag effect that produces virtual universal acclaim for a war when it first starts. As we saw with 9/11 and so on, everybody wants to go off and have a war, and they rally behind the president.It’s well known that if the polls show that 99% of the people support your war on the first day, that’s good. That’s what you want. If only 95% support it on the first day, that’s a bad sign. That means it could slip. And if only 90% support it on the first day, you’re in big trouble. Well, here, 26% support it on the first day. This is crazy. This is, again, the most unpopular war that’s ever been started in all of human history.Operation Epstein Fury will go down, I think, in history as the biggest public relations disaster from the get-go of any war ever. And Trump said that he didn’t care what the American people had to say about the war. He’s going to fight it. I was reading that yesterday in one of the articles in RT, and they were quoting him about the polls and what the people think about the war, and they said he didn’t care.He just doesn’t want those Epstein files to get released, all those pages detailing the witness interviews around his brutal rape of 13-year-old Katie. We know the Justice Department is illegally withholding those papers. That news hit the mainstream like three days before this war started. So Trump doesn’t care what people think because he knows that if he doesn’t do what Netanyahu orders him to do, it’s going to be even worse.Well, do you have any information on Netanyahu? Because Iran bombed the prime minister’s residence, and we haven’t heard anything from Netanyahu since Iran bombed the prime minister’s residence.Yeah, who knows? There are rumors that he was hiding in Germany, which would be pretty ironic, and other rumors he’s flown abroad, and there are various locations that have been proposed. But yeah, I don’t believe he’s been heard from. And Iran is claiming that they may have killed him, and if so, I guess sending that guy to hell is something to celebrate. At the same time, though, that dictum, never interrupt your enemy when he’s in the middle of making a fatal mistake, would suggest that Netanyahu is running Zionism into the ground. Netanyahu will go down in history as having killed off the possibility of there being a long-term viable state of Israel.And so once he’s gone, if more rational leadership emerges, that actually makes the situation for all of those of us who are fighting to put an end to the Zionist entity perhaps a bit more difficult.Hmm. Iran has suffered major assassinations, multiple assassinations on Syrian territory of high-ranked officials and diplomats or whatever. Has it ever come to their mind, and maybe they should say, okay, let’s sue for peace for a minute and send Jared Kushner and Witkoff over into Iraq and let’s negotiate—and I’m not advocating this, everybody in CIA, the Secret Service, I’m not advocating this—but I’m saying, and as soon as they get there, they do to them what America did to Soleimani.Yeah, well, the trouble is, Rashid, trading Witkoff and Kushner for people like Soleimani is not a good trade from the Iranian standpoint. That is, Witkoff and Kushner, they’re just mediocre minds. They’re real estate mafia. They’re quote-unquote “Jewish real estate guys”—no, they’re mafia. But they’re not smart. A lot of mafia gangsters get to a higher station in life than they should based on their intelligence because they’re risk-takers and they intimidate people and they’re plugged into these networks that use illicit violence. And Kushner and Witkoff are like that. I mean, they’re just idiots. They’re nobodies. It’s a complete insult, a slap in the face to any country when Trump, who himself, of course, is just another two-bit low-IQ gangster, when they send somebody like Witkoff or Kushner to negotiate. It’s an insult.So if you’re Iranian, do you really want to bother killing Witkoff and Kushner? I guess it would be a symbolic statement. But they’re worthless. They’re cockroaches. Yeah, okay, it’s like you step on the cockroaches, but what do you gain? I mean, two less cockroaches, but there’s a lot of them where they came from.The Israelis, whatever else you want to say about them, they do have this idea that if you kill these really great people, that maybe you can stop the movements behind these great people. And they’ve had a mixed record with that, though. If you read Ronan Bergman’s book Rise and Kill First, which is a history of Israel and its assassination programs, which are vast—Israel assassinates orders of magnitude more people than any other country and probably a lot more people than all other countries combined. They just love to assassinate people. That’s the Israeli thing. And they imagined throughout history that they could just take out the leaders that were against them and that would solve their problems. And as Ronan Bergman’s book Rise and Kill First explains, it didn’t solve their problems at all. Every time they killed some leader, an even more powerful leader would rise up to take his place and create even bigger problems for Israel.When Israel did actually succeed in finally neutering the Palestinian Liberation Organization, the secular opposition to Israel, guess what? This Hamas group that they had actually sort of helped encourage at the beginning, the religious opposition to Israel, suddenly took off and became an even bigger threat to Israel than the PLO had ever been. And the larger religious opposition to Zionism has become a bigger threat than the PLO.And so when they martyr these people and create martyrs who are going to be remembered for centuries or even millennia, and that those people who remember those martyrs for centuries or millennia are going to be dedicated to scrubbing the Zionist cancer off the face of the earth, they’re not gaining anything. They’re losing.And so from the Iranian perspective, again, when your enemy just keeps making all these mistakes—and they’re also evil mistakes, they’re operating in a way that’s both stupid and evil—you don’t want to mirror that. You want to act as intelligently and as justly as possible. And Iran really tries to do that. They try to pursue justice in their policies…with, I think, a lot more success than any other current government.Are we living in the collapse and the fall of America and the Western world?Yeah, absolutely. It’s like if you were living in Rome in the late sixth century, or the Western Roman Empire anyway, you’d be living through a certain kind of civilizational collapse. And certainly that’s exactly what we’re living through now in the West. Though I guess I shouldn’t say we. I’m not in the West anymore. I’m in Morocco. Morocco is on a rise. Africa is on the rise, as you said. And Morocco is the gateway to Africa. And Morocco really has a great future.Now, I’m not in agreement with the policies of the current government regarding this war for Palestine. The Moroccan government is trying to sort of have it both ways. They want to play Mr. Nice Guy and say, “oh, we can be the mediators. And so we’re going to have good relations with the Israelis and good relations with Palestinians. Hamas, they’re a little too radical for us. We’re going to try to be these nice moderators so we can get along with the West.” That’s b******t. It’s embarrassing. I probably shouldn’t rant too much about the evil, the odious, disgusting, embarrassing evil of the current Moroccan government’s embrace of the Zionists, because I don’t want them to revoke my residency permit and send me back to the belly of the beast where you are.But despite this, the Moroccan government is actually competent in presiding over a country that’s improving in so many ways and setting itself up to be the gateway to Africa, which, as you say, is going to be a big part of the human future. The big growth area of the world is going to be Africa, largely funded by China with Chinese infrastructure help.And so, yeah, I left the sixth-century Rome. I left the imploding United States and the West partly because I tried for 20 years to try to wake them up, and I thought maybe the truth about 9/11 would be a big enough slap in the face to wake them up. And at this point, I think they’re heading for big trouble. It could be anywhere from really big trouble, where civil war kind of stuff, a real societal collapse, or it could be less than that. It could be just a big collapse in living standards and then the kind of political infrastructure that’ll have to be used to try to keep a lid on the popular unrest when you get a collapse of living standards. Either way, big trouble is coming to the United States. And then the West is about to become a memory in terms of its 500 years of global hegemony. That period is about to close.I’m not a professor, so I’m going to ask you because maybe common sense is not so common today. And I often ask people that come on to this show this. I hear the talk of multiple poles of power and America will be one of the three or four major poles of power in this new dynamic, this new paradigm globally. And my question to you is this: if we were to use history as a base or guideline and to use mathematics as a base and a guideline, how can America maintain and be one of those poles of power when she has no manufacturing, when she has alienated everybody, when she has made war on everybody, when she’s the largest debtor nation in the history of the world? When all of those things come back and she’s so divided culturally, racially, economically at home as well as abroad, how is that a recipe for her to maintain her glory, global standing? It doesn’t make sense to me. Common sense tells me she will fall and she will fall hard and that she cannot, in her fall, maintain her position as a great global power.You’re absolutely right. And the way this is going to play out is that the petrodollar, which is what allows the U.S. to print toilet paper money and exchange it for real goods and services, is going to be gone. And so suddenly the U.S. dollar is going to lose maybe a third of its purchasing power. So imagine what happens if everything that you buy—your food, your rent, your housing, your car—everything suddenly costs one third more. You’re going to have a big budget adjustment to make.And so the U.S. is going to face this situation. And it’s going to be forced to recognize that its military can no longer buy it this largesse, this petrodollar largesse, robbing the world by printing toilet paper money, by pointing a military gun at everybody’s head. Suddenly you’ve lost the war. You can’t point your gun at people’s heads anymore. That racket is done. So what’s going to happen?Well, I think politically the U.S. is going to have to obviously fold up its military tent. Right now, the United States spends more money on its military than the next 10 countries combined, and that’s going to have to collapse. The U.S. is going to have to start spending more roughly about the same amount per capita on its military as Canada and New Zealand and the European countries and other countries do, which means that the U.S. military budget is going to have to be maybe one quarter what it is now.And so what that’ll do is that’ll cushion things a little bit because that huge pile of money that’s being wasted on the military right now will suddenly be real goods and services that go into people’s pocketbooks and their real living standards. And so that’ll cushion the blow a little bit. But what’s going to happen is when the U.S. loses its ability to force the world to accept its toilet paper greenback, at that point a hard choice is going to have to be made between completely impoverishing the population and then facing riots, or folding up the military tent and bringing the troops home. And that’s what they’re going to have to do.Last question of the day for my friend Kevin. Do you think that they will push the world to World War III to try to prevent anybody from ascending past the American empire because in their minds they think that, hey, I would rather rule over a trash heap than to allow anyone to rule in paradise?Yeah, right. That does sound like that Satan’s quote, right? “Better to rule in hell than serve in heaven,” from the famous John Milton poem. And yeah, we probably have some Satanists in power, and who knows how crazy they are. But I think it’s more of a game of chicken. I think that the people in power, the Epstein class and people anywhere near it, they live very cushy material lives. They’re pampered. They’re living better lives materially than the emperors and the kings did in past ages. And I don’t think they want to risk that with a nuclear war, especially since Russia’s got these radioactive tidal wave torpedoes that could totally put an end to the eastern and western seaboards of the U.S., that could completely drown the British Isles, et cetera, et cetera.I don’t think they really want to risk that. Well, they may want to risk it. They just don’t want it to happen. So they’re playing chicken. And these games of chicken where two guys drive at each other at high speed and the guy who swerves loses, is a chicken—well, that’s a dangerous game because it might or might not work out the way you want it to. And so, yeah, they’re doing that, but they’re still losing. This war on Russia through Ukraine—they’re basically admitting that they’ve lost, that Russia is going to end up with the Donbass region and more, and with a perfectly strong economy, and that we’re going to end up with a rump Ukraine and a much weakened Europe. They’ve admitted that, they’ve faced that.So whether they would take it all the way to World War III…there definitely are some people crazy enough to, but there are also people maybe pretending to be crazy enough to, like the Zionists saying “we have the Samson option. We’ll blow up every capital with nuclear weapon if we ever see we’re going down.” Yeah, right, you will. Because you know that if you did that, you and all your people would be hunted down and you would all die slowly and painfully. You probably, when push comes to shove, are going to have a good life going into exile in London, in Paris, in Venice, in Buenos Aires, in New York, and so on. You’re going to be living better than 99% of the population wherever you go. And you know what? I think you’re going to do that rather than guarantee that you’re going to be hunted down and killed like dogs. So you’re not going to do your Samson option. And that’s a bluff. They’re pretending to be that crazy. Sure, they’re pretty crazy. Doing 9/11 was pretty crazy. But I think there are limits to any of these people’s craziness because, again, they have good, cushy material lives that they want to protect.So ultimately they’re just going to lose the war. They’re going to go down. And if World War III happens in such a big way that it massively destroys civilization, that will be the result of a miscalculation. If that’s any consolation….I’m not sure it is.Thank you, my friend Kevin. I really appreciate you coming on the platform to do the program. I’m going to put your information in the description shortly. Do you have anything to say to them, any of your websites and everything that you could tell them about?Yeah, my two main websites are truthjihad.com, which is all one word, truthjihad.com, and then kevinbarrett.substack.com.Thank you so much. And I’ll send you the video in a few minutes, Kevin.Okay. Well, thank you, Rasheed. Appreciate it. 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 linkI joined the Richie Allen Show last night to talk about #OperationEpsteinFury.Transcript:Richie Allen: I need to go back to my history lecturers and demand my money back. Really? In 1953, the UK got involved. My God. Just listen to that again. I can’t believe it. I mean, this guy will be earning £200,000 to £300,000 a year for this. It is staggering.Interviewer: The history of Iran. Who put the Shah in power? British official: In 1953 was when the United Kingdom got involved and voted out the Prime Minister. That’s how it is reported. I didn’t realise the United Kingdom had the power to vote out Mohamed Mosaddegh in 1953.Let’s welcome back to the programme a broadcaster, writer and former lecturer. Our friend Kevin Barrett was in Morocco today. Kevin, welcome back. How are you?Kevin Barrett: Hey, I’m doing okay, Richie. I’m foregoing some body surfing to be on your program. It’s a windy, wild day here at the Mediterranean coast in Saidia, and I body surfed yesterday, but today here I am for you.Richie Allen: Thanks, mate. Appreciate it. And it is the holy month of Ramadan as well, so I know you’re busy.Did you ever hear anything like that from a commercial national broadcaster? The UK got involved and helped to vote out the Iranian Prime Minister? Is that how you remember it, Kevin? When you went to school, when you learned history? Is that what happened in 1953 in Iran? It’s astonishing, isn’t it? This really is it now, isn’t it? We really have arrived here.Kevin Barrett: It should be astonishing, Richie, but it doesn’t astonish me much because the tapes that you played had so many other outrageous lies. Basically everything that the media says about Iran is at least as big a lie as the claim that the UK voted out the Prime Minister of Iran in 1953.You know, I’ve been to Iran many, many times. I think nine times, actually, starting in 2013 and most recently, I think, like two or three years ago. The reality there is so completely different from the media portrayals that it’s just completely stunning.This notion that it’s a dictatorship is a joke. It’s vastly more democratic than any Western nation, just night and day. The freedom to express and hold different opinions is off the charts, vastly beyond anything in the West. There are a lot of different opinions, but basically at least about a third of the population is really hardcore, well-organized supporters of the purest version of the Islamic Revolution. Fifty percent of the population is more or less kind of, hey, we’re patriotic Iranians and we have this or that issue or what have you. Maybe twenty percent are somewhat at least open to the idea that we would like a more westernized country. But of that tiny twenty percent minority, which is mostly rich people in North Tehran and places like that, only a minuscule fraction is in any sense actively involved in joining in with the Americans and the Israelis in their terrorist assaults on the Islamic Republic.Just wrap your mind around this, Richie. There are basically two groups that the West is trying to regime change into power in Iran: the Pahlavi dictatorship that ninety-five percent of the people in Iran absolutely hate, and the MEK terrorist cult that makes Charlie Manson look like Mother Teresa. Ninety-nine percent of the Iranians in Iran hate the MEK. It’s as if somebody was trying to regime change America and put ISIS into power or something. Americans obviously would roll their eyeballs, and that’s exactly how Iranians react to all of this propaganda that’s being beamed into Iran through CIA media, where they hire these Iranian gusanos from the Shah’s family and other Epstein-class people and try to propagandize the Iranian people. It doesn’t work. They’re drinking their own Kool-Aid, swallowing their own propaganda, believing this nonsense that people in Iran would like to change their form of government, which they absolutely will not. Now that they’ve been attacked like this, that just gave the Islamic Revolution, the most hardcore possible version of it, a new fifty- or hundred-year lease on life.Richie Allen: Kevin has written about this in a very interesting and well-written, thought-provoking article on his Substack page, kevinbarrett.substack.com.Kevin and myself are not going to butt heads today. People will be listening to this and you will have heard me criticise a BBC reporter earlier for not challenging her guest. I don’t need to do what Kevin and myself have done many times before. I wouldn’t characterize life in Iran as Kevin has. Now, I’ve not been there. He’s been there. He’s experienced it. You should go there. Do you know, I’d love to someday, and I do mean that. But I’m not going to waste any time getting into the ins and outs about what life is like for people in Iran, secular people or non-religious people, because for me that’s a discussion for another day.Kevin Barrett: It’s fine. I hang out with secular people in Tehran. My friend’s family is secular Armenian Christians in Tehran and they strongly support the current government, as do almost all of the secular people and the Christians and the Jews in Iran, who are free to practice their religions.Richie Allen: You know what I mean. We’re not getting into it because I want to talk about the actions of the Israeli regime. We’re on the same page here, one hundred percent on the same page. Iran is a sovereign nation. If the people of Iran determine for themselves they want to change the way the country is run, it is up to the people of Iran to do that without any need or justification for outside interference. What has happened over the weekend in Iran is a crime. It’s an outrageous crime.I’m just making the point that for listeners who are new to this, there are things that go on in Iran that I really don’t like. But then there are things that go on in this country that I equally don’t like. We’ll do that another day, Kevin. We’ve done it before; there’s no need to do it today.What I’m interested in is your thoughts, your learned and educated thoughts, on what this means, what has happened. As we speak, I believe that Tehran is being carpet bombed by Israeli and US jets, not being reported on the BBC or on CNN, but being reported by people who are managing to get pictures out of what looks to be a terrifying bombing campaign going on at the moment.You write in your excellently written piece on Substack that you believe this could be, I’m going to paraphrase now, a Waterloo for the Trump slash Netanyahu regimes. Why do you believe that?Well, I think it’s more than that, Richie. I think it’s likely to result in the end of Western civilization as the dominant civilization on Earth. At the end of five hundred years of Western dominance, we’re going to see a complete disaster.There are all sorts of ways of coming at that argument. You can talk about the spiritual and psychological level. The Iranian people are not afraid to die. They embrace martyrdom. The supreme leader of Iran was a really beautiful human being. I didn’t know him personally, but I know people who did. He was the kindest, gentlest, most selfless, loving kind of person you could ever imagine. Extremely erudite as well, the equivalent of a PhD plus. He stayed home knowing what was likely to happen. He hasn’t been hiding at all. The leaders of the Epstein class who rule the West scurry like cockroaches at night from place to place, afraid of the light being turned on because all they have is their miserable lives.In Iran, their particular take on Islam, which is really not that far from mainstream Islam, puts an extra accent on martyrdom and the willingness to do the right thing even if you’re martyred, like Imam Hussein was at Karbala. Iran cannot lose. They cannot lose this war because they can accept any level of punishment. They will not just accept it but embrace it because it’s the best thing that could possibly happen to them. When you’re fighting people like that, you’d better have a plan.Iran has stockpiled many tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands actually, of short-range missiles that can take out everything anywhere near the Persian Gulf. They will just keep firing them until everything’s done. They already hit Ras Tanura, the big Saudi oil port. (Note: Turns out it was an Israeli false flag! -KB) They can bring the entire global economy to a screeching halt with one hand tied behind their back.No matter what the Americans do, and they are already losing their bases, evacuating and moving out to safe distance, they’re going to have all kinds of military problems. Both on the spiritual level and the strategic or military level, this is a total losing cause. The Americans are going to run out of ammunition somewhere between within one week and maybe three weeks. If they keep pounding Iran, all oil infrastructure will be finished off. There will be no more Persian Gulf oil for years. Guess where the world economy is going to go? A thousand times worse than the Great Depression.It’s funny you said that. Darshini David, who’s the deputy economic editor for the BBC, pretty much said what you said. She said this could have dire economic consequences in the short, medium and long term for the West. People are already incredibly cash-strapped and worried since the Russian invasion of Ukraine, which was blamed on the economic problems that people are experiencing.Supporters of Donald Trump will say that whatever might be in files about him is simply that: accusations contained within files. It doesn’t equate to proof that he committed any crimes. I don’t know; I wasn’t there. I don’t like Trump. I’ve used the term pedophile when speaking about Trump because I know that he deliberately walked in on girls who were under the age of eighteen when they were dressing themselves for beauty pageants. I suspect that Donald Trump has a lot to answer for. His supporters will say he hasn’t been charged, let alone convicted of anything.Kevin Barrett is our guest. You’ve got to check out his Substack, kevinbarrett.substack.com. He’s an academic researcher, author and broadcaster. We’re talking about the events of the weekend and of today.I’m more pessimistic than you. I agree the economic shock from this is going to be horrendous. The petrol pumps and the food prices are already increasing, if I believe what I see on social media today. But when it comes to some Iranian fight back or some regional fight back against the tyrants of Israel or the US, I don’t know, Kevin. I’m being told today by people I believe that Tehran is being carpet bombed and that means lots of Iranian civilians being killed. I talked earlier about the bombing of the school on Saturday where maybe two hundred girls and women who were in school were slaughtered.I think the forces behind Netanyahu and Trump will just do whatever they want in the region because they have the military might and unlimited resources. Am I wrong in saying Iran finds itself without any allies in the region?No, Iran has the support of the vast majority of the people of the region. You’ve probably seen videos of American bases being hit in places like Kuwait and Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates. The people are cheering for the Iranian missiles hitting what are supposedly their own countries. Deep down inside, nobody in this region, not even here in Morocco where we’re pretty chill with Westerners, wants to be occupied by the United States.The longer this goes on, the faster those regimes are going to topple because their people are furious at their leadership for getting them into this. There is fury at the United States and Israel among both the people and the leadership in the Gulf region and indeed here in Morocco.Going to read a few quick comments. These are genuine comments coming in through my app. This is Monday’s Richie Allen Show.Patricia says, “Richie, I talked to a Trump-deranged person in the US. They are convinced that he did a good thing. They are convinced in America that he was right and that the world is happy about it.”Isabel asks, “What are Kevin’s thoughts on the claims here that Iran killed more than thirty thousand of its own people recently?”Richard says his friend worked in Iran. He was an engineer and he hated it. He left seventeen years ago, said he hated the government even though he made a good living.Ronald says, “Richie, the Ayatollah was in charge of a regime that threw gay men off tall buildings. What does Kevin think about this?”There are lots of these questions. I mean, it’s insane. You know, these lies are just off the charts.But how do you know they’re lies, Kev? How do you know they’re lies?Google it. I mean, even like, you know, Google, which is owned by, what, Sergei Brin, you know, Jewish Zionist propagandists. Just Google it. They don’t throw people off buildings in Iran. This is just insane b******t lies.Likewise, these claims that six million Iranians were killed by the Ayatollah’s government in gas chambers and all this nonsense. Actually, three thousand people were killed. The vast majority of those people killed were killed by Western-backed terrorists. And the others were terrorists who were killed by the forces of law and order fighting back.That six million number is interesting, isn’t it? Where did they get that from?Yeah, look…This is all Jewish mythology. The mainstream media in the West is Jewish mythology. It’s psychotic propaganda, tribal propaganda.Can I just say, I don’t believe that people were thrown off of buildings by clerics in Iran. I know that Islamic State, which was openly, very openly, and even admitted by Mossad, this Islamic State... Wahhabist head shoppers, they did things where they threw people off buildings. But that certainly wouldn’t be the Islamic approach to, as far as I understand it, to homosexuality.I know that the Ayatollah Khomeini, he had a lot of negative things to say about homosexuality. But there’s no doubt, in my mind, they weren’t throwing people off of buildings for it.Kevin, there was definitely a crackdown on the protests. And even if I don’t agree with it, I can understand it, right? Because I understand why if you live in a country and you believe that another country, an enemy country, is sending people in to light fires in terms of, I mean, metaphorically, light fires to start revolutions, I understand why you’d want to crack down on it.What for you would be a reasonable figure? How many Iranians do you think did die during the protests? What’s a fair number?Like I said, about 3,000 died. And of those, well over 2,000 were actually killed by the terrorists, the anti-Iranian government terrorists of the West.And what happened was these were normal protests. Iran normally has protests almost every day. It’s a very free society, much more free than any Western society. People are out protesting constantly about this, that, or the other.And there were these economic protests in the bazaar that got started because the Iranian currency came under sustained, concerted attack by the usual Jewish mob, George Soros and his friends, in preparation for this war and in order to produce the very protests.Then there were these protests, which were real protests, and they were tolerated as protests always are in Iran. And on the third day of protests, Western-backed terrorists, people that the Israelis have bragged about having sent weapons to, started shooting police officers. And there were people on, you know, the usual snipers on the buildings shooting both the crowds and the police officers.And so these Western terrorists started slaughtering people. At this point, the government said no, no more protests because we just had hundreds of terrorists just killed hundreds of people, including hundreds of unarmed police officers.And so at that point, the rioters continued to go out and destroy things. They burned, I think, something like 400 or 500 mosques, which is a great way to make yourself popular among the big majority of Iranians, right? But they burned all these mosques.And at that point, once the people in the streets were just these armed thugs being paid by the Americans and the Israelis, at that point, the Iranian forces of order went out to arrest them and in doing so killed some of them.So basically what we have is about 2,000 people killed by the Western-backed terrorists and perhaps 1,000 Western-backed terrorists killed by Iranian forces of order and maybe some collateral damage, maybe a few people that got caught in crossfire.That’s how you see it.That’s how I know it.That’s how you see it.I get this straight from the horse’s mouth. I’m getting it from people on the ground.Yeah, but you’re too intelligent, Kevin. You’re speaking to intelligent listeners. You might very well be right. But right across the internet, right across thousands of podcasts and thousands of Substack blogs, there are people who are writing and saying different and they’re saying they have, you know, people on the ground as well.They’re liars. Okay.Either that or grossly misinformed.All right. Okay.I want to ask you this. I believe in my heart that the great majority of people are like us. They work for a living. They have to go out and work for a living. They’re in relationships. They are juggling one or two jobs. They’re limping to the end of the month, every month, to pay their bills.Maybe they’ve got a couple of... Maybe they’ve got a couple of months’ worth of rent in the bank. Maybe they don’t. These are the things we’re consumed by, most of us. Most of us in the world, I believe, just don’t pay an awful lot of attention to what’s going on at state level or going on geopolitically.How is it that we’ve ended up, all of us? And I said this to you years ago on this show, and it proved controversial at the time. I said that I no longer blame the tyrannical agents, sorry, the agents of tyranny, whether it be Boris Johnson, whether it be Starmer, Trump, Obama, the other idiot, Bush, or leaders in Saudi Arabia or in China or wherever.I blame people, Kevin. I sympathise with people and yet I blame people. There isn’t a person in the UK like me who has any problem or any quarrel with Iran or with Iraq or with New Zealand or Outer Mongolia, and yet we have this year in, year out, decade in, decade out. We have people authorising the use of the most disgusting weapons ever devised, right now, as we speak, being dropped on civilian populations in Iran.How have we ended up like this? And when do we start pointing the finger at our neighbours, at the people we share our lives with, rather than screaming about Netanyahu and Trump and the Ayatollah and everybody else?Ultimately, it comes down to people, Kevin, isn’t that right? Only people can stop this.Yeah, I agree, Richie. And, you know, that actually leads you to sort of you have to go back and think about these statements attributed to Osama bin Laden prior to 9/11.And the reason that they were able to frame him for the Israeli attack on the Twin Towers and the Pentagon was that Osama bin Laden had said something like it’s good, kill the Americans wherever you find them. And that could be interpreted to mean sort of pretty much any Americans, right? So it sounded like he was approving of attacks on ordinary civilians, which, of course, he actually wasn’t.After 9/11, he did several interviews denying any relationship to 9/11, deploring it, and saying that it was totally un-Islamic to kill all those civilians.But with his loose lips prior to 9/11, he had made that statement that, you know, kill the Americans wherever you find them.And that kind of thinking, you know, that, hey, these people are guilty just because they’re part of this group that is doing, you know, the group itself is doing bad things, I think is—I kind of understand it when one is emotionally upset, right?Like when you see this grotesque injustice of this genocide of Gaza, for example, and you think, well, the people who are enabling this, starting with the world Jewish community, really maybe those synagogue bombers are heroes, right?But that’s wrong. That’s actually, you know, that is an emotional reaction. It’s totally understandable.But, you know, the Jews themselves have turned this into dogma that, you know, slaughter the babies, slaughter the babies so they can’t grow up and have more babies. This is what we do in war. You can watch interviews with various tribal Jews saying this.Did you see that young woman? Did you see that young woman? There was a young woman interviewed by an American news team in Tel Aviv, a very pretty young Jewish woman. And you saw that.I think I just saw that today. And it’s not artificial intelligence. It’s a genuine clip. And she says exactly as Kevin described.She says, and you see, I’m going to sound like a virtue signaller. I really am, and I’m not, I’m not, I’m not, I’m not a nice guy at all. I’m a decent guy, but I’m not one of them virtue signallers. I almost felt sorry for her, Kevin.What sort of programming do you have to be subjected to that you think it’s appropriate to kill the children of Gaza so that they don’t grow up to have their own babies?You’re right. Simple answer: The kind of programming you have to be subjected to is circumcision a week after birth.The circumcision of Jewish children a week after birth destroys their attachment. And John Bowlby wrote a great book and did a lot of studies about attachment between children and their mothers, their caregivers, during the earliest part of life.And I think this traumatising these babies at one week by brutally slicing off the most sensitive part of their anatomy leaves them with a post-traumatic stress disorder that manifests throughout the rest of their life. They’re programmed to believe that, hey, there’s this dark figure who wants to do horrific things to you. They want to throw you in gas chambers. They want to drive you into the sea, etc.And they end up with this unconscious image of an evil Goy, the evil non-Jew, who wants to do bad things to them. And they become super paranoid.But what they don’t realise is that circumcision was an inside job. It was the rabbi that did it to you, buddy.And the women, they feel they’re racked with guilt because they’ve given their children over to a torturer. And they spend the rest of their lives racked with guilt, and they end up with Jewish mother syndrome overcompensating for this.And that woman who hates babies and the total hatred of mothers and babies throughout the state of Israel and in Jewish culture in general, where they hate the babies of the goyim, they want to kill them.IDF wears T-shirts with targets on the belly of pregnant women saying one shot, two kills. These are popular items in the IDF.There are endless quotes from people all the way up to the highest levels of the Israeli government, basically saying that it’s good to kill the children of our enemies. It’s good to kill the babies. It’s good to kill the women. It’s good to kill the pregnant mothers.And this is all based in that seventh or whatever it is day, that week after birth circumcision.If we want to solve this problem, what we need to do is absolutely ban circumcision before, say, the age of five worldwide and enforce that. And then the Jewish tribe as we know it, which is an evil tribe, will essentially disappear. And those nice individuals, nice Jewish individuals will remain.I’m not going to get into the Jewish evil tribe thing. We’ll do that another day. But I want to say this to you because I don’t agree with that. But I will say this to you.Let me finish now and you’ll get the final word. I know you’ve got to go. You’ll be breaking fast shortly.Kevin Barrett, old friend, valued friend of the programmes. Go to kevinbarrett.substack.com, trucejihad.com.Kevin is a Muslim. He lives with his wife in Morocco, the lovely Rabia. We’re talking about Iran and the future.Look, I’m going to summarise where I am very quickly. Excuse me. And I’ve not been influenced by anybody. I’ve come to this kind of conclusion by myself over the years.I believe that identity politics, I think, has gotten us where we are today. And I think that even the brightest people in the world can be afflicted by it. I’ve been afflicted by it, I think, in my life.I know you’re not going to agree with this, but I know you’re going to let me finish and you will get the final word on it.I have now come to believe that pretty much everything that happens is happening, the traumatic stuff that happens, it’s been happening for decades and centuries, is more to do with kind of corralling and changing and programming humanity to accept what some people call a great reset, you know, a great technocratic change, a movement towards living an incredibly controlled life, where peoples all over the world, regardless of what they look like, regardless of what they believe, will be subjected to, will be imprisoned in a new kind of a digital world, right?And I’ve not been unconvinced of that. I’ve not been taken away from believing that. Rather, I’ve kind of doubled down on it in light of what’s happened in the last five, six years, whether it be the COVID scam, the war in Ukraine, the genocide in Gaza, what’s happening now, because the result of all of these crises, we call them perma-crises, have been a kind of a kind of a kind of a raping of or a robbing of more and more and more and more of our individual freedoms.And it’s a controversial take and most people listening, I think, won’t agree with it. But I believe that all of these players, whether it be the, as they’re called, the Mullahs, whether it be the Ayatollahs, whether it be the leaders of Saudi Arabia, of Egypt, the Western leaders in Britain and America and the leaders in the Far East, all of these guys are somehow contributing to this kind of endgame and everything that happens suits or makes it more possible, makes it more likely that humanity is going to be enslaved, entrapped in this technocratic kind of a dystopia.Final word to you on that. That’s how I see it. Others would say it’s demonic or there’s some sort of supernatural element going on here. I’m not so sure about that, but I believe that everything that is happening at the moment works towards or suits or helps to further that goal of completely enslaving us in some digital, awful, dystopian kind of reality.I’m going to give you the final word and thanks for coming on.Well, thanks, Richie. You know, you might be onto something there. It certainly looks that way. And whether there is some kind of plan like you’re suggesting or whether it’s just the inevitable outcome of a world of competing nation states, competing corporations, competing tribes, competing interest groups, and to win the competition, you need a stronger technocratic apparatus than the other guy, and then once you win you take him over and you subject him to your technocratic apparatus, this is all going to lead to one giant—ultimately one side wins and imposes its technocratic apparatus on the planet. It might be that too. I don’t know whether it’s a plan or whether it’s just kind of the natural outgrowth of so-called technological progress and competition.But I’m going to one-up you here. My conspiratorial version of this, and I don’t know for sure that it’s true, but I have an inkling, is that this technocratic plan to enslave humanity is being run by demonic forces that want to keep us basically stupid, that is, they’re forces of the shaitan, as we say in Islam, whose job is to be basically our antagonist and to lead us into temptation and to try to basically stop our spiritual development.And I think that that’s actually the key, is the spiritual development. That is what we’re here for, is spiritual development, not just material gain, not just pleasure.And, you know, we’re not here to live for, you know, four score years and then, you know, retire, die, what have you. We’re here because we are spiritual beings. We’re consciousness trapped in physical bodies. And the physical space-time dimension is actually an illusion. That all there is is consciousness. The idealists are right, the materialists are wrong, existence is just consciousness.And so these forces that are trying to enslave us don’t want us to know that. And they want to keep us believing in this physical space-time reality that we’re trapped in.And so I think that’s what’s really going on. It’s sort of a test. Can we rise spiritually to the point of becoming aware of this and breaking free of this control apparatus, which is being run by these entities that don’t have any souls, that are stuck in this material space-time continuum and want to keep us stuck here with them and ultimately drag us down to hell?And for more on this, I would recommend both your favorite traditional religion, in my case a Sufi spin on Islam, and/or look into the science of parapsychology. I recently interviewed Dean Radin. People like, like, like Dean are well aware that the world is just consciousness. And that’s why there’s so much ESP phenomena going on. And we’ve all been brainwashed not to notice it, not to believe in it precisely because this control apparatus doesn’t want us to break free.My God. We’ll pick that up another time. It sounds a bit like some of the books I’ve read written by people like David Icke over the years. I’m very interested in it.Kevin, thanks, mate. Look, whatever else happens, I genuinely, in my heart of hearts, hope the bombing stops sooner rather than later. It’s evil that’s unimaginable. That’s all it is.Thanks for coming back today. Appreciate you always.Thanks, Richie. Appreciate your great work too.Kevin Barrett, you will find Kevin on Substack, kevinbarrett.substack.com. Check him out if you haven’t before. Truthjihad.com. 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 False Flag Weekly News linkState Department whistleblower Dr. J. Michael Springmann joins FFWN to break down the week’s news.Transcript:Kevin Barrett: Welcome to False Flag Weekly News, the weekly news show that plows ahead with more evil Epstein–Iran news. That’s our big theme this week, and lots of other interesting—and worse than interesting—stuff. I’m Kevin Barrett with Dr. J. Michael Springman. How’s it going, J. Mike?J. Michael Springmann: Oh, I’m quite happy to be here. The snow has finally melted and they’re predicting five more inches starting on Sunday, so we shall see.Okay, I will think of you while I’m running on the beach and frolicking in the Mediterranean. It’s a little chilly for Morocco here, but chilly for Morocco is nice and balmy for America. Well, here’s the fleet steaming towards Iran, flying their Epstein flags, I guess. That’s a nice touch, Trump. So that’s our image of the week.So here we are: war on Iran. Well, hopefully we’re not quite at war with Iran yet, but it’s looking pretty touch and go at this point. Iran closed the Strait of Hormuz a couple of days ago for drills. They ran drills with Russia. I was on Press TV talking about those drills. Meanwhile, there may be a diplomatic way out. Mike, could Iran send enriched uranium to Russia? Could they figure out a deal?The nuclear issue is not even an issue. Iran doesn’t even really want to build nuclear weapons. They’re happy to let the inspectors inspect. So it comes down to whether Trump is controlled by the Israelis and is forcing these non-negotiable, totally non-starter offers on the Iranians—like “give up all of your missiles, basically have no more military defense, and break all your ties with your regional allies.” We all know that countries are not allowed to have allies! Of course, the Iranians are rolling their eyeballs at that stuff. What do you think, Mike? Are we going to get a deal or not?No, not at all. The Wall Street Journal’s headline was denied this morning by Al-Mayadeen English. Quoting Iranian government sources, they said no, we’re not going to ship our refined uranium to Russia. We’re going to keep it here in the bomb-proof bunkers that TrumpleStiltskin and his magnificent B-2 bombers suddenly couldn’t do anything with. All they did was rearrange some rocks on top of the entrances and maybe bomb whatever was above ground.I don’t think they’re going to ship uranium out of the country this time. They might have done this a couple of years ago if Trump, to use Wayne Madsen’s word, had a thought in his head, or if his controllers or advisors had three brain cells to rub together. But they pushed the Iranians to the point where they’re going to be cooperative on nothing—particularly on things they believe go to their signature on the Non-Proliferation Treaty, which the Israelis flatly refused to sign. The Saudis, with their four to seven nuclear bombs presumably bought from Pakistan, did in fact sign. So it’s going to be an interesting situation when TrumpleStiltskin and his idiots want to cross the Iranian red lines, which they’ve been making very clear for the last several years.As our theme image of this week suggests, it seems like the Epstein affair spinning out of control may have something to do with Trump’s willingness to risk World War III as a diversion. We’ll get more into those details. Here’s what Trump was saying less than a year ago, last summer. This was put out by the White House: “Iran’s nuclear facilities have been obliterated, and suggestions otherwise are fake news.” Why do we have to go back and obliterate them again?Well, he doesn’t know what he’s talking about, and he likes to make these outrageous statements in the vain hope that more than three people will believe him.He’s getting bored of peace, I think. Here he is at the board of peace meeting a couple of nights ago, in a phase of the Gaza peace plan, ensuring a lasting peace. But falling asleep in his own board of peace meeting does make you want to misspell the word “board.”The Ayatollah Khamenei, the Supreme Leader of Iran, is warning that the U.S. warships are basically sitting ducks. They’ve got missiles that can break through any missile defenses, as they showed when they busted through the Iron Dome last June. These aircraft carriers are really kind of asking for trouble, aren’t they, Mike?They sure are. They’re sitting ducks. They’re fat targets. They have to keep a steady course when launching and recovering aircraft, which of course will never reach any significant point in Iran. They have to refuel and refuel and refuel because carrier aircraft have short legs and have to be heavied up because of their essentially controlled crashes and folding wings. If you refuel, you’re flying slow and steady and making a great target for anti-aircraft weapons, whether artillery or missiles. Unless he can make his ships amphibious and walk all the way to Tehran, he’s not going to get very far.Most of the smarter military people have been saying for decades that a war with Iran is a guaranteed loser. That’s what you wrote in “Trumpelstiltskin’s Toy Navy.” Summarize your key points.Basically, aircraft carriers and warships striking Iran have to come close inshore, where they are absolute targets for anti-ship missiles. Those missiles are pretty much scattered all over the country, but I would imagine there’s a concentration along the southern shores of Iran in the Persian Gulf, the Arabian Gulf, and the Sea of Oman. They have good range—up to 2,000 miles for some of them, especially the Mach 15 hypersonic missile. They can carry a 4,000-pound warhead.The ships, as I noted earlier, are not amphibious. If they get too close to launch aircraft, they’re marvelous targets. Ansar Allah proved that in the Red Sea over the last few years by flooding anti-aircraft defenses with cheap, low-cost, throwaway drones and missiles. They exhausted the anti-ship missile batteries and had to return to port to reload. Finally, Trump got to the point where he realized they couldn’t overcome this and withdrew his Navy.That’s going to happen if he dares to attack with his huge armada of four ships. Granted, the three Arleigh Burke–class destroyers displace about 8,000 tons, about that of a pre-war heavy cruiser. But he’s got a limited number of missiles, mostly Tomahawks to hit non-existent nuclear weapons facilities. So Trump is essentially going to send a lot of iron, and a lot of sailors and Marines, to the bottom of the ocean. And then what does he do? I don’t know how they’re going to take that loss very well. He’ll have to explain why he attacked Iran and got nothing. Or if he withdraws and gives up, he’ll have to explain why he wasted billions sending ships, aircraft, and refueling tankers to West Asia at fantastic cost.It does seem like a fool’s errand from an American perspective. The pressure to do this is coming from Israel, and the speculation is that Israeli assets basically own Trump because they’ve got a lot on him.There was more news along that line this week. We learned that the DOJ just scrubbed records of interviews with Trump accusers from the Epstein files, and this made it to The New Republic. It appears these accusations relate to that Katie case. You can watch Katie talking about Trump assaulting her when she was 14. Apparently there were witnesses supporting her testimony, and she was believed to be a credible witness by the FBI. All of that then just got scrubbed from the Epstein files that were released. Half a million files or so just disappeared overnight—but they had already been downloaded by researchers. The whole situation is a total fiasco, almost as big as the one brewing in the Persian Gulf.But Attorney General Pam Bondi wants us to sing along with her: “It’s the Dow! That’s what we should be talking about!”The Department of Justice and Kash Patel are going to be working overtime to scrub these files. They’ve released three million unclassified documents, and from what I understand, there are three million more classified documents. If they’re trying to scrub anything incriminating to the current leadership, that’s going to be a big task—even with AI helping.Here’s Ted Lieu, the representative from California, saying Republicans focus on Bill and Hillary Clinton to distract from the fact that Donald Trump is in the Epstein files thousands of times. Lieu cited disturbing allegations that Donald Trump raped children and threatened to kill children and encouraged the press to look at them. He also criticized Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche for getting the law wrong.This recalls the E. Jean Carroll case. Trump testified about her statements in an interview with Anderson Cooper. That was pretty incredible testimony to give. The case was bad, but Trump made it worse for himself by basically confessing to having raped Carroll and accusing her of “liking it.”Since the first time Trump and Melania had sex was reportedly on Epstein’s jet—they were introduced through those modeling circles—we really do have a sleazebag government, don’t we, Mike?Oh, it’s marvelous. The media goes on and on about the Epstein files and who’s involved and who’s not, and it just goes round and round and nothing gets done. I tell people nothing will get done because too many people are in there—besides Trump and his cronies, you’ve got Ehud Barak, the Clintons, probably half the present and past governments for the last ten years. Nobody wants the truth out, and nobody wants to get prosecuted because the jails would be bulging.If Trump can’t distract us by starting World War III in Iran so he doesn’t end up facing consequences for these allegations, he’s now talking about releasing the UFO files and proving we are controlled by extraterrestrial life or in contact with it. This week Obama said the aliens are real, then tried to walk it back after Trump threatened him over supposedly releasing classified information. On Thursday, Trump ordered the Pentagon to release the UFO files.He’s going to have a great danger there. If he releases those files, he’s going to prove the aliens have landed and taken over the federal government.It does seem like another huge distraction from Epstein.Finally, the Mossad–Epstein ties to 9/11 were in the news. It turns out Howard Lutnick was much closer to Epstein than we realized. Lutnick, head of Cantor Fitzgerald, lost all 658 employees in the Trade Center on 9/11. Like Larry Silverstein, he had an unusual reason for not being there that morning. He said that for the first and only time in his life, his wife insisted he take their child to kindergarten. Unlike his employees, he didn’t get blown up.His wife, Edie Lutnick, a lawyer on the 101st floor, also wasn’t there. She had a breakfast appointment with a client who canceled at the last minute, so she went back to bed. So he took the kid to kindergarten, she went back to bed, and 658 employees died. What are the odds?Here’s Trump telling the story: Donald Trump: Howard built one of the great companies, Cantor Fitzgerald. It was completely wiped out, other than a few people left in Europe. And he rebuilt the company into a bigger, better company.Cantor Fitzgerald is absolutely one of the top companies on Wall Street, stocks, bonds, trading. And he took that, I mean, he literally watched the plane go into the building, into the World Trade Center.Amazing story. That alone is amazing story. He was delayed because his wife insisted that he finally, after years, take his child to school. So he took his child to school that one day because normally he would have been in the building at six o’clock in the morning. That’s that business, right? So you owe your wife a lot and your child a lot, right?But his wife insisted that he take his child to school. For five years, he didn’t do it. He was horrible. What kind of a father was he? Okay, I’ll do it. And he was therefore driving down at 8:43, whatever the time was, down the West Side Highway, and he saw the plane go into the side of the building. He said, wow.So he looked guilty to me, did you see Luttnik laughing nervously? Yeah. It’s pretty funny, pretty funny. The horse pucky is getting pretty deep. And here was a tweet from Omar saying, “I doubt he even went to the school. He’s probably watching the towers falling with his neighbor.” And of course, he lives right next door to Epstein. Those are their two houses, 9 East 71st Street and 11 East 71st Street.And so, yeah, we’re getting a sense now of the class, the people that were involved in 9/11 in various ways. After this guy’s company was wiped out, do you think he went on food stamps? Oh, undoubtedly, undoubtedly, yeah. He had to take all that charity that he was raising for the families of the people that he knew were going to die, and he didn’t do anything to stop that.So more 9-11 and Epstein news this week. This is perhaps even bigger news. That is, Ghislaine Maxwell was invited onto the Shadow 9/11 Commission, the top secret Jewish-Zionist Shadow 9-11 Commission, and she was invited by a certain Edward J. Epstein.Edward J. Epstein, Mike, I don’t know if you got into the JFK research back in the day like I did, but he’s like blatantly Mossad. Edward J. Epstein posed as a JFK researcher, but he did things like setting up George de Mohrenschildt for assassination. George de Mohrenschildt was Lee Harvey Oswald’s CIA handler. Yeah, I read about him.Prior to the killing, George de Mohrenschildthad been complaining—he’d been terrified, and he was complaining to his friend, George H.W. Bush, about being persecuted by “the Jews,” right? He begged then, ex-CIA director or whatever, Bush, or future CIA director Bush or whatever he was then, to “please get the Jews off my case. The Jews keep harassing me.” And then he ends up interviewing with Epstein, Edward J. Epstein, that is, no relation to Jeffrey, we think. And he gets set up for assassination.Edward J. Epstein was a very close associate of the number one JFK assassination suspect, James Jesus Angleton. Everything Epstein did relating to the JFK case was run through Angleton and through, of course, the Israeli Mossad. So this guy who was basically on the Jewish-Zionist shadow JFK commission, designed to keep a lid on the JFK case—and of course, Israel killed Kennedy. Likewise, Israel did 9/11.And Edward J. Epstein, the same guy who was basically key to the shadow JFK commission on behalf of Jewish-Zionists that killed Kennedy, he’s the guy who’s running the shadow 9/11 commission that nobody ever heard of until this declassified email inviting Maxwell, of all people, another Israeli spy, to join. I mean, this is all looking pretty freaking incriminating, wouldn’t you say?No, no, not at all. These are poor innocent zebrews who are being wickedly persecuted by the anti-Semitic people that infest the entire world. Indeed, we’ve got to stop those anti-Semites from talking about these things.And then here’s Richard Gage’s report on this, and he goes into the Shadow 9/11 Commission story. And of course, nobody really knows what that is, but what would that mean? Well, there was the public 9/11 Commission in 2003. The Shadow Commission, of course, would be the perpetrators keeping an eye on making sure, trying to keep a lid on what’s going to come out in the actual 9/11 Commission.So anyway, Richard Gage goes into that and a few other interesting 9/11 tidbits from the Epstein emails, including Senator Bob Kerry and Epstein and some other things. So that’s all.Do you think Ghislaine didn’t join the shadow commission because she wanted to devote all her free time to the pedophilia ring she was running? Yeah, she was probably too busy blackmailing the Clintons and Trump and everybody else at the time.But yeah, so we could kind of see who is this organized crime ring that’s doing this stuff. And the cockroaches are starting to scurry because the light’s being turned on a little bit, it seems like. This was the actual email of Ed Epstein:And I knew that he was bad news. I read his book on Oswald back in the 70s when it came out. It was so obvious. These people don’t even hide it very well. It’s so obvious he was working with Angleton. Now at the time I didn’t realize that Angleton was a Mossad guy. I thought he was CIA. I was among all those people that blamed the CIA, which is pretty much what they wanted you to do because that means the CIA and the American government has to cover it up. If you don’t have a way to blackmail the American side, then of course they might conceivably come after the real authors of the assassination, namely the Israelis.So we also found out this week that Israeli officials managed surveillance at the Epstein residence that Ehud Barak used to spend a lot of time at. So all of that surveillance of all of these people that’s getting blackmailed is Israeli equipment. Does that shock you, Mike?No, because they did a very good job of spying on Washington, putting all of these cell phone intercepts around the government buildings downtown. And of course, they had this Pegasus program that they got into journalists’ cell phones and other people’s. So they work hand in glove with the CIA to make sure that they can control who gets into these residences and who’s in there and who’s in charge and what they’re doing and so forth.So it comes down to the old saw about, I believe the CIA is lying to me to protect me.I mean, somebody like Epstein, of course, is going to be making inroads in the CIA and dishing them some stuff. But I mean, it’s clear that all of these ethnically Jewish people in this billionaire crime ring are primarily loyal to their own tribe, not to any American government institutions.So Epstein associates, how about Andrew, formerly known as Prince, has been arrested and they just released him yesterday, but he got to spend a night or two in the cell. People are saying this could threaten the future of the British monarchy. So they’re arresting people over the Epstein scandal in the UK, like important people, really important people, a guy who almost could have been king or whatever. That’s pretty important. Why aren’t we arresting people in the US, Mike?No, because if we did that, we’d have to arrest half the people in the government and finance and the captains of industry and everybody else who flew on the Lolita jet. There’s far too many to prosecute. I don’t think they have enough prosecutors to prosecute them. Again, break out the woodchippers. And this revelation, all these revelations about Peter Mandelson, who is a key guy who basically created the so-called New Labour Party, which is basically a Zionist billionaire oligarch-owned shell of the former self of what used to be the UK Labour Party. And Peter Mandelson is another British casualty. Maybe he’ll get arrested, too. Let’s hope and pray.Yeah. And he’s contributing to the downfall of Starmer, one of these many corrupt non-entities like Tony Blair, who were manufactured by these Jewish Zionist billionaires loyal to Israel with no loyalty whatsoever to the UK, just like the same people in the U.S. have no loyalty to the U.S., but they took over Britain and installed their whole new ruling apparatus through the so-called New Labour Party.And then when Jeremy Corbyn tried to be like the real Labour Party and not be owned by Israel, they slammed him and slimed him and torpedoed him and took him down. So this whole story is told quite well by Jonathan Cook in this particular article.Well, that was the key takeaway from the article for me, what they did to Corbyn and how they did it. I know a journalist in London who was a strong supporter of Corbyn, who had greatly admired his views on Palestine and Arabs and Muslims and what the British had done to the region from Sykes-Picot on to the present. And this individual simply turned on Corbyn and said he was weak, he was spineless, he kept apologizing to the enemy Jews instead of striking back and saying, you are the people who are monsters, you are the people who are international murderers. And all Corbyn did was say, oh, I’m sorry, I’m sorry, I’m sorry. I don’t mean to say that. And that’s what killed him, that the chief rabbi of Britain said he was anti-Semitic.Yeah, Corbyn, instead of just calling it straight, you’re right, he did keep trying to apologize. “Oh no, I didn’t mean to be anti-Semitic.” “Oh, I’m so sorry that I let that guy who said something that sounded faintly anti-Semitic come to my meeting.” This kind of nonsense. Yeah, I mean, that doesn’t play well. You’ve got to fight back against these people just as energetically as they’re sliming you.This was more Epstein associate news. We’re in the Epstein associate segment of the show. And this is the Epstein email showing that both Fox and ABC were handed all of this trove of all of the surveillance blackmail stuff from the Epstein mansion in 2020. And they verified it, but then what did they do with it? They buried it somewhere. Maybe somebody needs to dig it up..Well, that’s typical. When I was fighting the CIA for getting me fired from the Foreign Service, I went to the Los Angeles Times with a list of the CIA officials in Jeddah and what they were doing and how they were doing it, recruiting terrorists for the Mujahideen in Afghanistan. And the guy bought me lunch, but that was the end of it. And I had names, dates, and places right there in front of him and an inch thick stack of paper. So if it’s something they don’t want to hear and they don’t think the people want to hear and think it’s dangerous to hear, it goes into a black hole with a circular file and that’s it.Yeah. And the details here are kind of interesting. They tried giving it to ABC’s Mark Remyard, but because it contains child pornography, he is hesitant to receive it. And so these were just a couple of housekeepers for Epstein from 2012 to 2017, got fired and took memory cards, pictures, videotapes, audio tapes from the house and are just trying to get it out there. And Fox and ABC totally covered it up.So, I mean, no wonder nobody’s getting prosecuted here in the U.S. The institutions are just run by these criminals. And Leon Black is one of them, of course. He’s another Epstein associate that was all over the news this week. Turns out that he supposedly paid Epstein $158 million from 2012 to 2017. He was being attacked over various rapes he was committing, and Epstein apparently had even more dirt on him. So yeah, this dirty billionaire elite, it’s worse than we ever imagined. And you’ve got Epstein there, who never graduated from college, wasn’t much of a mathematics teacher, and suddenly he’s a billionaire with key contacts of key leaders all around the world. And does somebody have a magic wand or a fairy godmother? It’s called Mossad. Mossad is the fairy godmother with the magic wand that created him. And I think there were a couple of quotes where he basically admitted that. And Ari Ben-Manash, of course, has gone into it as well, a former Mossad guy.Well, so Trump went to court twice this week. Unfortunately, not for rape and things like rape of 14-year-olds. But no, he went to court twice in one week and lost both times. He’s not happy.What was he in court for this week? Well, here he is in court accused of terrorizing immigrants. And Judge Sunshine Sykes basically finds against him and orders ICE to start returning to the procedures that they were following prior to this current Trump administration, basically freeing the people that they grab who have residency cards, I guess, and giving them hearings or something like that.So I don’t know. Putting the brakes on the way ICE has been acting is actually a good thing because ICE is basically, even if you’re anti-immigration, ICE is smearing the whole anti-immigration movement. On the other hand, I’m not sure if I’m totally on the side of Sunshine Sykes on this thing either. What do you think, Mike?Well, my problem with the whole article and the whole procedure that seems to be going on across the country is you get some federal judge, say this person Sunshine in California, somehow believes that a district judge in one district can make rulings that have legal impact on courts all across the country, on governments all across the country, counting New York and Maryland and Delaware. I think that’s a little bit much.It goes more from forum shopping to a violation of the whole legal system. It’s not a decision made by a circuit court, a full circuit court, or a decision made by the Supreme Court, which has jurisdiction over the entire country. It’s one person in one district in one part of the country somehow has the wisdom to dictate what will be done throughout the entire United States from sea to shining sea. And that’s what bothers me.She’s like a federal district judge somewhere, right? Well, that’s how the cases work. You first take the case to the district, and then if it gets appealed, it goes up to the higher courts, right? Yeah, but it’s in that particular district. Most states have at least one district. Maryland has two. I don’t know how many they have in California. So it shouldn’t go any farther than her district in California. It shouldn’t go to Maryland or Delaware or Virginia.Again, this whole immigration thing, which is another big distraction from Epstein, where they’re pretending they’re trying to grab these illegals one by one and remove them from the country when there are what, 15 million, 20 million or more, some have even higher estimates. And this notion that you’re going to, using legal procedures, track them down, reliably identify them, grab them and deport them one by one like ICE has been doing is, of course, a complete joke.And it’s even more obvious that if you really wanted to get rid of these people, you could do it so easily just by passing a law that would strictly penalize anybody who employed them or rented to them. So the law is there. They have to produce their eligibility to live and work in the United States when they apply for a job. And everybody looks the other way because they want the free slave labor.Exactly. So I don’t think Trump and his billionaire cronies who employ huge numbers of illegals have any interest whatsoever in removing illegals. This is all theater. It’s all show. It’s all Trump riling up his base, distracting us from Epstein, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. And you’ll know that they really want to get rid of the illegals the day that they pass that law that strictly penalizes anybody who employs them or rents to them.So how about the tariffs ruling? That was front page news this morning. The Supreme Court has ruled that Trump’s sweeping emergency tariffs are illegal. Well, obviously, they’re unconstitutional. Because the Constitution gives the power to tax to Congress, not to the president. And tariffs are taxes. But Trump doesn’t see it that way, and he has vowed to maneuver around the tariff decision. So how’s that going to go? Here he is talking about it.Trump: “But I am allowed to cut off any and all trade or business with that same country. In other words, I can destroy the trade. I can destroy the country. I’m even allowed to impose a foreign country destroying embargo. I can embargo. I can do anything I want, but I can’t charge $1 because that’s not what it says and that’s not the way it even reads. I can do anything I want to do to them, but I can’t charge any money. So I’m allowed to destroy the country, but I can’t charge them a little fee. I could give them a little two cent fee.”What do you think of this whole issue, Mike?Well, the key takeaway on this is what’s not discussed. Trump is running out of money to fund his operations. And he’s running out of money because he can only tax the American voters so much before he rebels. And a good number of countries around the world, like China and Japan, are dumping American dollar-denominated securities. So Trump has no money to fund his projects, and he’s mad as hell and figures, well, I’ll get it from import duties the way that funded the U.S. government in the 19th century, before we had a one and a half trillion dollar military budget, more than the next 10 countries of the world and soon to become more than all of the world’s militaries combined.So he needs money and he can’t get it. And he’s going to have to go back to printing it, which, of course, he’s been doing for a while because the inflation keeps going up and up because there’s too much money chasing too few goods. So rather than taxing imported goods, which is what these tariffs basically do, and that tax is mainly paid by the American consumers who buy the imported goods, and so it does end up being another form of inflation, he’s going to have to come up with some alternative mechanism. But ultimately, I don’t see how that’s going to help. The White House is in trouble in a lot of different ways.Well, here we are with the Erasing Palestine section of the show. The British Museum is erasing Palestine from their displays because these Ziobeasts who completely rule the UK through these people like Starmer and Mandelson and these other Jewish Zionist owned puppets are insisting that there’s no such thing as Palestine, even though all the maps used to show right up until 1948. Everybody called it Palestine, as all the maps said. Well, all that has to be erased now. So I guess they’re going to go into the British Museum with hammers and chisels and chisel all the stone monuments that say Palestine. They’re going to have spray paint just like the Palestine action people are going to spray paint over anything that says Palestine in any of the displays. But that kind of vandalism will be paid for by British tax dollars. What a concept. Mike, your thoughts?Well, the British Museum has had problems for years. The Greeks want the Elgin Marbles back, and the Egyptians want various things that have been stolen by the British Empire. So where are you going to stop? Where are you going to start?This is not the same thing, though. That’s like taking back looted property from the British Museum, whatever you think of that, is not the same thing as going through the British Museum and erasing every mention of the existence of Palestine. I mean, that’s insane.Well, obviously, it’s the British Museum. We got it. We’re not going to give it back. And we’re going to do what we please with it, whether it’s Palestine or whether it’s greater Israel that goes from the Nile to the Euphrates or the Dijla in Iraq.So you sent me this story. This was from RT. And Sergei Lavrov, the Russian leader, is telling us that the Palestinians made a mistake in 1947 by rejecting the partition plan. And of course, that partition plan took land that was 90 percent owned by Palestinian Arabs and awarded the vast majority of it to Jewish invaders. And so Lavrov apparently thinks that the Palestinians should have been willing to just let Jews steal their property.I just don’t understand the Russians kowtowing to the Ziobeasts. I mean, granted, Uncle Vlad is best buddies with the two chief rabbis of the Russian Federation. And there are some three million Russian Jews in occupied Palestine. But why sacrifice the rest of the world? I mean, you have, what, two billion Muslims now? And how many hundred million Arabs are there? And they’re sacrificing all of that for three million Jews who are the most treacherous things on the face of the earth. I don’t understand it.Yeah, I don’t understand it either, but I sort of do. I think it has to do with these tools of power that these tribalist Jewish criminals have developed over generations and generations of essentially being a criminal outsider group that preys on its host, like a parasitical entity that infests a host. That’s how Jewish communities have lived in other communities. I mean, it’s a terrible thing to say. It’s true of Romani gypsies to a certain extent, too, who find ways to separate people from their money wherever they go. And that’s what Jews do, let’s face it, running usury rackets, other forms of organized crime, drug trafficking, alcohol trafficking, slave trafficking across the oceans, the long-distance trade. Of course, they would use their ethnic nepotism to dominate in that.And so you had this really hostile group that has an extreme differentiation between insiders and outsiders. The traditional Jewish teaching was non-Jews didn’t even have souls. They were goyim cattle. They were beasts to be fleeced. And I got in trouble for talking about this on the Boston 9/11 Truth Talk a couple nights ago. I’ll be putting that out and talking about that soon. But this is the cultural background of Jews and the Jewish religion and the way it operated in historical time. And we translated Laurent Guyénot’s book From Yahweh to Zion about it. Today’s people who haven’t been born Jewish, a lot of them are pretty normal secular people from whatever country they came into. But to some extent in that culture there’s still this historical baggage, and it’s leading the people, especially the people at the top of the socioeconomic power pyramid in the Jewish tribe, to behave in these hideous, insane ways. And so anyway, that’s why I think we’re totally discouraged from talking about this.Anyway, moving on to the Board of Peace. This is where we had Trump falling asleep the other day at his Board of Peace meeting. And everybody’s declining, not just the Europeans, but a number of other countries that refused these invitations. So that doesn’t really look like it’s going to go anywhere. And certainly it isn’t doing Palestine any good. It’s absolute nonsense that people actually give it ink, give it airtime, attend these things. It’s a shock and people should see it as that. But somehow it’s up there on the wall there, Board of Peace, with its members and a huge logo. And my God, you don’t think the orange clown has the right to totally just replace the United Nations and crown himself king of the world.No, I think the orange man should go back where he came from and then hide under a rock.So how about this? This was a very moving article by Vanessa Beeley about the Zionists. They call you up and say, you want to die alone or with your family. So he gets out of his house and goes out and gets in his car, drives down the road, and boom, he gets hit by a missile. And they’re doing this day after day. Just this morning, the big news was another attack on Lebanon that killed 20 or 30 people and injured another 30 or 40, including several children. They just never stop. And there’s a ceasefire. They’re not allowed to do it. Wasn’t there a ceasefire? And what, 180th day of the ceasefire that’s really not a ceasefire?The more you see this stuff, the more…“Israeli Channel 10 reported in March of 2014 that Israel has the largest human skin bank in the world. Where do you think they got all this skin from? They have more human skin than China and India. They are literally skinning the dead bodies of my brothers and sisters in Palestine. That’s where they are getting the human skin from. And if I call them Nazis, your law is going to punish me.”So human skin lampshades, that was war propaganda. But the Zionists are the world’s greatest organ leggers. They buy them. They pay for them. They take the Palestinians that they murder and then cut their organs out. It saves them the cost, I guess, not much more than a bullet or a tank shell. And you can’t say anything disapproving about it or you’re an anti-Semite, of course.Well, here’s one of the growing worldwide majority of “anti-Semites,” Kauther Benhania, who walked off during her Berlin Film Festival awards ceremony over the Gaza issue, and specifically the murder of Hind Rajab, that little girl who was killed so brutally with her family and whose last words on that tape are just so amazingly moving. In Germany in particular, probably the most vicious country in terms of policing anybody breathing the slightest word of truth about any of these matters, she had the guts to do this.Well, I know a woman who grew up in Germany from the Balkans, and she’s traveled back and forth several times and says that Germany is lost. It is a repressive, brutal country that simply cannot function.Frankly, pointing out the good things that Hitler did, like nationalizing the banks and fixing the economy, is a good way to get yourself in trouble in Germany. But honestly, I think the current German regime is making a lot of people think Hitler looks relatively good compared to these people.Well, the Alternative for Germany party is making increases in its membership and its votes. It’s now equal to Merz’s Christian Democratic Union, the center-right party. They refuse to have any kind of dealings with them because they think that they are anti-German, undemocratic, and so forth. And you look at what the CDU and the CSU and the Socialist Party, the SPD, do, and I think the AfD would be a welcome alternative.Yeah, I’m not so sure about that. To me, they’re all Nazi, meaning the caricature of the evil of the World War II era German National Socialist government, which, frankly, I think had good points and bad points, but definitely had some bad ones. For me, the AfD is just more Zio-Nazi. The evil that the word Nazi is supposed to convey really should be conveyed by the word Zionist. And so it’s the Zionists, these Zionist Jewish criminals who dominate the entire West through the Epstein ring and everything else, who really do skin people and sell the skin. Who needs Hitler’s supposed human lampshades that never existed when you’ve got Zionists actually skinning people, slaughtering, committing genocide, and then skinning the genocide victims and selling their skin and taking their organs and selling their other organs as well?So anyway, I think the German government is in bed with those people now. And unfortunately, the AfD is every bit as much in bed with them. Yeah, that’s my problem with the AfD. They support the Ziobeasts and the apartheid entity. So to me, they’re just even more Nazi, or at least equally Nazi in the bad sense, as the ruling regime.Here’s Indi at Indi.ca. He’s a Sri Lankan guy who calls it pretty straight on his Substack. And here he goes off on the hypocrites who condemn Hamas. You’re not allowed to say anything nice about Hamas. It’s weird. Like supporting the Green Bay Packers: The idea that they’re going to force me to prefer the Chicago Bears and I’m not allowed to express that I support the Green Bay Packers never occurs to anybody in America. But supporting, in that sense, meaning just, hey, I think these guys are right, you’re not allowed to say that about Hamas. You could be arrested in many European countries. I might have immigration trouble next time I go back to the U.S. But I’m not giving Hamas any money. I’m not giving them any guns. I’m not fighting with them. I’m just stating my opinion. And it’s illegal.Well, it’s a typical hypocrisy that you see in the United States and the rest of the West that, oh, we believe in equal rights, but by God, we don’t want to live next to those people.I think there is some kind of extreme racism or ethnocentrism involved in this. Here’s the resistance in Palestine. It’s the most heroic movement in all of human history, as far as I can tell, just from a totally neutral scholarly perspective. If you’re studying these various groups who’ve picked up arms and fought for this, that, and the other throughout human history, there’s never been a better, braver group with a more noble cause than the Palestinian resistance, ever. But you’re not allowed to say that. I’ve got to support Hamas, I’ve got to support Hezbollah, and I’ve got to support Ansarallah and the Islamic State. Allahu Akbar.All right. Let’s see what happens to us for voicing such verboten opinions.So we’re now at the anti-Semitism watch of our show. Watch out for being anti-Semitic or else the Washington Post will get you. The Washington Post is totally Zionist controlled now and totally Trump fascist Zionist controlled. They’re basically owned by Netanyahu. Jeff Bezos has mutated into Netanyahu. They both probably look like space lizards.Anyway, the Post is now publishing stuff like this Matthew Smithe article headlined, How the Epstein Files are Fueling Antisemitic Conspiracy Theories. So Tucker Carlson, Ana Kasparian, and people like us are really bad because we mention that Epstein was a Mossad agent blackmailing powerful people in America and around the world on behalf of Israel and the Jewish tribe of criminals that runs Israel.Well, the thing is with the Washington Post, Eugene Meyer, the original Jew who bought it early in the last century, and his daughter, Katherine Graham, they’re not there anymore. They’re dead. So who are the Jews running the Post these days?Well, Bezos still owns it, right?Yes. But he supposedly is not a Jew.No, but he’s obviously totally capitulated to the current Epstein power configuration of Jewish Zionist billionaire oligarchs who own the Trump White House and so much else. And now the Post won’t even criticize Trump. They used to bash Trump and they made a lot of money at it. They got all these liberals to read them. And now they stopped bashing Trump because Bezos is afraid that Trump might do something mean to Amazon. And now they’re totally losing their readership.Exactly. I dropped them. I couldn’t stand the lies, the misinformation, the disinformation, and the outright propaganda. I regret it. I used to like to read the Post with my morning coffee and breakfast.Yeah, me too. When I was in college, I used to read it in the university library. Not anymore.So how about this? This is the story that E. Michael Jones brought up. And Ron Unz just published a great article about it.It wasn’t on our list last week, so I put it on this week’s list. Kerry Prejean Boller, who’s this religious liberty conservative who Trump appointed to the Religious Liberty Commission, got in big trouble for being accused of being an anti-Semite. What did she actually say? It looked so harmless. It didn’t say much of anything except that we have to give equal rights to people. And then I think she said that Candace Owens is not an anti-Semite. So they’re going to fire her from the commission for saying that Candace Owens is not an anti-Semite. Candace Owens has been critical of the Ziobeasts, as has Tucker Carlson, and as have the Young Turks, who used to move from making nonsense like Tom Hartman on RT to actually coming out with their own YouTube production, which is eminently based on good common sense and reality.Yeah, the Young Turks have actually taken it up a couple of notches since back in the day when they were just another kind of dumb liberal Tom Hartman type of show. Not anymore. They’re doing great stuff. They’re 9/11 truthers now, too. I’m just waiting for Cenk Uygur to invite me on the show and apologize for all those years he spent bashing the 9/11 truth movement. I’m not going to hold my breath.But Kerry Prejean Boller basically thinks that Candace Owens and Tucker Carlson are OK. And that makes her an evil anti-Semite who has to be purged from the commission. Just goes to show you who’s heavy handedly exercising power over all of this stuff these days.So moving on to Euro dystopia. This was just a crazy story. This journalist, Hussein Dogru, has been unpersoned in Germany. It’s even worse than I realized. He’s not allowed to use money. And if anybody gives him money, they’re violating it and they could go to prison too. So this is Ali Abunimah at the Electronic Intifada writing about that case. Why has he been completely cut off from being allowed to buy groceries?So I asked Google AI about this. The reasons for his sanctions include that he’s supposedly influenced by Russia because he has some kind of ties to RT. He’s been on RT, worked for RT. Everybody went on RT! Supposedly he’s disseminating “disinformation,” which is whatever the European authorities disagree with, they call it disinformation. He “supports radical narratives.” He “supports radical Islamic terrorist groups such as Hamas, which provides a media platform for violent anti-Israel activities at German universities.”So he supports Palestine, and he’s against genocide. So he’s being basically unpersoned because he goes on RT and he’s against genocide. But he can’t buy groceries because all of his bank accounts are frozen. He has zero access to his own money to pay for basic necessities like food, rent, or medicine. And it’s legally prohibited for any EU citizen or company to provide him with economic resources. Even if a friend or his own wife were to give him money or buy him groceries, they would be criminalized. That’s Google AI explaining it. It sounds pretty dystopian.Well, that’s more proof that Germany is lost.I was in Germany about 10 years ago, and I went to that Holocaust memorial in Berlin. There’s this big old Holocaust memorial with all these pillars. And I filmed myself talking about how I’ve read all these books about this controversy about the Holocaust. I think the people who say that there were no gas chambers are probably right. The people who say that the actual number of total Jewish victims was vastly less than six million are probably right, and so on. So I talked about that and posted it. I denied the Holocaust from the Holocaust Memorial in Berlin. I was still there for several days and nothing happened to me.You were lucky.Yeah, I think if I tried that now, I probably couldn’t buy groceries anymore.All right, we made it to the end of the show. We made it to the circumcision row, or circumcision row. I thought it sounded sort of like Dylan’s Desolation Row. “They’re selling postcards of the circumcision. They’re painting the rabbi’s knife red….”So anyway, here’s the circumcision row story. Belgium summons U.S. envoy over circumcision row. And I guess the Belgian government has been going after rabbis who circumcise without a license. And the Americans are saying that that’s anti-Semitic. What do you think, Mike?Well, we have to cheer for the red, white, and Jew. And we also have to realize and be thankful for the fact that if you had Rabbi Miyakawa slicing things off going hi-yah, ha, ha, well, that’s probably what Bibi is going to do to Trump if Trump doesn’t invade Iran.So we reached the end of the show. Thank you so much, J. Michael Springmann. It’s good to do the show with you. I enjoy it. It’s always fun.All right. See you next time. Bye.Stripe is Substack’s only processor and they debanked me, so you can no longer pay me through Substack. Now I am posting everything on Substack free and asking people to sign up for recurring donations at my Paypal donation page…or better yet, the free speech platform SPdonate. Alternately you can Paypal or Zelle to truthjihad[at]gmail(dot)com. Note that Zelle, unlike other methods, doesn’t charge any fees. 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 linkFormer CIA analyst Larry Johnson joined me on Press TV’s Spotlight program to discuss the latest Russia-Iran naval drills and the likelihood of another major US attack on Iran. Transcript:Welcome, everyone. Iran and Russia have held naval exercises in the Sea of Oman and northern Indian Ocean to boost military cooperation and regional security. And topping the drills, maritime counter-piracy and counter-terrorism operations, IRGC forces also closed the Strait of Hormuz for a brief episode during their exercises just a day earlier. Annual drills are meant to send a clear message that the region is capable of providing its own security and stability and does not need or welcome, in fact, foreign players or intervention in this regard. In fact, this Moscow to Iran cooperation is also giving way to the south north south transit corridor, a revolutionary transit route on land to run from St. Petersburg, Russia to the middle of India. And it runs primarily right through Iran, an economic game changer. But first, let’s start with this quick report. Iran and Russia have wrapped up a series of joint naval exercises in the Sea of Oman and the northern Indian Ocean, aimed at boosting military cooperation and maritime security across the region. The drills focused on expanding operational coordination between the two navies, particularly in planning and executing combined missions. Special operations units from the Iranian Army, the IRGC, and the Russian Navy carried out a complex simulation to retake a hijacked vessel. In a coordinated air and sea assault, special forces boarded the target ship, detained the mock hijackers, and secured the vessel.Military officials say the exercises were designed to improve joint readiness in countering maritime threats, including piracy and terrorism.Rear Admiral Hassan Mafzoudlu, spokesperson for the Iran-Russia joint drill, said all planned objectives have been successfully achieved.In the end, all the objectives planned by the designers in the operations room were successfully achieved.The Islamic Republic of Iran Navy routinely participates in various defense diplomacy exercises around the world. Joint exercises with Russia in the Caspian Sea and in southern waters are also part of Iran’s annual defense diplomacy planning. As defense ties between Tehran and Moscow continue to deepen, Russian naval official Alexei Sergeev emphasized that the two countries are capable of addressing a wide range of maritime challenges together, highlighting a growing atmosphere of trust and cooperation. The level of interaction and cooperation between Iran and Russia shows that together we can manage and resolve many maritime and coastal challenges.Moscow is ready to hold joint exercises in any region, including specialized drills such as maritime counterterrorism operations carried out by naval vessels and patrol boats from both countries. With Iran and Russia expanding collaboration across multiple sectors in recent years, the latest Navy drills underscored deepening strategic partnership between the two countries. The exercises also demonstrate the ability of both countries to safeguard regional maritime security without reliance on outside powers. The drills come at a time of heightened tensions in the region, as the United States has stepped up its threats against Iran in recent weeks. Tehran has asserted that it is fully prepared to respond to any force threatening its sovereignty and territorial integrity.And now for our guests for our program. Joining us, Mr. Larry Johnson, former CIA analyst from Florida. And also Kevin Barrett joining us from Saidia, Morocco. Gentlemen, pleasure to have you both. Welcome to our spotlight program. I guess Mr. Johnson, we’ll start with you down there in sunny Florida. Your initial take, please, on these naval drills between Moscow and Tehran and what they signify, especially in the scope of recent tensions.Well, I think it’s important to understand that it’s not just with Russia. China’s also been involved. I mean, China, Russia, and Iran started a series, an annual joint naval exercise. They started that back in 2019. It’s always been scheduled around mid-February to mid-March. And anybody that’s ever been involved with military exercises before knows that the planning for this, they didn’t come up with this because of recent tensions with the United States. These exercises are usually planned days to months in advance.And so it’s a reminder that now because of the tensions, it does take on added importance. It’s possible that they added in an additional dimension to this with just Russia. But you know the Chinese are also in the area. They have a an intelligence ship tailing the US aircraft carrier Abraham Lincoln. So I think it’s important to understand that unlike what happened in June’s surprise attack by Israel, Iran now enjoys the full backing of Russia and China, based in part on a trilateral agreement that was assigned at the end of January of this year.Thank you there, Mr. Johnson. Dr. Kevin Barrett, pleasure to have you join us, sir. And thank you for your presence, in fact. And your opening thoughts as well on these annual drills that we witnessed. And to Mr. Johnson’s point, he’s very correct on that, that it’s been Russia, Iran, and China. And even China was supposed to be part of this, and it just opted out in the last minute. But nevertheless, the timing of the drills, the geopolitical relevance, and the message they sent this year, forget about the other years, but this year, with the buildup of tensions.Well, first, I’d like to say it’s an honor to be on the show with Larry Johnson. He’s doing great work. I wish we had more government service people in the United States with his analytical skills and integrity. So yeah, these drills show that this time this is yet another aspect of the way that Iran is prepared now in a way that it wasn’t last June. That is, Iran has had more than half a year to figure out what went wrong, what went right in June, and to coordinate its response with Russia and China.And of course, Russia is the world’s leading nuclear power with a lot of battle-tested people. They’ve been fighting a very serious war now that’s dragged on. And so they’re used to fighting an existential war in a way that the United States, of course, is not.China is the world’s biggest economic and technological power by quite a bit now. And China has, according to many analysts, made a lot of progress in the intelligence fields relevant to the Iranian response to any US attack. We know that Iran now has access to radars that are specifically directed to going after stealth aircraft. And China, of course, had with its technological edge in many fields, is known not only for their ability to deal with cyber communications and satellite communications, but of course, also they’ve been apparently involved in helping Iran develop its missile technology. I believe there were Sunburn missiles more than two decades ago that already at that point could have shut down the Persian Gulf. So Iran is totally prepared for this. Dick Cheney backed off. Obama didn’t even want to think about it. And now we’ve got an apparently Epstein-blackmailed Zionist stooge lunatic in the White House who is willing to gamble with the future of the region and the world. And so it’s a very, very dangerous situation. And with Russia and Chinese involvement, this of course sets the stage for escalation that could get out of control.And thank you there, Dr. Barrett. And Mr. Johnson, Iran said time and again that the anti-terror operations and anti-piracy operations and other dimensions to the drills are meant to convey that, hey, we have regional players that can handle regional security and do not need, in fact, do not want outside forces in the region for any assistance in this regard. But is anyone listening when it comes to this point being driven home?Well, the only terrorism threat that Iran has really faced has been that which has been ginned up by the United States and Israel. In particular, let’s recall that in after the United States invaded Iraq in 2003 and identified the MEK, the Mujahideen al-Khalq, they then, in 2004, realized, “hey, we can use these guys to attack Iran.” And even though the MEK was still on the list of international terrorists that my old office used to classify as organizations that were bad, the CIA and the US military started working with these guys. They weren’t removed from the terrorist list until 2012. And yet they became US proxies.So to my knowledge, the MEK has never been responsible for carrying out a maritime attack. I think the maritime platform is, I’ll call it an excuse, to bring Russia and China together. What happens in these exercises is the officers, they get to know each other. You develop friendships. You learn how to communicate. You learn what kind of systems work best, and you try to simulate a crisis situation. And can you communicate in that situation? And if there’s a breakdown, what kind of workarounds do you come up with?So they used the anti-terrorism thing as sort of the script, but that’s not the real purpose of this exercise. The purpose of this exercise is to ensure that Russian military personnel, Chinese military personnel, and both the conventional and the Revolutionary Guard personnel in Iran know how to communicate, know how to work together in different circumstances. And I frankly think that we’re on the cusp, as Mr. Barrett was noting. of something very dangerous and very terrible, but I think at the heart of it, the United States has grossly, grossly underestimated the capabilities of Iran.And part of it is they keep feeding themselves propaganda. Just as an illustration, Sy Hersh, who I’ve known for years, and Sy’s been a friend, but he’s come out with one of the most ridiculous pieces of crap. He insists that during the 12-day war that the Iron Dome of Israel knocked out 90% of Iranian ballistic missiles and they eliminated the ballistic missile threat from Iran. Now, that’s what he’s been told by intelligence sources. That is a complete falsehood. But the problem is, the policymakers in the United States, and apparently in Israel, believe that nonsense. And when they act on it, they’re in for a rude awakening.Thank you there. And Dr. Barrett, would you like to weigh in on that as well? The fact that Iran and Russia, both under U.S. sanctions, both would like to see a region free of U.S. and NATO presence or meddling, that it’s basically they take pride in maneuvers like this to make that very declaration that no one is, especially from the West, is needed or wanted in this backyard. But does it matter to anyone in the West?I think the West is right now mired in confusion. And as Larry Johnson said, they are basically high on their own supply of propaganda. And I think that’s largely due to the exorbitant power wielded by fanatical tribalistic Zionists. Everything they see is tempered by their kind of paranoiacal tribal self-interest. And then there are some millenarian messianic strain of Zionism as well that lead them to embrace these extremely dangerous and risky scenarios. And of course the fact that the Israelis have gotten away with so much over the years, not least of all the Kennedy assassinations and 9/11, emboldens them to take these ridiculous risks. Russia and China and Iran are at this point the grown-ups in the room who see that the West, led by this Zionist occupied regime in Washington, is a grossly irresponsible actor that cannot be allowed to preside over the development of this coming multipolar world. And there’s now an agreement on that. That is the crazy Americans, the Zionist hijacked Americans, have driven Russia, China and Iran together in a way that never would have happened if relatively sane strategists like Zbigniew Brzezinski had had their way. Brzezinski wrote in The Grand Chessboard that one of the most important, if not the most important, strategic imperatives for the U.S. was to basically get along well with Iran and not create a situation where Iran might make common cause with one of these other rising great powers. And now we have this situation where the Americans have proven that they’re just so completely, grossly irresponsible and reckless and crazy that they no longer have the mandate of heaven, no longer deserve to preside over the world. And the rest of the world, the sane people, see that. And that’s why we’re seeing increasing cooperation from the heart of this new multipolar order led by Iran, China and Russia.Right, and Mr. Larry Johnson, these strengthening alliances in the face of very sensitive time, increased U.S. military threats and buildup, for that matter, in the region. Okay, many feel that that has no bearing on the fact that from different dimensions of Iran’s leadership, including the leader himself, very defiant, bold, and far from cowering in the face of U.S. threats recently. Many people, it has nothing to do with Iran’s ties with Beijing or Moscow. What do you attribute this level of confidence to?You mean confidence on the Iranian side?Yeah, it’s a crushing response, should the U.S. make a misstep.Well, look, Iran made a mistake prior to June 13th last year. because both Russia and China had offered assistance. And in fact, the mutual security pact that Iran and Russia inked last January of 2025 did not include the kinds of security guarantees that Russia had offered to North Korea. And my understanding is that, in fact, Russia had made the same offer to Iran, but for some internal reasons, I call it the desire to be more independent, Iran said, no, no, no, let’s just go with this other level. Well, in the aftermath of this cowardly attack by Israel and by the United States, I think the Iranians sort of woke up and went, you know what? Those offers from Russia and China sound pretty good. And so what we’ve seen is a dramatic upgrade in the relationship between Russia and China with Iran and providing not just military equipment and significant upgrades with air defense radar, actual air defense systems, other weapons such as attack helicopters, but more importantly intelligence, intelligence cooperation and sharing.And, you know, I understand the pride of the Iranian people and don’t want to diminish that at all. But there’s a reason Ringo Starr wrote that song, “I get by with a little help from my friends.” And that’s where Iran is now. They’re going to be getting by with the help from some very powerful friends. And the other dimension to this is Russia and China open a new economic path forward for Iran, who has been victimized by what I would say is an illegal economic warfare waged primarily by the United States, but also by Europe.Thanks. And Dr. Barrett, Mr. Larry Johnson earlier alluded to, you said many are grossly underestimating Iran’s defense capabilities in the face of these U.S. threats of military action against the country. Your take on that?I think that’s right. I think maybe the people who were fooling themselves on the Western side, I’m not talking about Trump and the political leaders who don’t really have any understanding of the military issues involved, but maybe some of the military people who are basically telling Trump and his friends what they want to hear, that, hey, we can solve this. Maybe what they’ve done is they’ve got some kind of plan to deal with what Iran did last time. But Iran, of course, is not going to do exactly what they did last time. And what Iran learned in raining down missiles on Tel Aviv is that there are ways to get past the so-called Iron Dome and these other anti-missile systems.So I think you might have a static analysis coming out of the Western side that doesn’t take into account this series of changes that Iran has undoubtedly made, as Larry Johnson said, in part with the assistance of Russia and China, but also, of course, due to its own internal abilities to look at what’s happened on the battlefield and make adjustments.I imagine that anybody in the American side that thinks that they can deal with the capabilities that we saw on display in June—and we saw that they can go through the most advanced missile defense systems that the West and Israel have and hit these targets flat on, right? Just very, very accurately. That means all of that whole armada that Trump just sent, it’s a big series of sitting ducks. They all have targets on their back. And whatever the Americans think that they have to deal with that, it’s really hard to imagine how it could possibly be effective.You know, what I’m concerned about, of course, is that Trump is not just playing the Nixon-style madman theory of pretending to be insane. I mean, he really is a narcissistic, deviant character. And who knows what he could be manipulated into. And that’s why the escalation potential of this is so dangerous for everybody.All right, thank you. And we have, I think, enough time to get one more question out to each of you. I want to kind of switch shifts now and go beyond the drills. There’s this north-south corridor, Mr. Johnson, this land route that will connect Europe to India. It runs from St. Petersburg, Russia, all the way through Iran down to the middle of India. Now, it’s obviously a massive operation that will have massive economic dividends for the region’s future. But not just that. With something like infrastructure this big, a project this big, comes political benefits, you very well know, and political leverage. So your thoughts on what that, the fruition of such a project will mean for all parties involved.Well, it’s just, it’s another, let’s call it another brick in the wall of building a new economic, international economic order. The Bretton Woods system, what the United States erected in the aftermath of World War II with Bretton Woods, IMF, World Bank, that system is now unraveling and the unraveling of that system has been accelerated by the sanctions that were imposed on Russia, sanctions imposed on Iran, sanctions imposed on China. It has been really created an incentive for these countries to find a way that they can operate outside of a system that is based upon a reserve currency as the US dollar. And in fact, they have dramatically accelerated in that regard. The problems Iran has suffered economically were imposed in large measure because they didn’t have an alternative system. Now they do. The Chinese have created it with the cross-border interbank payment system, for example. So, you know, I think that’s where the north-south corridor fits within this whole architecture, new architecture of building a new financial trade system.Thank you, Mr. Larry Johnson. And Mr. Dr. Kevin Barrett, I want to come to you also. What the realization, from your perspective, of the Northwest Corridor mean for Russia, for Iran, and the region, even for those not party to or apart of the project?Yeah, this means a whole new world where these crazies in Zionist-occupied Washington, D.C. can no longer just sanction anybody that doesn’t obey their orders. And of course, everybody wants that all over the world. Nobody likes living in a world where these crazies in Washington and Tel Aviv can just hit you with these sanctions and basically debank you, deplatform you, you can’t trade anymore. Russia doesn’t like that. China doesn’t like that. And of course, Iran likes it least of all.And with this progress in alternative trade platforms, we are going to see the final sinking of the dollar as the international reserve currency. And we’re going to see a thriving Eurasia in a multipolar world.We have a little bit of time left. I’m not going to sign off just yet. Larry Johnson, Donald Trump said that he’s giving talks days to see if they reach a good diplomatic settlement. How do you see things unfolding over the next days to two weeks with respect to tensions between D.C. and Tehran?He’s lying. I think Iran’s going to be attacked within the next to hours.And Dr. Kevin Barrett, your take and final thoughts, please.Well, I have no idea what the time frame would be, but my optimism from a few days ago has evaporated. And I think that the odds at this point do seem to favor another American attack on Iran. And I think Iran is going to be able to demonstrate that it can go all the way up the escalation ladder as far as the Americans want to take it. And hopefully some, perhaps the Israelis will call it off as Iranian missiles once again rain down on Tel Aviv to the delight of everybody who’s horrified by this genocide that the Israelis have been committing.Well, we all hope that cooler heads obviously prevail. Thank you, gentlemen. Pleasure to have you both on. Stay safe both of you. Larry Johnson, former CIA analyst, joining us here out of Florida, and also Dr. Kevin Barrett, editor at Veterans Today, joining us from Sadia, Morocco.And viewers, this brings us to the end of your Press TV Spotlight program.Thank you for tuning in, and bye-bye for now.Stripe is Substack’s only processor and they debanked me, so you can no longer pay me through Substack. Now I am posting everything on Substack free and asking people to sign up for recurring donations at my Paypal donation page…or better yet, the free speech platform SPdonate. Alternately you can Paypal or Zelle to truthjihad[at]gmail(dot)com. Note that Zelle, unlike other methods, doesn’t charge any fees. 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 linkDean Radin is the English-speaking world’s leading popularizer of the science of psi and its implications, and the author of many books and scientific papers. He is Chief Scientist at the Institute of Noetic Sciences (IONS), Associated Distinguished Professor at the California Institute of Integral Studies, and cofounder and chairman of the neuroengineering company, Cognigenics. He earned a BS and MS in electrical engineering and a PhD in psychology from the University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign. In 2022 he was awarded an Honorary DSc from the Swami Vivekananda University in Bangalore, India. He has worked at AT&T Bell Labs, Princeton University, University of Edinburgh, and SRI International. Welcome to Truth Jihad Audiovisual. I’m Kevin Barrett getting visual here for the first time with Dean Radin. I’ve had him on a few times on audio. And here we are doing actual video and talking about his great new book, The Science of Magic. And the subtitle is How the Mind Weaves the Fabric of Reality. It basically starts with the science of psi, leads us up to magic, and the notion that we’re actually all sort of co-creating the universe through paranormal means. It used to be known as magic. Anyway, it’s a good book, and it’s good to have you back, Dean Radin, welcome.Thank you. It’s good to be here.It’s another fascinating book. I’ve been interested in these topics since high school when I discovered the Encyclopedia of Philosophy’s entry on Psi, which shockingly basically said that, yeah, this has been proven. Unless there’s something very strange going on, clearly Psi has been proven scientifically. This was back in the mid-1970s. And so I looked into it. Wow, that’s interesting. That’s not what I’ve heard from everybody else. And I looked into it and it was true. So I’ve been sort of following that ever since and also have been aware of the fact that we’re sort of influencing reality psychically all the time. And that’s that’s where your book gets to in this kind of second half or third third. So, yeah, let’s talk about that and the wild and crazy implications. Where should we start? You tell the story of how you got into this field in the book. So maybe you can give us the short version.Well, the short version is that like a lot of kids, usually, who start reading science fiction and fairy tales, you can’t help but start wondering if any of that stuff is true. And then you get a little bit older and you start learning about science and you hear pretty uniformly that none of it is true. And so it depends on whether or not you remain with childlike enthusiasm and imagination, or if it gets squashed when you’re a little bit older. So for a lot of people, it gets squashed pretty quick. For some, they never break out of the squashiness and their imagination begins to fail. But for others, many scientists, actually, you’re driven by curiosity, as I am. In which case you simply want to know what’s real, what’s true. And so when you start looking at the scientific evidence, which has been around since the late 1950s, it’s very difficult to reach a conclusion that the phenomena that we’re talking about, psychic phenomena, does not exist or is impossible, because it’s quite clear that it has been happening all the time in human experience, and you could even see it in laboratory tests. So anybody who pays attention to that, as you just said, you are then presented with what amounts to a kind of a paradox, a contrast between we are being told, and yet the evidence is clearly not saying that. This is real. So other questions arise like, well, why are we not being told this? What is something being hidden from us? And so I generally don’t go in that direction. I simply say that science tends to be very skeptical and conservative in terms of what it accepts as being true, which is fine. But once it accounts certain kinds of anomalies, which history again and again shows that’s where the future of science always is, there’s two ways you can respond to it. One is to go with the status quo, so it doesn’t disrupt the possibility of your future employment, and just agree with what everyone else does and says; or follow the anomalies, which entails some risk, but also offers a lot of rewards. So I decided the risk was worth it. So here I am years later, and finding it as interesting and as thrilling as I thought when I was a teenager.Yeah, I agree. Your book is really kind of exciting to read. For somebody like me who’s known about this for a long time, it really is inspiring. It’s actually kind of thrilling to know that we’re somewhere near the edge of a radical change in worldview. Because this can’t be ignored forever. And there are signs, even though it hasn’t exploded into public consciousness the way I expected it would. When I first looked into this in the 1970s and early 1980s, I kind of thought, “well, by the turn of the millennium, this will be pretty widely accepted.” And it seems like it kind of stalled. The Encyclopedia of Philosophy was a very mainstream publication. And they were unequivocal that “this stuff is real. It’s been proven seven ways from Sunday. Get used to it.” But somehow the consensus view in the academy has managed to keep sticking heads in the sand. How have they kept a lid on this?Yeah, in many ways, that’s really the interesting question, because the answer is that it’s partially culture-bound. So within, as a broad umbrella term, Western academia, it is thought that because these effects are impossible, then the only evidence can be interpreted as flaws or fraud. If you look at Wikipedia, that’s sort of the way that is presented. Well, that partially becomes a theoretical problem. If you can’t immediately think of an explanation, you say, well, it doesn’t exist. But as sociologists of science have pointed out again and again, that is always how anomalies are presented. That there must be something wrong because we can’t possibly change the dogma, which is what we are accepting as being true. And eventually, if something is real, it will penetrate. So why has it not penetrated yet into the mainstream? Well, one possibility is, without going too far into conspiracy theory, is exactly the same reason why UFOs have only recently, like within the past five years or so or six years, have come out of the closet as far as the U.S. government has presented. And other governments have been way ahead of this. So... There are those who perceive that UFOs, psychic phenomena, and a whole bunch of other things are simply declared as demonic. We don’t understand it. We don’t like it. It’s uniformly presented as demonic or as horrific in our entertainment. And so we simply come away with an idea that we don’t want this to be real. And so there’s a huge push from a religious perspective: Don’t pay attention to this. Don’t look at it. It’s bad. There’s the other push from science, where the science spokespeople, many of them, are saying that this stuff can’t possibly be real, and then give a bunch of reasons. So you have pressure from both of those directions, which is pretty strong. You may also have pressure from government. The government doesn’t want people to know that this is actually real too, partially because with things like remote viewing or clairvoyance in general, the possibility arises that not only are we in a surveillance state, but the kind of surveillance that literally can look at anywhere in space or time by people who are adept at doing that. And so maybe there are people in government that don’t want to know that that’s possible. It’s even worse than Snowden said.You can understand that there’s multiple pressures that combine to push the idea of these kinds of phenomena to the fringe. So that’s a big part of it. But again, it’s culture bound. So you go to India, you go to Asia and so on. These things are so well accepted that people say, well, why are you even bothering to study it? Like, what are you studying? That’s the kind of attitude I’ve encountered in India for sure, but in other countries as well. So this is a culture bound problem. Absolutely. I moved to Morocco two and a half years ago, and I can tell you that it is a culture where people basically accept the worldview that you’re presenting. Nobody, only maybe a very minuscule percentage of people here who’ve been overly indoctrinated in Western education, might agree with the Western consensus. But the vast majority, not at all. And that’s one of many things I like about Morocco.So you mentioned science and religion both kind of working in the same direction to keep this suppressed. I wonder…it seems to me that years ago it was more the religion side that was doing it. And now we have the tools of science proving that it’s real. And I think one of the reasons that many people in the scientific establishment don’t want to admit it’s real is that it challenges scientism as a dogmatic substitute for religion. And indeed, it opens the door again to a more religious worldview. I think many certainly mystical people and other people who are engaged in religion in something other than a dogmatic way would see the world much more closely to this, the way that you see the world based on your scientific work. And so I’m wondering if part of it now isn’t actually a sort of an anti-religious impulse coming from the dogmatic adherence of the religion of scientism.Yes. Yeah that is partially a challenge to an ideological position about what is a worldview, what is the nature of reality, and what’s our role in it. And so traditionally that was a religious worldview which scientists—not all of course but a percentage of scientists—don’t like that view because they see it as irrational.But nevertheless, yeah, there are people who have a predilection towards a kind of faith. And so scientism is a faith, because it is generally not taught within the sciences that we’re working under a set of assumptions. We’re talking about the philosophy of science. And in some ways, the opening gambit in my book is all about the philosophy of science. But I didn’t want to put it in those terms, because the words have too many syllables if you do it in a philosophical sense, and the book would only act as a cure for insomnia. So I kind of go round about to say that we all live within a certain worldview. Some scientists have different worldviews, which only admit certain things to be true. And yet the moment that you see that science is sitting on a set of assumptions, and we already know that some of those assumptions are wrong, some of them are questionable, suddenly our worldview is put into a kind of a spin. And if you’re uncomfortable with ambiguity, the easy thing to do is just say, “I’m going to ignore it. It’s not true. Can’t be true, right? Yeah, it’s impossible.”You mentioned that you didn’t want to get too far into conspiracy theories, but you’re welcome to go as far into them as you want in this particular show. Because, of course, I got into this business, as opposed to studying medieval Moroccan Sufism—my dissertation is on the miracle stories about the paranormal, miracles recounted in the Sufi saints’ legends in North Africa. And I would probably still be doing that, except in late 2003 I read David Ray Griffin’s work on 9/11, looked into that, discovered that same situation as when I looked into psi in high school, that the reality is very, very different from the official story. So I’ve been sort of a professional conspiracy author and podcaster ever since. The two big American “conspiracy theories” that are basically true are the JFK assassination coup and the 9/11 coup. And in both of those cases, the reason that there’s such a grotesque discrepancy between the official mythos and the unfortunate reality is that there are powerful interests that are heavily invested in the official mythos. And if that’s true for those issues, one wonders to what extent would that be true for the suppression of psi? And certainly there are vested interests there. I remember last time I had you on, you said that eventually, at some point, normal Western materialistic medicine will probably be completely replaced. And my brother, who’s a kind of materialistic medical doctor, who sometimes reacts badly to my discussions of psi, so I don’t bring it up as often as maybe I would like to—he’d be out of a job, I guess, if that happened. That’s just one example of somebody with a vested interest in maintaining a more materialistic worldview. And there are probably lots of others. And then let’s not even get into the people who might actually be using psi and not want any competition. So go for it. Tell us about the possible conspiracy scenarios here.Well, I talk about maybe not conspiracy, but of disinformation, which is quite clear that the U.S. government has used during the Stargate program. And so I think I gave one or two examples of that, where at the same time that the Army was funding the Stargate program, their public stance was “there’s nothing interesting going on here,” as was said at a press conference where they talked about a review of the evidence. We knew at the time—I was president of the Parapsychological Association at the time—we knew that that was a ridiculous thing to promote in the media because not only did it counter what we knew was true, that these phenomena are real, but their own report contradicted what was said publicly. So it was like a bad version of disinformation, because if you just read the book, you’d say, oh, that’s different than what they’re talking about. You can look back at it and say, well, why did they do that? Because it was so transparently wrong. They did it because they were funding a secret program and they didn’t want to sort of out it. So of course they would say, no, there’s nothing to look at. Just go do something else right now. And then the media went along with it. The only media that didn’t was the Chronicle of Higher Education. And the only reason that happened is because I happened to be at Princeton at the time. So I called them up and said, there’s something seriously wrong with this. And then some editor or journalist at the Chronicle said, oh, this is an interesting story. And so they wrote about it. That’s why we know that the expert hired to evaluate the psi component of that report, who was Robert Rosenthal at Harvard University, wrote a very positive report saying, yeah, this stuff looks real. And then they suppressed it. And so the head of the program at the National Research Council called up Bob Rosenthal and said, don’t put that in there, leave it out. And fortunately, Bob said, no, you hired me to do this, this is my opinion, and there it is. So by outing that, basically for anybody who cared, they would look at that and say, well, sometimes the government doesn’t tell us things which they know is incorrect. Well, then, as you said, what else are we being told that’s not completely correct? In this particular case, it was maybe because at the time we knew that the Soviet Union—this was during the Cold War—they were doing this as well. And maybe the Chinese were. And so we didn’t want to trumpet it. We didn’t want to say, yeah, here it is, and this is what we’re doing. So maybe that’s why they tried to suppress it. But otherwise, I don’t know why they would do that.And they also suppress this kind of research through ridicule, just like with other so-called conspiracy theories and unofficial knowledge. The wonderful, enjoyable book, Jon Ronsen’s The Men Who Stare at Goats, and then the film that was made based on that, struck me as possibly something that the insiders would have approved of, because it ends up sort of making light of the topic: Oh, look at these crazy military guys who are trying to kill goats by staring at them. Ha, ha, ha. Isn’t that hilarious? Well, yeah, but the fact that they were putting it out in that form made me suspicious that it was a diversion, and they claim they’ve shut this stuff all down. “Of course, we wouldn’t ever use the taxpayers’ money for anything this crazy ever again.” Yeah, right. My suspicion would be, oh, they’ve got something even better going in the background that they don’t want to tell us about. So they invited Jon Ronson in there to have some fun. Yeah, no, clearly it was a spoof, right? One of the ways of doing any kind of propaganda is to deflect interest by making fun of it. And it works, right? We make fun of it. So there’s just pressure from all over the place. You mentioned the Sufis. And so, yeah, there are all kinds of interesting bodily effects, like the skewers through your body, and then there’s no blood, and it heals instantly, whatever. The Isawiyya order is famous for that here (in Morocco). Yeah. So I had an opportunity a couple of months ago to talk at some length with Sadhguru, who’s an Indian guru with many followers. And this was at Harvard Medical School where there was an audience, and we were on stage and we were discussing something. So I could have talked about anything. So the thing I was interested in is privately, I talked to Sadhguru a little bit before about telepathy. And we were saying, well, we’re learning more and more about telepathy and maybe a little bit about how to enhance it and eventually figure out how to make it actually really good. He said, that’s not a good thing. Don’t do that. And it reminded me that in every spiritual tradition, it is said that if you do a practice, whatever it happens to be, that you will begin to bump into these kinds of phenomena, whether it’s meditation or drugs or whatever it is, that you will have these phenomena. But don’t pay attention to it. Just sort of recognize it as something that will happen and that’s not your goal. So keep going and eventually become enlightened or whatever the goal is.So I asked this to Sadhguru. I said, well, why? I mean, wouldn’t it be interesting to know what’s going on here and to actually learn from a scientific perspective what these phenomena are? Because if somebody encounters those phenomena and the usual response is either don’t pay attention to it from a from a spiritual tradition or worse telling somebody about it and then ending up going to a psychiatrist and being drugged because “those things are psychotic” or immediately falling into, “oh, those are demonic. So, you know, do something to get rid of the demons.” Or you’re Jesus. I mean, people are going to look for some kind of explanation and they need it. So why not a scientific explanation?And so Sadhguru basically told quite a long story in several different ways that said, in essence, humans are aggressive, not particularly intelligent monkeys, and we are seduced by power, and it would destroy humanity if we actually learned how to use this stuff. So I’m a scientist. The room is full of medical professionals and scientists. And so I kind of looked at the audience. I said, are you saying there’s like some things we shouldn’t know? We shouldn’t study? And the answer more or less was yes. There’s some things that should not be studied. And part of the story was: Look at all of the things that we have learned through scientific methods, which are turned into technologies, which are killing us. That’s hard to argue against because some of that is true. Like we created plastic, what a great thing. Well, now there’s plastic everywhere. So we didn’t figure that out too well. And one time I met the man who invented trans fats, which were going to replace things like butter and so on, because it’d be a lot healthier for us. Well, that turned out to be a really bad mistake. So it’s true that we can learn a certain amount, we turn it into a technology, but we can’t see the unintended consequences. This is why people are beginning to freak out about AI. Well, maybe that’s a technology. Maybe it’s not so good. So this would be a technology, said Sadhguru, and also echoed in the spiritual traditions, that if you learn really, really well, like what’s going on with psychic phenomena, and you can develop it into what would have been called magic a long time ago, you can have a whole lot of Merlins out there. And maybe if their egos aren’t in check, they’re going to be seduced and that will destroy the entire planet quickly. So don’t do it.So now what? Now we have pressure from even from the spiritual traditions that recognize these things are real. So we’re getting pressure from all directions. “Don’t do that. Don’t look at that.” You have to be pretty stubborn or at least self-confident, I guess, to persist in the face of all that opposition.Regarding that question of: “Is humanity ready for this, and what kinds of consequences are likely to come about if people start developing these powers more consciously?” Your book takes a pretty optimistic view, not too far from a common sense perspective that when people kind of do these practices, these attention practices and meditation-like practices that are associated with building up their ability to do magic or have psi powers, typically they become less attached to their base, lower desires for wealth, power, fame, sex, dominance, and all this sort of thing, and become better people, the kind of people that you would trust more with these powers. And in that sense, your book could be taken almost as a guide to a new sort of religious philosophy: “Let’s all learn magic. Let’s all develop these abilities and let’s become better people. And let’s assume that everybody who does this is going to become better people.” And that does sound kind of tempting. But then I also, you know, I’m kind of coming out of a traditionalist perspective, a traditionalist movement of perennialists. This movement was founded by René Guénon, the great French philosopher who came to Islam. That’s what led me to Islam. and Moroccan Suivism and all that stuff. Guenon looked at what the Freemasons and the cultists were doing in late 19th century Paris and concluded that there was a lot of bad stuff going on because these people were all too worldly, too attached to their base desires, and that the best map, the roadmap for getting to where we need to go, would be back in the great revealed traditions. And he found that Islam was the best preserved and the one most congenial for Westerners. And I sort of followed that line of thought and practice as well. So anyway, there is a difference between on the one hand, believing or hoping that building up magical or psi powers will actually lead us to be better people versus those who say, “be careful with that. Better to go back to a traditionalist path.” Like in Islam, the word Islam means surrender the ego. So you really have to kind of blow off the ego and all of the lower desires, right? The ego that desires evil. You’ve got to blow that off before you even get into these worlds. So anyway, just what are your thoughts about that argument? Yeah. That is the yogic path as well. If you’re on the yogic path, you might spend years learning how to dissolve your ego or get beyond it before you start learning how to do the siddhis. Which makes a lot of sense. You can imagine a very old tradition where people saw that if you’re seduced by the power too quickly and your ego is involved, that is dangerous for yourself and other people. So what are we going to do about it? Well, we have a training program. which will train you how to get beyond your ego and to recognize the unity of everyone and the interconnectedness of life and all things, but really get, it in the same way that sometimes people will get it through a psychedelic experience or a mystical experience. That’s when they become better people. But if you suddenly... for one reason or another, end up with having remarkable powers like this. Like in fairy tales where you have three wishes. What are you going to do? Well, that’s dangerous. So... So the spiritual traditions then make sense in that maybe you need to pass through all of that until you realize, “oh, actually everything is one unity and it is connected and all of the rest,” all of that, which is transcending the ego to a large extent, then it’s okay because you can use these abilities. But before then, it is not a good idea. So then what do I do? What do other scientists like myself do? I’m driven by the curiosity that everyone would have the moment they have one of these experiences. If you happen to start out being on the spectrum where you’re kind of psychotic, bad news. If you’re not there, which I’m not, I tend to intuitively feel that there is a connection to everything anyway. Then I’m drawn to the curiosity of trying to figure out: how do we reconcile the nature of these phenomena with what is taught about in spiritual traditions? And I’m not a religious person by any means, but I get the same sense a lot of people do that there’s a lot more going on than we can perceive. And even from straightforward psychology, we know that our experience or our conscious awareness is a tiny little cartoon trickle of what’s actually going on. So we’re missing huge amounts of stuff that are actually right in our face, but we can’t see it. We don’t see it. Like most scientists, I think it’s better to know than not to know. And so I’ll continue doing what I do, and someday maybe we’ll be smart enough if we pass the very rough adolescent stage of humanity at the moment. People will look at this backwards in time and say, oh, okay, yeah, they were pushing us into this direction where we had a broader relationship, rational language to be able to understand what these things are, without having to use what amounts to religious language. And that leads to the question about retrocausation, which features in a pretty major way in this book. And it’s one of the most mind boggling concepts in parapsychology: That one of the ways that psi or quote-unquote magical power sometimes actually operates in the world is by rearranging the past so that something happens in the present that had to have been influenced by the past. And there are actually studies that you’ve designed to test this, and it seems like that’s happening. Although with proviso that it’s not changing the past. It is influencing events as they unfold or as they unfolded when they were happening in the past… It’s an important distinction because if we could change the past, then all hell breaks loose, so to speak. The present would never be stable. And as best as we can tell, it’s pretty stable. So what we see in the experiments then is that if there’s an event that’s taking place, say now, right now there’s something happening. Most of it is not being observed by anybody, unless you imagine that there’s panpsychism and everything is being observed all the time, which is possible. But at least for conscious entities, sort of like humans, we’re not paying attention to most of everything. So those events apparently reside in something similar to or analogous to a quantum superposition, like they could take all kinds of different possible futures from there. And so those seem to be susceptible to what we would see as a future influence. And so some—I don’t remember if I put this in the book or not—but one of the things that our institute has studied are spontaneous remissions of disease. You did discuss that. Right. And so one of the explanations then of “how is it that somebody with a very serious, usually fatal disease can be cured miraculously overnight? How did that happen? And so one way to think of it is that you’re not literally changing the past of that person, but rather every disease will follow a certain progression. And you can think of it as a branching structure where some of it will be fatal and some of it you’ll be perfectly fine. And so maybe there are different probabilistic pieces of that branch. But if you have the capacity now as a healer to influence what was happening way back when, which is not being observed, and you can say, you know what, we’re going to nudge it onto the branch where they’re still quite ill, but something happens in their body, which no one’s paying attention to, including that person, that will push it into the branch where they’re going to suddenly look like it’ll suddenly actually get better quickly. And so that would be a way of understanding then how something that looks miraculous actually is because of something that is happening in the future. Interesting. I’m going to ask you about something. The reason I’m here in Morocco, actually, or kind of the most direct, obvious reason, is that my wife really wanted to come here. As you say in the book, people really have this strong desire. That’s when you’re going to manifest the magic. So one day she told me, I bought two tickets to Morocco. We’re going to Saidia, Morocco. And if you don’t want to come, I’ll just go myself because I’m looking for a place to live there. And I said, well, I guess I better come along. So I went along with her to Saidia, Morocco. I had looked at the real estate stuff that she had pulled up on the Internet, and it didn’t appeal to me at all. And we got in the car with the real estate guys and drove all over the place, and there was nothing that looked remotely interesting. And actually, we did this for two days. And at the end of the second day, we gave up and said, OK, let’s just go take a walk on the beach and forget about it. So we walked towards the beach, got close to the beach. My wife turned and looked at this villa and said, oh, what a beautiful villa. Why couldn’t I have a villa like that? And at that moment, a car pulled up and a guy got out of the car. My wife turned to him and said, is that villa for sale? And he thought for a second and said, come on in and drink some tea. And the next thing you know, it turned out this was the one place that she would succeed in convincing me to move to. It was maktoub as they say in Morocco.So anyway…how did she do that? For this guy to pull up at exactly that moment…and he didn’t even know he was selling the house until that moment. For that to happen, he had to do all these things in the past such as get in his car and drive in such a way to show up there. So if my wife wasn’t somehow influencing the past, what was she doing? Right, so this is one of the theories, sort of somewhere between a magical theory, but also has been discussed in parapsychology, of how does any of this stuff work? And so the idea is that through psychic ability, we simply hypothesize, we can perceive through space and time. And we also have the capacity, an agency type of capacity where we can push things. We can push probabilities around, we can do both. And so if you want a certain thing to occur, which in a popular sense would be thought of as a manifestation, you simply want something to happen or you want to create a synchronicity. You use everything you possibly can. So you’re saying we’re going to look in the future and past. We’re going to look at all of the possibilities of that. And we’re also going to push things and people a little bit and sort of kind of arrange for a certain goal to occur. Now, if you tried to figure it out, you have spreadsheets with all of the possibilities, but it’s going to be like infinite. It’d be very difficult to tell. But let’s assume then that some aspect of our unconscious can see all of that. And so we simply say, this is the goal that I want. I want this. And you figure it out. Well, who’s the you? Part of it is us. Part of it is the universe in some way that simply responds to what it is that we want. That’s pretty much how we imagine magic works. Because again, for a magical thing to happen, what you’re describing is a perfect synchronicity. I want, and then things are put into motion. So- How does that occur? Well, we don’t know exactly how it occurs. I have a proto-theory, as I just described. But of course, that would immediately drive any curious person into trying to figure it out. Like, what is that? How is that even possible? Well, that’s the kind of curiosity that drives me to do what I do. We do little experiments and say, well, is it possible? And there have been some experiments looking at this notion of a kind of looking at psychic phenomenon, not as there is telepathy and it’s different from precognition and it’s different from this. And they’re all like the same thing. They’re all related in some way. We’re participating with the universe as John Wheeler said. So one of the aspects of the book that I try to thread through there is that a lot of this sounds from a conventional scientific perspective like it’s kind of crazy. Like we’re delusional and making up coincidences that aren’t really there. And yet, when you look at leading physicists who have been trying to figure out what is quantum mechanics trying are to tell us, John Wheeler in particular, used the notion of a participatory universe, we are engaged with it, whatever it is out there. We’re engaged with it in a kind of a continual dance. And so from that perspective, if you really accept that and recognize that this is coming out of physics, it’s not coming out of spiritual traditions or religion or anything else, you accept that as a hypothesis, they’d say, well, let’s just imagine that were true. That’s why you’re living in your house. Indeed. It reminded me actually of your story of your lab, where there was a guy who set up a psi lab adjacent to your lab, unbeknownst to you both, even though you thought you knew all the people who worked in psi. And it turns out he had deliberately sort of manifested you. And then he had the equipment that you needed. Yeah, like a co-manifestation, like a double synchronicity. Both of us focusing hard on what we wanted. So he wanted me. I wanted his equipment. And somehow we ended up literally adjacent to each other in the same place at the same time, which is ridiculous from a conventional perspective. Because again, like I needed to make these decisions. He needed to make those decisions totally in any conventional way, independent from each other. And yet they coalesced.I decided to write both my previous book called Real Magic and the new book, The Science of Magic, partially because I’ve experienced those kinds of things. And then again, curiosity comes to play. And I realized very early on that psychic phenomena and magical phenomena are the same thing, just with different words, different language, different part of history, different culture, but the phenomena are the same. So in terms of practically dealing with this whole fascinating part of life, of course, studying it is one thing, and that’s what your career has been about. And then in terms of thinking about how we as a species or a culture can do a better job of navigating it and admitting it into our consciousness. It does occur to me that maybe we need some kind of a different way of thinking about things. That is...rather than space and time, all of this manipulation of space and time, manipulating the past through retrocausation or manipulating the present through psychokinesis or sending telepathic messages or what have you, we could see that that’s actually kind of a product of an underlying layer of meaning. The idealists tell us that meaning—or ideas, consciousness—is the basis, and the space-time continuum—material reality—is an epiphenomenon of that. And somehow I think perhaps accepting that new worldview might be actually more important than simply developing and learning about psi phenomena and magic. When I try to imagine what could help people get to that stage of consciousness of admitting that, of seeing things in this new way, I look back at the history of religious movements. Do you think that there could be either a revived religious movement from one or several of the Axial Age religions? Could some kind of contagious change of consciousness emerge in the modern world? Is that a possibility? It was probably easier before there were eight and a half billion people on the planet. It is also probably easier when we’re not being confronted by multiple extinction-level events, all of which are pushing towards, from a political perspective, pushing more and more towards right-wing protectionism. And so in that kind of level of chaos, it’s not entirely clear…Take India as an example of what can be considered a more spiritual culture, and yet still with horrific problems. Or even go way back to the Greeks where they’d have the Greek mystery schools or everybody drank the Soma or whatever that was and learned about the nature of reality experientially, a mystical experience. And yet they had slaves. So I don’t know how to resolve any of that stuff. It doesn’t seem like there’s one place in history that we can look at and say, “finally, they got it right.”So maybe that kind of churning is simply part of…of the nature of life. And in order for our species and maybe other species as well to remain resilient against change, which might be inevitable just from a planetary perspective, you need to have a certain degree of chaos and a certain degree of diversity in order to be able to survive impacts, whether they’re asteroids or something else. In which case, how do we become a more mature species? What does it even mean to become a more mature species? My guess is it’s something like a hive mind, which from a scientific perspective is almost always presented as horrific. That’s like the worst possible thing. Well, why is that? Because ego is not involved anymore. That’s why. And so can we transcend ego? Well, as long as we appear to be separate organisms, maybe not. Maybe that’s a flaw in this particular species. Yesterday my wife and I saw a movie called Fantastic Fungi. That’s a great movie. Yeah. So I know Rupert Sheldrake and I remember meeting the man who wrote the book when he was like 12 or something. And so that book was a good reminder that fungi is everywhere in the planet and a very important component of the way that the biosphere works. And it’s cooperative. There are also forms of fungi that are not cooperative. They’ll fight against each other, basically. But as a whole, as a concept, the notion that there are webs of life underground, typically, occasionally become a mushroom, but mostly underground, which are sort of close to the idea in the movie Avatar that there’s something like a living bio-planet, which is intelligent. And for the creatures like us who are mushrooms or popped up on the surface, we have lost the idea. We’re not connected anymore to this web of life, which is below us, that’s normally visible to some people anyway. So maybe... the indigenous people had it right to recognition that we sort of, we dismiss it as animism. But maybe if everything is alive and we recognize that, maybe we need something in that direction to really begin to appreciate that we’re being extremely efficient in killing ourselves. And so maybe the more we learn about interconnectedness, not just interdependence, but actual interconnectedness of the sort that is like entanglement, that’s how we become mature when we recognize that is the way things are. That makes a lot of sense. It makes probably more sense than hoping for salvation through any kind of political change, which I had originally thought that the truth about 9/11 would be such a slap in the face to the United States, the world’s most powerful empire, that it would force it to recognize that “we met the enemy. He is us.” And then it would shed some of its ego and we’d have a better world. Didn’t really work out that way. People like me who blew up everybody’s faith in mainstream media narratives paved the way for Trump. And here we are with a situation that is certainly no better, really, than it was then. And people like me are trying to still improve the world by getting out the truth about things like the Epstein oligarchy that largely rules the West through all these horrific means—including, by the way, you may have noticed in the Epstein emails, there was a reference to abusing children to produce alter personalities that would have psychic abilities. Did you see that? I didn’t see that, but I’ve heard it. And there is some evidence that early childhood trauma, wherever it comes from, does lead to at least hypersensitivity as adults, some of which may be psychic. So learning the truth about all this horrible stuff, that these people who rule us are much worse than we had imagined…Is that going to lead us to a better future? Maybe, maybe not. At this point, I’ve become agnostic. Yeah, I don’t know either. That’s why, in many ways, the... The approach that everyone takes is similar to how we feel sometimes about compassion fatigue, right? You can only push so much. And then after a while, you just say, what can I do as an individual? And so I’m not ignoring any of it by any means, but I’m focusing on my work because I feel that it’s actually important in a longer run, if we survive as a species, for us to get a better handle on what are our actual capacities. And so it may turn out we’re way stronger than we think we are, or way more powerful in a positive sense. And if that is actually true, then yeah, we need to understand these kinds of phenomena better and popularize it, which is what I do with hundreds of podcasts and my books. Okay. That’s a good place to leave it. And I want to thank you for popularizing this incredibly important knowledge in a way that is blessed with common sense and good, solid ethics and a really good writing style as well. So your book is highly recommended. Should people buy it from Amazon or through your website? Well, on my personal website, which is deanradin.com, I think I have eight buttons going to many, many different bookstores, whatever one you like. Okay, deanradin.com. And I will link that at the blog for this podcast. All right. Thank you, Dean Radin. It’s been wonderful. Keep up the great work. You’re one of my heroes. God bless. And write another book. I’ll bring you back, inshallah. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit kevinbarrett.substack.com

Rumble link Bitchute link FouaDebate YouTube linkFoad: In the name of God, the compassionate and merciful, hello everybody, hope you are doing great. You’re watching FoaDebate. Over the past few weeks, the Middle East has witnessed a mix of intense tension and diplomatic movements. On one hand, indirect talks between Iran and the U.S. took place with both sides expressing willingness to continue the dialogue. On the other hand, the Trump administration has ramped up its maximum pressure campaign, sending naval forces to the region and threatening Iran. Meanwhile, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was heeding to Washington to push Tel Aviv’s demands for including Iran’s missile program and regional activities in any potential agreement.In such a heated atmosphere, the key question is, are Tehran and Washington moving forward a new deal? Or is the region on the brink of a full-scale conflict? To explore this, I sit down with Dr. Kevin Barrett, a senior American journalist and well-known political analyst. Welcome back there, Kevin Barrett.Kevin Barrett: Thank you, Fouad. It’s good to be back with you.You’re welcome. As I said, over the past week, we have seen two conflicting signals from the U.S. On one hand, talks in Oman and Trump’s expressing satisfaction with them. and on the other hand, an escalation in military and economic pressure. How do you interpret this duality?Well, I think that Trump is basically conditioned by his history as a kind of a, let’s face it, a somewhat corrupt businessman and indeed a money launderer for organized crime who built up hotel chains and casinos and so on, and took a kind of a bullying approach to business negotiations. He would threaten people and pressure them and try to get the upper hand over them and then try to come out with the best deal that he could, thinking that by applying pressure, he could get better terms in a deal. And so that’s just his standard operating procedure. And for whatever reason, the foreign policy establishment is letting him do that.But I don’t think that we should take the aircraft carriers being sent into the region at face value as preparations for necessarily for war, because frankly, I don’t think that the United States and its Israeli partner, or some would say occupier, is ready for that kind of war. As we saw during the 12-day war in June, Iran, even when taken by surprise by another dastardly surprise attack during what was supposed to be negotiations, was capable of regrouping, and its missile force was extremely formidable, forcing the Israelis to beg for the Americans to give them a face-saving way to end that war.And since the Americans are unable to basically even disable the rocket program in Yemen by Ansar Allah—and Iran is many orders of magnitude more formidable—it seems unlikely that the American leadership is looking forward to a war that would certainly leave a large number of Americans dead with tremendous damage and the prospect of either an American defeat or an attempt to throw good money after bad money and essentially keep digging the hole deeper and deeper and deeper for another forever war, which the U.S. would have no real expectation of winning in any meaningful way.After Trump met Netanyahu, it seemed that Trump’s statement on his platform, Truth Social, and then Netanyahu’s statement in Hebrew just before he got on the plane to go back to Israel, indicated that Netanyahu didn’t get what he wanted, which was a kind of a promise from Trump that Trump would indeed go all the way with a threatened war if Iran didn’t negotiate away its allies and its ballistic missile program, which Iran, of course, will not do.Right. Iran has made it clear that its missile program is never up for negotiation and that uranium enrichment is its non-negotiable right. In contrast, Israel wants these issues included in any agreement and Netanyahu was heading to Washington precisely to push for that. How do you see this fundamental deadlock being broken?I think that it is a situation in which the American leadership has to decide to what extent is it willing to damage American interests and, of course, Trump’s political interests, in service to Israel’s maximum demands. And we’ve seen the Israelis already creating all sorts of problems for American foreign policy. I’m one of many who are known for arguing that Israel was the prime force responsible for the September 11th false flag attack on America, which was designed to drag the U.S. into a war that was supposed to overthrow seven countries in five years. All of those seven countries were viewed as problematic by the Israelis. And Iran was number seven on that list, and by far the most important of those seven countries. This is all according to General Wesley Clark, who was told this shortly after the September 11th attacks by a leading neoconservative.So the Americans allowed themselves to be dragged into that series of wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, and elsewhere around the world. And it didn’t help the American strategic position. Now the Americans are facing serious challenges from China and Russia after squandering their resources in this endless war on behalf of the Israeli settler colony, which has become so genocidal that it’s hated everywhere in the world. And I think it’s very likely that the people around Trump are telling him this prospect of a big American war with Iran is just not going to work. You can’t get a quick victory. There’s just no way that’s going to happen. There will be great American losses. And the endgame is totally unclear.And we’re talking about the Strait of Hormuz being closed, oil prices skyrocketing, the global economy crashing—all of this at a time when Trump’s popularity ratings are at unprecedented lows. So I think the Israelis may have bitten off more than they can chew, even though they may be applying pressure to Trump in various ways, possibly including the Epstein revelations, which are increasingly incriminating Trump. And because Zionists dominate Western media, they can hold this over Trump’s head and say, “if you don’t do what we tell you, we can bring you down. We can suddenly start taking seriously all of these horrific allegations against you.”So Trump is sort of caught between a rock and a hard place. But the American military leadership around Trump knows that a big war with Iran would be a loser for the United States empire at a time when it is becoming increasingly fragile. And so I think that the chances are quite strong that the Americans will back off this time and, in fact, defy Israeli orders. And that’s, of course, an unusual and actually kind of refreshing development considering the way things have gone in the past.Right. Thank you so much. You know, some analysts believe that Trump’s approach toward Iran is essentially a one-shot deal rooted in a transactional mindset. However, other experts argue that Washington’s ultimate goal isn’t an agreement at all, but rather risk management and long-term containment of Iran. Which scenario do you find more likely?Yeah, that’s an interesting question. I think that Trump personally does think very transactionally. And he would be likely to personally favor any kind of agreement that can be cast as providing some sort of advantage to the United States and, of course, to himself. So the strategists behind Trump, that is the professional class of empire managers, they’re thinking probably more in terms of long term containment as they have in previous decades. But it could be that given the fact that Trump does have a certain amount of autocratic power in the current situation, it is conceivable that some kind of deal could be framed that would appeal to Trump’s transactional interests. Perhaps there would be some sort of economic deal, American investment, something that looks good from the economic side. And that would give Trump the face-saving ability to back down from these ridiculous Israeli demands that Iran negotiate away its rocket program and its allies, which again, it will not do.But Iran doesn’t really want nuclear weapons. So it’s not like Iran has any reason to not find some sort of compromise agreement, essentially a new framing of what was achieved with the JCPOA, but of course with some sort of guarantee that the next American administration won’t just blow that up too. And that could be then sold to Trump by way of some sort of economic deal.And the question is, does Iran really want to do that? Or would Iran really be better off in the long run possibly opting for an alliance with China rather than trying to reintegrate itself with the West? This is, of course, a question that the best minds in Iran are thinking about, and they probably have a better approach to it than I do.Right. Some sources suggest that the war option is losing popularity among the American public and that there is a kind of strategic fatigue in Washington. On the other side, Iran insists it does not seek war but will respond decisively if provoked. In your view, how are both sides calculating to avoid a deadly miscalculation?That’s another very interesting question, because miscalculation could be extremely deadly in this case. Americans are quite averse to losing their service members. And in this particular case, if there is a major U.S. attack on Iran, depending on how much damage it caused, there would be somewhere between a few dead American service members and a very large number, possibly well into the thousands, even tens of thousands are at risk. And the American public is not ready for that. And so the from the American perspective the prospect of a long-term serious war with Iran is really a non-starter. That is, there is enough war fatigue that the American people are just not going to be giving their consent to that kind of war that would involve a lot of casualties, that would go on with exchanges of (bombings and) rocket fire at American bases and ships.Of course, Israel would be heavily pounded. Iran has said it doesn’t distinguish between the US and Israel. So if there was a US attack, Israel would still be pounded just in the way it was in June.And the American public is not ready for that. What they are willing to put up with is Trump making crazy threats, doing quick one-and-done crazy operations like kidnapping President Maduro of Venezuela, which may have caused as many problems as it solved from the American standpoint.But there is no such quick one-and-done approach to Iran. There are reports that Trump actually proposed such a thing to Iran and said, let us hit a couple of targets, we’ll tell you what we’re going to hit, then you hit a couple of our targets, nobody gets hurt, and then we’ll be done. And Iran said, no, I’m sorry, we’re not doing that.So I think Iran actually has the upper hand here. And how that plays out remains to be seen. But again, I wouldn’t be surprised if some kind of revived JCPOA happens and that Trump comes up with some way to camouflage the fact that he’s walked right back into essentially the same JCPOA that he tore up when he came into office in 2016. And to camouflage that, he’ll have to come up with basically some wonderful deal that everybody makes money at. And I think that’s probably an actual possibility. So I would say there’s at least a 50-50 chance that that could happen.Considering all the current circumstances, what is your overall assessment of the future? Are we closer to war or to a deal?As I said, I think we might be a little bit over 50% closer to a deal. But one should never underestimate the power and craziness of the Zionist extremists led by Netanyahu and the lobby that he largely controls, or at least coordinates, within the United States. The extremist wing of the genocidal Zionist project has grown in power over the decades, and it now dominates the Zionist project in occupied Palestine and also in the United States, in the West in general. And those people realize that Iran has won and that the survival and eventually the thriving of the Islamic Republic under a new post-American empire world will spell the end of their hopes to create this greater Israel project involving destroying the Al-Aqsa Mosque, invading more and more neighbors, stealing more and more land, accelerating the genocide of Palestine—that all of that cannot continue in a post-U.S.-empire world with a strong Iran.And so they would like to see the United States and Iran both damage each other seriously. They don’t care about the United States. And from their perspective, Iran is their biggest problem. as it has been ever since the days of September 11th when the Israelis blew up the World Trade Center in order to try to destroy seven countries in five years, with Iran being the most important.But they’ve only managed to badly damage six countries in 25 years, and Iran is still standing strong, and inshallah, it will continue to stand strong.Thank you so much. If you would like to add something more, all ears.I guess all I can say is that the genocide in Gaza that has horrified the world over the past few years has had very few heroes besides the Palestinians themselves. But the Iranian leadership, which has been willing to make sacrifices and make itself a target in order to do the right thing and to support the Palestinian people against this genocide, is heroic. And so I really think everybody in Iran needs to remember that, that whatever else they may think about the various issues domestically and internationally, that Iran and the Ansarullah movement in Yemen and the Hezbollah movement in Lebanon are the real heroes of our time in terms of resisting this genocide. 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 False Flag Weekly News linkE. Michael Jones of Culture Wars breaks down the week's news...starting with the looming confrontation between the Islamic Republic of Iran, and the degenerate Zioligarchy that rules the West. Partial transcript:Kevin Barrett: Welcome to False Flag Weekly News, the weekly news show that just keeps on digging deeper into what’s really going on in the world, as it all gets exposed by some kind of weird Hegelian dialectic…I don’t know (about that) but the guy who does know is my co-host Dr. E. Michael Jones of Culture Wars. Hey Mike, how are you doing? E. Michael Jones: Good. Good to be here.Yeah, it’s weird. It’s like every time you come back, it’s kind of the same, it’s the same but different, right? Like the Epstein story never goes away. The war on Iran by the Epstein oligarchy that runs the West never goes away. And the noticing just keeps on happening...And so anyway, let’s listen to our PSAs. Okay, it’s Valentine’s Day. So give us some love. Send us some money. Well, wait a minute. Love and money, it’s not the same. Anyway, we have some breaking news, Mike. Did you see that Satan has joined the Board of Peace? He will be reporting to his boss, Bibi Netanyahu, I guess.And more breaking news, the conspiracy theorists were right. It turns out that the moon was an inside job. This is the New York Times science section. So that just goes to show it’s not just Epstein. Conspiracy theorists were right about everything.And finally, I don’t know if you’ve been watching Jake TV, Mike. Have you seen this?No, I haven’t seen it. (Watch the full 11:34 JakeTV satirical video at my Substack, reproduced for educational purposes only. Please note that laughing may be illegal in some jurisdictions.)Jake TV: Breaking news. The FBI has just dropped three and a half million documents in the Epstein files mentioning Goyim, pizza and grape soda.Oh, wow. Probably has nothing to do with Israel. Our greatest ally.Of course not. Who doesn’t like pizza?Exactly.John, break it down for us.Chloe and Michael, good morning. Let’s just ask the FBI. How do you like your pizza and grape soda? “Christian white ones only. As young as it gets.” WTF?!…Okay, happy birthday, Islamic Iran. It was the birthday of the Islamic Republic this week. And so we’ve got these birthday cards. I can’t believe that Elon allows Grok to make birthday cards for the Islamic Republic, Mike.Yes, it’s part of the strategy here. He wants controversy and there’s nothing more controversial than Iran at this moment. So I think that’s part of the strategy.There you go. Yeah, I was kind of surprised when Grok did that. So anyway, over in Iran, there were 25 million people in the streets supporting the Islamic Republic on the occasion of its anniversary. And you and I have been in the midst of these crowds. It wasn’t just in Tehran, by the way, but there were actually some like there was a medium size city that had this gigantic crowd. Anyway, so you’ve been in the thick of these crowds, just like I have, Mike. Do you believe this stuff in the Western media that all the Iranian people hate their government?Yes, Mike Huckabee said it. They said the Iranians want to kill us. So it must be true if Mike Huckabee said it.But I was in the protest in first time. And I was surrounded by women in chodors who were chanting, Magh Barg Amariku, death to America. Although I’m told that there’s nuance in Farsi that maybe it doesn’t mean quite that. But anyway, surrounded. And I was the only guy in Tehran wearing a tie. So I began, someone came up to me and said, are you an American? And I thought, maybe I better say I’m a Canadian. So I said, yeah, but I said, yes, I’m an American. And he said, well, I’d like to go to America. So this whole idea that the Iranians want to kill you is false. I experienced it firsthand. I was not killed.When we got back, were you in the bus with me when they took us there? We were surrounded by a mob in that bus. They were plastered…I did feel that my life was in danger there. I thought it was gonna be crushed by the crowd at one moment. And that passed and then we were in the bus and the bus was completely surrounded by people. There were no police, there were no nothing. And if they wanted to overturn the bus, they could have, they could have set it on fire. We all would have died in the bus, but they didn’t. So that was my witness. We somehow survived.And you were even wearing a tie, which is actually in Iranian revolutionary sartorial correctness, ties are not exactly de rigueur. They’re seen as…like it’s the imperialists and the Zionists that lead you around by the neck. That’s their cultural interpretation. But they still are not going to lynch you just because you’re wearing a tie. Actually, they like Americans. They just don’t like our Zionist occupied government. And I don’t either. Right. And they can make a distinction which some people cannot make.Indeed, yeah. Iran is a pretty sophisticated country. It’s pretty cool. And the Islamic Republic is a pretty cool system. I actually just wrote about that. But here’s the film of the march of the millions. And, of course, the usual suspects are saying, “oh, it’s got to be AI. Because we know the Iranian people don’t like their government.” There are a lot of Iranians who actually are very proud of their Islamic Republic. But they don’t like Epstein. They don’t like sacrificing children.But before the Islamic revolution, this is what Iran looked like. Actually, have you seen these Internet memes where the anti-Iran people try to post all these trendy Western people?No, this is fake. They didn’t look that way. It didn’t look that way. I’ve seen miniskirts, okay, in pre-Islamic Revolution Iran, but I’ve never seen people working at computers in their bathing suits because those computers didn’t exist in the 1970s.Yeah. Okay. But here’s an authentic picture of a fun, freedom-loving couple biking around on their motorbike in Tehran before the Islamic revolution ruined all their fun. And there they are. They look familiar.Actually, do you know who was there in ? Michel Foucault was there.Yeah, but he couldn’t find the bathhouses, so he left and he went back to San Francisco.Well, Michel Foucault showed up and didn’t have the categories that would allow him to understand what was going on. He thought it was going to be staged by the Marquis de Sade. And so he didn’t know what to say. He went there. He was there right at the moment, at the moment. He was sent there by a French newspaper, and he didn’t know what to say. And he went to San Francisco after that and died doing what he loved.Indeed, indeed. Well, actually the stuff Foucault wrote about the Iranian revolution is actually less stupid than most of the stuff from the other Western philosophers, for whatever that’s worth. And here’s the Shah Jr., the wannabe Shah…it’s it’s just unbelievable that these Western regime change people think (Iranians want another shah).I think the significance is that finally, Iranians finally undid the playbook. The playbook began with the overthrow of Mossadegh. They’ve been doing the same thing over and over and over again. They tried it again this time with these Mossad agents who mixed in with the demonstrators in Iran at these fake demonstrations. And Iran, with the help of Russia, I think, figured out how to do it. They shut down Starlink. It turns out that Starlink was absolutely essential to those demonstrations that were calculated to overthrow the government. They reverse engineered Starlink and found out who was downloading it and apprehended them and put an end to the counter-revolution. This is the first time I think that anyone has really dealt with the real grammar of these color revolutions and thwarted them from the inside.Well, there have been some other color revolutions that failed. But yeah, this may be the most spectacular failure—and the most important, because Iran was the number seven on the list of seven countries in five years that 9/11 was designed to overturn. And now it’s been six countries in 25 years and number seven is not going away. And that may be the one that dooms the Zionist entity.All right, moving on to the clownery in the White House. Speaking of the clown in the White House and the Zionist entity, here’s Netanyahu visiting Trump for the seventh time amid more threats of a U.S. attack on Iran. And I don’t know if you saw John Mersheimer’s discussion of this with Judge Napolitano, but it was quite good. John Mersheimer, the eminent realist political scientist, says that he thinks this meeting didn’t go very well for Netanyahu.Now, Netanyahu absolutely does not want a return to any kind of nuclear deal. And Trump and his people are saying that’s the only alternative. There’s really no military solution to this. And so if you read between the lines, you read what Trump said on Truth Social, and you look at what Netanyahu said, especially in Hebrew at his press conference on the way back to Israel, and the upshot is that it’s very likely that the Americans actually do want to get back into essentially a new JCPOA, and the Israelis are not going to like it.Yeah, I saw that report by Mersheimer. I think it’s right. I think that Trump does not want to go to war here. I think that’s significant. Apparently he offered them the same deal that he offered before, namely “pick out two targets, we’ll let you hit them, we’ll hit something, you hit something, and then I’ll declare victory and then we’ll move on.” But apparently the Iranians wouldn’t go along with it this time. So this time it’s backed by an Iran that has been rearming ever since the 12-day war in June. The Chinese pulled into the Persian Gulf with their most advanced electronic warfare ship. The Russians, as I said, aided them in blocking Starlink. So it’s a completely different configuration. And I think even the most rabid hawk in the Pentagon has to realize you’re not going to win. You’re not going to win this war.Yeah, that’s what they’re telling him. And Trump sees that his popularity is sort of at an all-time low right now. Probably not a good time to start a losing forever war…I think that the categories have become obsolete: It doesn’t matter whether you’re a Republican or a Democrat because you’re both getting money from AIPAC and AIPAC is determining our foreign policy. That’s been the status quo. And if Trump goes along with it, he will destroy himself. We know that now. I think even he knows that in his kind of a narcissistic fantasy of himself. Even he knows that. And he doesn’t need any more money. Money is diminishing returns now with AIPAC. Trump’s got so much money. He couldn’t possibly spend it. He’d have to live another hundred years to even make a dent on all the money that he has. So what hold does AIPAC money have on him? None. None. None.So that’s the problem. You’ve got a point where it’s all wearing off. The whole victim card, the whole Holocaust narrative, the whole money thing, the whole control thing is all breaking down now. And it’s becoming counterproductive. The more they insist on it, the more the pushback. You find people like Fishbeck in Florida rising to the occasion on a totally anti-Jewish platform, basically. Same thing with Massey, a guy who’s standing up, who’s going to be reelected, beating AIPAC. Mamdami, another instance…But first, the big story this week, as in seemingly most weeks, is this endless Epstein explosion. It just keeps going off. It keeps detonating. And this week…well, here’s a discussion of the term goyim that recurs throughout the Epstein files… (video)…So people are starting to notice things from these Epstein files. It’s out of control. They released, what, three million, leaving three million to go before they get to the magic six million.Pam Bondi has a series of meltdowns on the floor of Congress. Did you see Bondi’s performance, Mike? That was pretty hilarious. She starts ranting about the Dow Jones is up. Forget Epstein. She starts ranting about how Trump is the greatest president we ever had. You should get down to your knees and apologize to him. And on and on and on. Anything but address the issue at hand. It was rather hilarious.Yeah, so we’re going to be inundated with the problem with the Internet. You get inundated with too much information. And so the categories are important. The categories you bring to are very important, extremely important. And the one category they don’t want you to bring to this now is the Jews.So you have a question like, what could possibly Noam Chomsky have to do with Jeffrey Epstein? They’re two completely different people. Aren’t they? I thought they were.What comes out is this kind of Jew-to-Jew candor throughout the Epstein files. It’s not only Noam Chomsky. Another famous scholar, David Galanter, a professor at Yale, the world’s smartest Jew, who wrote a book about America as the world’s fourth religion. He turns out to be a pimp. I don’t want to insult pimps or anything. Anyway, he offers this really cute young girl or something like that to Jeffrey Epstein. So what’s the common denominator? This is an intra-Jewish conversation about the Goyim. And let’s see if we can drag the Goyim into situations where they will compromise themselves. Because I know a nice-looking 20-year-old girl from Yale who would like to meet you. And she’s blonde and she’s a shiksa. Blonde, a shiksa. Oh, there’s another shiksa. There’s another blonde shiksa. Bondi’s got her work cut out for her defending these people. That’s for sure. Trying to cover this up. So, oh, and now the peasants are rising up with the pitchforks. Here’s a guy with a pitchfork coming after Desantis:You’re covering up for bleeping pedophiles. You’re a bleeping pedophile.And then how about this guy?You know, whenever somebody says that maybe it’s time to move on from the Epstein files, I’m always like, great. I totally agree. I think we should have moved on to the public execution phase of this a long time ago. So like, what’s the hold up? Do we not have enough wood chippers? I’ll donate.So the peasants are rising up with the pitchforks. And this Young Turk guy, Cenk, whatever his name is, the Uyghur, no relation to the Chinese Muslim dissident genocide victims or whatever the heck they’re supposed to be. But anyway, he’s on board with 9/11 truth now. Five million views on his 9/11 truth tweet. He’s getting towards the magic six million. Great.Cenk…By the way, Cenk, I’d like to come on your show and ask you why you condemned me quoting the ADL. Are you still a conduit for ADL slander against me? This is when I went on and did my show with Jason Whitlock. Immediately after Jason Whitlock, after the show’s over, a barrage of ugly articles and posts came on. And there was Cenk leading the charge, quoting the ADL. “E. Michael Jones is an anti-Semite. He’s a crank, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.” Which Chank are we talking about here?Well, he was I think he was anti-9/11-conspiracy theorist, too. So he owes us both an apology. We’ve got to both go on his show and talk about this with him. But again, the conspiracy theorists are winning. It’s no longer considered strange to be a little bit paranoid. Thomas Massey has every right to say, “just because you’re paranoid doesn’t mean they’re not out to get you.”Thomas Massey: “I’m not suicidal. I eat healthy food. The brakes on my car and truck are in good shape. I practice good trigger discipline and never point at anyone including myself. There are no deep pools of water on my farm and I’m a pretty good swimmer.” So Thomas Massey felt the need to tweet that. I think the conspiracy theorists are winning, Mike.I would say truth is great and it will prevail. The truth is inexorable. Because as Aristotle said, the human mind does not rest until it rests in the truth. So that’s what we have. That’s what’s driving the zeitgeist right now. So I guess there is a sense in which we’re winning.Read the whole transcript by clicking transcript above the video image at my Substack.Stripe is Substack’s only processor and they debanked me, so you can no longer pay me through Substack. Now I am posting everything on Substack free and asking people to sign up for recurring donations at my Paypal donation page…or better yet, the free speech platform SPdonate. Alternately you can Paypal or Zelle to truthjihad[at]gmail(dot)com. Note that Zelle, unlike other methods, doesn’t charge any fees. 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 linkPress TV: For more on that, we’re joined by Kevin Barrett from Saidia, Morocco. Mr. Barrett, give us your overall thoughts on the questioning at Capitol Hill of Attorney General Pam Bondi. U.S. Democratic lawmakers have echoed a similar sentiment that we’ve been hearing for a while now, that in this case Attorney General Pam Bondi is siding with the perpetrators and not the victims.Kevin Barrett: That shouldn’t be surprising. Pam Bondi had a reputation as a mobbed-up lawyer and prosecutor during her career in Florida. And the fact that Trump chose her as his attorney general tells you everything you need to know about Donald Trump and his lifelong service for the Kosher Nostra, the organized crime organization that’s so strong in New York City that used Trump as a money launderer throughout his career.And these hearings illustrate the extent to which the United States government has turned into a complete clown show. In this case, Pam Bondi was the one with the big red rubber nose, saying the most ridiculous things. Every time she was asked a specific question, she would respond something along the lines of, “you’re a washed up horrible former lawyer, and why aren’t you getting down on your knees and kissing Donald Trump’s feet? Because he’s the greatest president that this country has ever had.” Over and over and over she would respond like this. A five-year-old could do a better job.But getting to the serious issues here, clearly the questioners are right. Bondi has rather incompetently been siding with the perpetrators, not the victims. She wouldn’t even look at the victims that were lined up right behind her during this hearing. And she presided over the release of only half of these six million Epstein files. And she presided over the redaction of the names of perpetrators, not victims. The names of dozens of victims were allowed to slip into the public domain, while perpetrator after perpetrator after perpetrator was blacked out.And it’s hard to tell to what extent this is total incompetence or whether perhaps there is dissension in the Justice Department as some of the lower level people who are charged with going over these files are so horrified by what they see, which essentially indicates that the United States is run by an Israeli Mossad blackmail ring that traffics these young girls to powerful figures and uses the networking power of the billionaire Zionist class that rules the West to continue to subordinate the United States, a country of more than 300 million people, to this tiny little genocidal settler colony squatting in occupied Palestine.And unfortunately, none of the questioners, not even Thomas Massie, were brave enough to point out the elephant in the living room here, which is that the Epstein blackmail ring was run by Israeli intelligence designed to gather compromising material on powerful Americans and other people worldwide in order to perpetuate the rule of this corrupt criminal genocidal state over the West.Press TV: And what about the other half, I could say? It’s around three million other documents that may never be released. What does that say about the initial claim of transparency, which was one of the campaign mottos and slogans that Donald Trump ran on?That’s right. The deadline for the release of all six million Epstein files was December, late December. And so they released only a tiny fraction before the deadline, and they still have only released about half.You know, the West as a place where there’s supposed to be rule of law has turned into a complete joke. You can be jailed in the West for suggesting that only five million nine hundred ninety nine thousand nine hundred and ninety nine Jews were gassed to death during World War II because you’re one short of the holy, sacred, mythical six million figure. But if the law says you have to release all six million Epstein files, you’re allowed to make it three million instead and hide the other three million.What could possibly be in these other three million? We’ve seen the horrors in the ones that they’ve released, which completely indict the entire Western ruling class in this horrific abuse of young girls, and hint at much, much worse.So I don’t know if we’re ever going to see the unredacted version of what’s left in these three million files that are supposed to be and should have been released a month and a half ago. All of these Justice Department people who haven’t released them need to go to jail. But whatever is in them, it must be beyond belief. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit kevinbarrett.substack.com

Rumble link Bitchute link FFWN linkPresident Donald J. Trump is a cornered political animal. In recent days he has come under attack from several directions. The president has been issuing fumbling non-apologies-just-excuses for tweeting an AI video depicting the Obamas as apes. His aides have denied that he defecated in his pants while signing an executive order. They likewise deny that Slovakian Prime Minister Robert Fico “expressed concerns about Trump’s psychological state” which seemed “dangerous” when they met in Florida January 17.The volley of negative news threatens to accelerate Trump’s dip in popularity following the collapse of his ICE war on the Twin Cities. Potentially even worse news for Trump is the January 30 Epstein files dump. My forthcoming American Free Press article (to get first access to the full article, subscribe) ends:For many Americans, the most disturbing revelations in Epstein files involve President Donald J. Trump. Prior to the files’ release, we already knew that Trump flew on Epstein’s jet at least eight times, was referred to by Epstein as his “best friend,” sent a birthday drawing to Epstein depicting a barely pubescent naked girl alluding to their “secret,” and has been accused of raping 13-year-old “Katie Johnson” in 1994 at an Epstein party and then threatening to kill the girl and her family. The first Epstein dump also contained FBI witness reports that Trump was present when a baby was drowned in Lake Michigan, and was implicated in the rape and murder of a certain Dusty Rhea Duke in 2000.The new Epstein files release includes FBI witness reports that Trump was involved in murdering three girls who were buried at Mar-a-Lago and threatening the witness with a similar fate. Witnesses also told the FBI that Trump auctioned underage girls from his swimsuit contests, measuring their vulvas and rating them for tightness. Trump is also accused of forcing oral sex and other abuses against 13 and 14 year old girls.Meanwhile the mainstream media chant in unison: “President Trump has not been accused of wrongdoing.” Obviously they will change their tune, and suddenly discover the FBI files, if and when Trump stops following Israel’s orders.And Israel wants Trump to attack Iran.That puts Trump between a proverbial rock and a hard place. Attacking Iran would invite disaster: Dead American servicemen, Israel riddled with rocket strikes, US escalation leading to even more dead servicemen and rocket strikes, ad infinitum. Such a war would be a strategic fiasco for the US empire and a political fiasco for Trump.But if Trump refuses to attack Iran, he’ll get Epsteined. The media will magically discover that Trump actually has been accused of serious wrongdoing, and at least some of the accusations (including whatever comes out in the next Epstein dump) are credible.No wonder Trump is sh*tting in his presidential pants.But presidents, unlike the rest of us, have a magical solution that can solve all their problems and then some: They can push the button and watch the planet, and all their troubles, go up in billowing fireballs. For a 79-year-old megalomaniac with both verbal and anal incontinence problems, that “solution” might sound tempting. No wonder Fico is worried. How did we get into this mess? To start with, we let the world’s craziest Jews, the Likudnik neocons, blow up the World Trade Center and blame their enemies. That repeated the mistake made in 1963, another spectacular coup by the same crowd.Letting the unhinged, blatantly narcissistic Kosher Nostra frontman carnival barker Trump anywhere near the Oval Office was almost as monumental a mistake. Hua Bin is right that a “democracy” that produces leaders like Trump (and most of the rest of them) would be better off canceling elections and finding a better way to identify and insert virtuous leaders into office.Hua Bin notes that many columnists at the Unz Review, where we both publish, fell for Trump’s all-too-obvious BS:In the 2024 election, many former Trump critics – both writers and readers on Unz Review – turned into Trump supporters with glowing endorsement of his policy promises and real enthusiasm for the changes they expect him to bring. Compared with Biden and Harris, Trump was not just considered the lesser of the two evils…His campaign promised domestic focus to address immigration issues and wokism. He promised reindustrializing the country and bring jobs back…Trump vowed to end foreign wars and stop military interventions/regime changes…These Unz writers and readers voted for Trump and couldn’t wait to let the world know how Trump was going to be great for the good old USA. They congratulated themselves as smart voters.I have never been a Trump supporter, never voted for him, and have been calling him a sociopathic narcissist and likely Kosher Nostra asset since 2016. Though I admittedly have occasionally found him amusing and even refreshing in his lack of hypocrisy and willingness to say transgressive things, a few of which are actually worth saying—I have no use for the anti-Trump establishment either—I’ve never been anywhere near the MAGA bandwagon, which in a few years will be the equivalent of saying “I was never a gullible idiot.”Repentant Ex-Trump Supporter Jim Fetzer Admits I Was RightBut as Hua Bin writes, many Trump supporters aren’t exactly idiots, IQ-wise. Take Jim Fetzer. Though he has been accused of lapses in judgment, Jim is an accomplished philosophy professor with a mind capable of holding and parsing unusually large bodies of information. Jim’s uninhibited brilliance and his quick-witted volubility and responsiveness as a public speaker made him a good commentator on my False Flag Weekly News show…until Trump came along.In December 2015, I basically fired Jim Fetzer from False Flag Weekly News. He had annoyed me by letting his enthusiasm for then-candidate Donald Trump run haywire on a live broadcast of FFWN. Here is what happened: I was in Paris to crash an academic Islamophobia conference that disinvited me at the last minute due to fears of looking “radical/antisemitic/conspiratorial” in the wake of the 11/13/2015 Bataclan false flag. Then on December 7, Trump proposed a “complete ban on Muslims entering the US.” I assumed that all 9/11 truthers understood that all of the well known “Islamic terror attacks” were false flags designed to incite Islamophobia, and would revile Trump as a tool of the 9/11-perp neocons. But Jim, and many others, surprised me.Jim and I had agreed that if I found good internet access in Paris we would do the show normally, with both of us, whereas if I didn’t, Jim was prepared to go it alone. I found a place to do the show. But when Jim and I met up in cyberspace to broadcast, he tried to persuade me to disconnect and let him deliver an hour-long monologue. Of course I declined, having gone to considerable effort to set up the broadcast. Jim’s insistence on doing the show alone, rather than together as we always did, disconcerted me. Then once we started, I grew even more annoyed when he wouldn’t let me get a word in edgewise. Jim delivered a full-throated pro-Trump rant, including positive remarks about the “Muslim ban.” I cursed him out on the air, and that was the end of Jim’s stint as my regular partner on FFWN. (The producer, the late Allan Rees, encouraged Jim’s departure from the show because Allan was afraid Jim wasn’t careful enough about potentially libelous utterances…which proved prophetic a few years later when Sandy Hooker Lenny Pozner sued Jim and won.)I subsequently apologized to Jim for cursing him out, and we remained friends, despite various differences of opinion, over the years. From 2006 through 2023 we lived in Wisconsin within an hour’s drive of each other, and did innumerable 9/11 events together, including quite a few road trips. Even after the 2015 FFWN fiasco, we would occasionally get together at an event or a meal and always enjoyed each others’ company. (Jim is one of several people I know whose internet presence one could easily find “irritating if not insane” if one disagrees with them, but who turn out to be enjoyable company once one meets them in person.)Since the lawsuit-shy Allan Rees passed away in December 2020, I have been occasionally inviting Jim Fetzer to join me on False Flag Weekly News—most recently for yesterday’s show. Though 85 years old now, Jim is (in my humble opinion) sharper than ever…or at least sharper than he’s been since 2015, because, lo and behold, he’s finally seen through Trump! Watch the new FFWN to hear Jim’s frank and forthright admission that I was right all along about the senile Kosher Nostra narcissist who may or may not blow up the world in hopes of making the Epstein files go away. Bonus: You’ll also hear me admitting that Jim was right about something…watch and find out what that was.Stripe is Substack’s only processor and they debanked me, so you can no longer pay me through Substack. Now I am posting everything on Substack free and asking people to sign up for recurring donations at my Paypal donation page…or better yet, the free speech platform SPdonate. Alternately you can Paypal or Zelle to truthjihad[at]gmail(dot)com. Note that Zelle, unlike other methods, doesn’t charge any fees. 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 linkPress TV: Welcome, everyone. Now, more than three million pages of records by the U.S. Justice Department in a high-profile sex trafficking case has shed light on dozens of powerful figures allegedly connected to convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, exposing links to political leaders, royals, diplomats, and corporate elites across multiple continents and their illegal escapades with underage girls. U.S. President Donald Trump Former President Bill Clinton, Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates, Tesla’s Elon Musk, UK’s Prince Andrew, UK ambassador to the US Peter Mendelsohn, France’s Emmanuel Macron and officials from Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Turkey, Slovakia and all throughout West Asia.But a peculiar number of files lead straight to Tel Aviv. Former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak is shown to have stayed at Epstein’s New York apartment on multiple occasions. It’s this intimate relationship and money transfers involving the two of them driving speculation which will be the focus of the spotlight program.But first, here’s a quick report. This is not only a story of a pedophile, sex trafficker and a predator. This is also a story of blackmail, power and foreign influence. The explosive new FBI memo alleges not only that Jeffrey Epstein worked with Mossad, but U.S. President Donald Trump was even compromised by Israel, with Jared Kushner described as the real brains behind the operation.The claims are fueling a firestorm. The memo links Abstein directly to former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak, a former military intelligence chief who visited Epstein’s home dozens of times. These revelations come as pressure builds from Epstein’s survivors and U.S. critics, including Tucker Carlson, who openly questions if Epstein was running a Mossad blackmail operation:And moreover, it’s extremely obvious to anyone who watches that this guy had direct connections to a foreign government. Now, no one’s allowed to say that that foreign government is Israel because we have been somehow cowed.The memo also references Epstein’s 2008 sweetheart plea deal where prosecutor Alex Acosta was told that Epstein “belonged to intelligence” and to back off. This pattern of protection continues to date in order to keep the truth hidden:Your memo and release yesterday on Jeffrey Epstein, it left some lingering mysteries. One of the biggest ones is whether he ever worked for an American or foreign intelligence agency. The former labor secretary, who was Miami U.S. attorney, Alex Costa, he allegedly said that he did work for an intelligence agency. So could you resolve whether or not he did? And also, could you say why there was a minute missing from the jailhouse tape?Yeah, sure. Trump (irritated): Could I just interrupt for a second? Are you still talking about Jeffrey Epstein? This guy’s been talked about for years. The released FBI document provides official weight to long-circulating theories. It paints a picture of a compromised U.S. political system where a convicted sex trafficker may have acted as a tool for a foreign ally’s influence, raising grave questions about who truly holds power in Washington.He wasn’t one of ours. So he was an American, which leads basically three options, MI6, Saudi, or Mossad.Yep.Which one would you choose?I guess Mossad, given his connection to Ghislaine Maxwell.The Justice Department and FBI have stated no further significant evidence will be released—a move that has only deepened public suspicion and demands for full transparency.For now, the official record contains a shocking allegation. America’s most infamous predator was an asset of the Israeli regime. And now for our guests for the program. Joining us is Kevin Barrett from Geneva. And also Mr. John Bosnitch, journalist, activist, and political analyst, out of Fredericton, Canada.Hello, gentlemen. Pleasure to have you both join us on our spotlight program. Dr. Barrett, we’ll start with you out there in Geneva. Good to have you. I hope you’re safe and doing well. Your thoughts, please, on all the speculation that Epstein was some kind of intel operative that went on on his island has produced too many files and pictures, over million in just this last release, for it to be just one man’s personal archives or chronicles or personal trove.Kevin Barrett: Well, I’ve been among a small number of people that’s been growing over the years that has been calling Jeffrey Epstein an obvious Israeli Mossad blackmailer since around 2008. I’ve been interviewing people like Nick Bryant, author of the wonderful book The Franklin Scandal, which everybody needs to read to understand how horrifically compromised our political class is in the United States. I’ve long been interviewing Nick Bryant and other very brave journalists who have helped break this story ever since that sham trial in which Alex Acosta gave Epstein a sweetheart deal because he was with intelligence.And just as I’ve been screaming from the rooftops since late 2003 about 9/11, it’s been the same kind of situation with the Epstein scandal. But the difference is that he did get arrested and some of the victims were brave enough to insist that some kind of justice be done. And so we’ve been slowly moving towards exposure of these crimes.But the real story that the mainstream media has been ignoring is that it’s been thunderingly obvious that the Epstein sex blackmail ring, pedophile ring, if you will, has been blackmailing powerful Americans and other people around the world for the state of Israel. And you’re not allowed to say that in the mainstream media in the West. Partisans of the state of Israel, who are mostly Jewish-supremacist oligarchs who are fanatically loyal to their fellow Jewish Zionists, control our media. They’ve bought up most of our media, and they’ve ensured that nobody can get near the truth of issues like 9/11—which is also a Mossad job, not an inside job—or the reality of the Epstein Israeli blackmail operation.And now it’s been forced upon the attention of the American public. People like Tucker Carlson, Candace Owens and others with huge audiences are talking about it openly. And I really wonder whether (when?) the American people are going to wake up and turn against their Israeli overlords.Thank you there, Dr. Barrett. John Bosnitch, thanks for your patience, pal, and welcome to the conversation. John, you take his role on Jeffrey Epstein and the Israeli regime connections. There are mentions about other officials from different countries that received money through some kind of transaction with Jeffrey Epstein, but it was Ehud Barak that acted as a liaison to funnel money from Epstein to a number of politicians throughout the planet, which raises a bunch of red flags. Your initial thoughts, please.John Bosnitch: Well, first of all, I support and underline every word of your previous guest. As far as I’ve been able to determine, everything he says has been true. And it has been true not just recently, but for a good many years. So we have a situation in which we’re talking about the Epstein files, which are not the Epstein files. They are the Mossad files. And... This misinterpretation of identities is critical to maintaining the lie. We have a prince, a former prince, known as Andrew Mountbatten Windsor. Well, OK, he was one of the main culprits raping underage girls at the sex honeypot set up by Mossad. But let’s look at Andrew himself, his own identity. Well, his first family name, Mountbatten, is not Mountbatten. It’s Battenberg, a European royal family that changed their name to Mountbatten to make it palatable to the English people who were at war with Germany. His other family name, Windsor, is not, of course, his family name. That is Saxa-Coburg-Gotta, which was changed in World War I.So you have a man who is no longer a prince. We know he’s a rapist. And he has two family names, which have both been changed. But that’s no surprise, because the Maxwell Mossad operation was founded by Ghislaine Maxwell, the daughter of highly decorated, nationally celebrated Mossad super spy, Bob Maxwell. But of course, that was not his name. His name was Jan Binyamin Hoch. And he had no English identity whatsoever.So you have an entire scenario of royals with fake names, bankers with fake names, but the name Jan Benjamin Hoch brings us back to the old German term Hochjuden, or high Jews. And these were the Jewish bankers who financed the bankrupt noblemen and aristocracy of Germany, many of whom have moved to England.So you have a web of corruption and money that goes back not just to the latest operation with Maxwell and Epstein and Mossad, but back for generations.Thank you there, John. Now, Kevin, one email suggests that Russian opposition figure Ilya Ponomatov could replace Vladimir Putin, calling him an uprising organizer. Now, a separate message also stated that Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky was, quote-unquote, seeking help and described him as being run by Israelis. Now, this is all according to Epstein’s notes. My question to you, does a normal person... who is just some eccentric party animal billionaire, speak of coups and puppet presidents, if he is not an operative or involved in some kind of intel apparatus?Kevin Barrett: That’s one of the mind-blowing things about these files. Many of us had thought that Epstein was essentially just a guy that some Israeli intelligence people had spotted as a talented seducer of young females. And so the Mega group, which is a group of Jewish billionaires who are essentially Mossad agents, or sayanam, which means volunteer Mossad agents, here in the United States, discovered Epstein and groomed him. They sheep dipped him. They gave him a job as a high school math teacher. They then pumped a billion dollars into his bank account and called him an investment advisor, but essentially what he mainly did was sexual blackmail for the Mossad.And so we didn’t realize that he was quite this connected. Because as he did his sexual blackmail, his job was to establish personal relationships with the most powerful people that he could find. So he moved in all of these circles,but apparently he was used to broker various Israeli agreements and deals and various kinds of corrupt wheelings and dealings with very high-level people in many countries all over the world.You mentioned Ukraine. Then there was also India. The Israelis have put a lot of effort into trying to corrupt India’s government, and indeed they have. They’ve used Indian intelligence to do false flag operations that benefit both Mossad and the fanatical Islamophobic Hindu faction in India, and Epstein was in the thick of that, and many other sensitive international operations.So it turns out that he was actually even more active of an Israeli spy than most of us had suspected. Yes, his main job was sexual blackmail. But on top of that, because he had all these contacts, he was used for high-level power brokering as well.And so it’s really kind of astounding that this is all being exposed at a moment when the state of Israel is trying to once again hijack the U.S. government to go into the West Asia region and wage a war on behalf of genocidal Zionist expansionism. That’s why they blew up the Trade Center on 9/11—to hijack the American military and go into West Asia and try to take out seven countries in five years. Well, now they’ve taken out six in 25 years, and the (long-delayed) seventh is Iran. Israel is pushing as hard as it can to try to hijack the American military once again and do its dirty work by having a war with Iran, and they’re pressuring Trump. And suddenly all these files are being released. So what the agenda is here isn’t entirely clear, but it’s certainly interesting that this Mega/Mossad operation has been exposed at this particular historical juncture.Interesting stuff there. And John, I’d like to put the same thing to you. Another interesting development in these emails shows Epstein and Emirati businessperson Sultan Ahmed bin Suleiman discussing using former MI6 and Mossad agents to recover Libyan assets frozen after Gaddafi’s downfall. What role does he, as supposedly a civilian, play in that? Another correspondence reveals discussions about projects in Somaliland, including water exports. So, yes, that’s the same Somaliland Israel just recognized the sovereignty of, to the dismay, of both Somali leaders and the global community, for that matter. Again, what does this expose about who the heck Jeffrey Epstein was and basically what his whole get-down was about?John Bosnitch Well, once again, Jeffrey Epstein was an operative of Mossad. And the fact that he is apparently gone—they say he killed himself in his cell, although I’ve recently read reports that he was removed from his cell the day before. The fact of the matter is that these operations take place everywhere. The bankster organization that manipulates governments and makes democracy into a sham are active everywhere in the world that they can find a connection. And unfortunately, many people will do many things for money. We are now coming up to the 2000th anniversary of when Jesus Christ had to walk into the synagogue with a whip to drive the money changers out of the synagogue. It doesn’t seem as if very much has changed since then. And I think that we’re going to see a real confrontation here between the peoples and the nations that do believe in God, that do believe in moral principles, and those who will do anything for money, regardless of the cost to human lives and to reputations and to the political system itself. They have hollowed out and rotted out the entire Western political elite.Nice. And Dr. Barrett, as a U.S. citizen, people that, under the Freedom of Information Act, they have a right to, as a citizen, to know what their government does. The federal agencies—I just googled Freedom of Information Act Summary, it says it is often described as a law that keeps citizens in the know about their government. Federal agencies are required to disclose any information requested by under the FOIA, unless it falls under one of nine exemptions which protect interests such as personal privacy, national security, and law enforcement.This huge redaction we’re seeing of the Epstein files. Obviously they’re going to invoke the parameter under national security. What kind of a tell is that in and of itself?Kevin Barrett: You’re absolutely right. The FOIA (Freedom of Information Act) requests around Epstein have been going on for a long time, and very little has ever been released. Then in November, some very brave American congressmen led by the great Thomas Massie forced the issue and passed the Epstein Files Transparency Act. And that law mandated that by a deadline that, as I recall, was late December, all information that the government held on Epstein had to be released by law. And not releasing it would be a criminal act.And of course, they didn’t comply. They released a small fraction before the deadline. Then they released some more like a few weeks after the deadline. And now here we are a couple of months after the deadline. Well, maybe a month and a half, I guess. And now we’ve got almost half of the files released. And if this is the half that they are going to release, it really makes you wonder what’s in the other half. Because in this half, we have multiple references to murdering children, torturing children, to all just the most obscene horrors you can even imagine.Trump, of course, is implicated in much of this. The famous Katie rape case in which Trump allegedly raped a 13-year-old who was very credible. Her lawyers all believe her. They’re still there. But she ended up being terrorized into taking a nondisclosure agreement. It turns out that large numbers of these victims ended up signing nondisclosure agreements, and the government had no interest in prosecuting these horrific crimes, which, again, go all the way up to murder and all kinds of threats of murder. And so I’m wondering what’s going to happen to the other half of the files and what in the world could possibly be in them.But at this point, I think the American people need to take it on themselves to get justice here. And if the authorities aren’t basically going to just arrest all of these people who have any suspicious connections to Epstein and sort of shake them upside down and see what falls out, then we need to have another French Revolution. Those authorities need…their heads need to roll. And you can decide whether I mean that literally or figuratively.Appreciate that. And I want to put that same question to you, John, because this is one of the exceptional moments that we’re seeing people from both sides of the aisle, Republicans or Democrats, even independents, doesn’t matter what party you’re from. Basically, American voters want to see accountability here. They want to see Trump’s involvement in these files. They want to see what the files stand for. They’re sick of the redactions. They want access. Why?John Bosnitch: Well, because they know there’s more to the story than they’ve been allowed to see. This is a scandal that makes Watergate look like child’s play. This is a scandal that goes not just into the White House, but we have to remember that the current prime minister of my native Canada was the chief bankster of Great Britain at the time that they seized all of the gold of Libya’s Gaddafi. We know that we have current... Mr. Lord Mandelson is now implicated in England. And if they got to Prince Andrew, then there’s no doubt that they were in contact with the rest of the royal family. The royal family itself is in doubt here.And these festering wounds must be investigated. And we also have to find out who it is that made the decision to redact which items from the million-plus documents. Some of those redactions must have been made in the interest of the CIA, Mossad, and the people who perpetrated these crimes. There is no chance that the entire list of all the redacted data is just to protect the female victims. And in fact, some of the female victims have come out and said, I’m prepared to see my name in print if the perpetrators are all exposed at the same time. And that’s what needs to be done. There needs to be an ongoing investigation and we really need to show the world who these people are, how they got power, how they use power to rape and murder around the planet and how we have to get ourselves out from under their control.Thank you, John. It seems like we have about a minute and a half left. I guess we’ll put one last question to Dr. Barrett. And one more interesting fact, and I don’t mean to be redundant, but about Epstein, a former Israeli premier, Ehud Barak. When everyone went running for cover, Barak is mentioned in the newly released Epstein documents corresponding on multiple occasions after Epstein was convicted for sex crimes in Florida, meaning that it was that pressing, Dr. Barrett, that it was worth the exposure to settle one last time. What do we discern from that, from Ehud Barak taking that risk to contact a man that’s already been convicted?Kevin Barrett: Yeah, Barak was a multiple times visitor at Epstein’s mansion in New York, and clearly this was a very, very important relationship. What hasn’t been mentioned in the mainstream media is that Barak was the man who committed the most vicious and sadistic rape of all of the rapes that were at least encountered in the first dump of Epstein files. He was named by Virginia Giuffre as the perpetrator of this absolutely horrific rape.So he’s both a close collaborator of Epstein and Epstein’s work for the Israeli Mossad, and he’s also a vicious, sadistic rapist—which isn’t surprising given that Israel is the rapist nation where they have huge demonstrations for the right to rape, and the people who rape prisoners to death are national heroes.And I’d like to mention one thing the other guest said, that the victims don’t want to be redacted. Well, it’s actually worse than that. In this latest dump, they didn’t redact the names of dozens of victims, or at least they missed dozens of uses. Many, many uses of the victims’ names are there. They were not redacted, but the perpetrators are all redacted.This really makes you wonder who is doing the redacting, what they think they’re doing, and if they think they can get away with this. And if they get away with this, I think that America and the West is well and truly cooked. Because knowing that the most sick and depraved people imaginable rule over you, and then having it shoved in your face and then just rolling over and allowing them to do it and letting their vicious, evil, genocidal Zionist tribe continue to rule the world’s most powerful nation through controlling the vices of their goyim cattle is absolutely unacceptable. If Americans don’t rise up over this and overthrow this evil regime, then I can’t imagine what kind of punishment—divine punishment, I mean—is in store for them.Stripe is Substack’s only processor and they debanked me, so you can no longer pay me through Substack. Now I am posting everything on Substack free and asking people to sign up for recurring donations at my Paypal donation page…or better yet, the free speech platform SPdonate. Alternately you can Paypal or Zelle to truthjihad[at]gmail(dot)com. Note that Zelle, unlike other methods, doesn’t charge any fees. 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 TruthJihad linkFor background on allegations that Trump is being blackmailed by Israel, focusing on the newly-released Epstein files, read “The Epstein Files Show We Are Ruled by Demonic Pedophiles” by Council Estates Media. -KBPress TV: Thousands have taken to the streets of U.S. city of Houston as part of nationwide rallies and protests against President Donald Trump’s anti-immigration crackdown. Gathering outside ICE Detention Center on Friday, Texan protesters held signs and chanted slogans, including No Justice, No Peace. In the city of Los Angeles, thousands of demonstrators gathered at City Hall and marched to a federal detention center. As protests grew into the evening, federal agents used chemical spray to disperse crowds.The demonstrations are part of nationwide strikes where people participate by not going to work, not going to school or shopping. Protests were sparked by the recent killing of Alex Pretti, who was shot dead by Border Patrol officers in Minneapolis. His death follows a January 7th shooting of Renee Good, a mother of three, by an ICE officer, intensifying national outrage over immigration enforcement tactics.And join us for the story out of Marseille, France, Dr. Kevin Barrett. Dr. Barrett, always a pleasure, sir. Good morning to you out there in Marseille. OK, so obviously illegal immigration is an issue that a lot of Americans want to see cleaned up in American cities. Why are they so opposed and coming out in record numbers in so many cities protesting the Trump administration’s handling of removing illegal immigrants from U.S. soil?Kevin Barrett: I think the American people are starting to understand that this isn’t really about the illegal immigrants. Now, not all of them understand that. Many of these protesters think that they’re protecting the illegal immigrants. But some of them do (understand).It’s reached the point now that it’s obvious that these ICE death squads are waging war against whole neighborhoods, against all people that look possibly foreign or have darker skin pigmentation, et cetera. And then they’re also targeting these protesters who come out against them. They’re committing these grotesque abuses, including murder in the cases of Renee Goode and Alex Pretti and others, actually. But those are the two that got captured on video and revealed to the world.So what this is actually doing is turning the American people, especially the middle ground, the independents, the silent majority, against the Trump policy, the ostensible Trump policy, of getting rid of the illegal immigrants. And more and more Americans, including on the right side of the political spectrum, who actually want to crack down on illegal immigration, are scratching their heads and saying, what is this really all about? Sending federal goons in masks without any badges any identification to just attack and abuse people randomly and to grab people off the streets throw them in vans and disappear them, in some cases even murder them, is totally against the American tradition. The Americans have sponsored such activities in other countries, with Latin America being a good example. But it’s shocking to normal Americans to see this (at home). And they’re starting to notice that what this is really about is Trump, or the people around Trump, creating a police state and perhaps preparing to cancel the next round of elections, and perhaps ultimately install Trump as a dictator for life.They’re creating the conditions for a civil war. And most Americans don’t like that. And that’s why we’re seeing so many come out in this general strike.And Dr. Barrett, before we let you go, it seemed like after Rene Good’s killing there in Minneapolis, that Trump kind of loosened the leash on these ICE agents, possibly leading to the death of Alex Preti, or murder, we should say, because everybody’s seen that video. So do you feel he was finally tying that leash, or does he simply not know how to?I think Trump is lashing out blindly in all sorts of ways. And I think part of that is the pressure that’s being applied to him around the Epstein files, which include all sorts of material implicating him in the most horrific crimes imaginable against children and teenagers. And clearly, the state of Israel has blackmailed Trump. Epstein was a blackmailer for the state of Israel.So I think Trump is caught really between the proverbial rock and the hard place. That is, if he tries to pursue more normal and constructive policies, he will be pushed towards fighting the Zionists’ wars. Currently, he’s sending this “big, beautiful armada” to threaten Iran at exactly the moment when these millions of Epstein files are released with hundreds of references to Trump, including some perhaps credible allegations of horrific crimes.So I think Trump is creating distractions: In Venezuela, in Greenland, now sending the “armada” to Iran, and then by waging war on American cities. And part of this is actually due to the pressure being applied to him by his Zionist oligarch owners who realize that destroying both domestic law in America, the Constitution in America, and also international law, is really their only hope of continuing to commit genocide in occupied Palestine.A world that has law will not allow that genocide to continue. And the United States under the rule of law with free speech will ultimately turn against it as well. So they’re using Trump to destroy the rule of law everywhere in hopes that that will save their doomed genocidal Zionist entity. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit kevinbarrett.substack.com

Rumble link Bitchute link False Flag Weekly News linkFalse Flag Weekly News special! Kevin Barrett joins Laurent Guyénot from an undisclosed location in a bunker deep beneath the Alps.When people say “Europe is committing suicide” they’re usually talking about demographics, meaning low fertility and excessive immigration. But Europe is also committing spiritual and geopolitical suicide. The low fertility that’s the main cause of the demographic problem is a symptom of a spiritual malaise in general and hedonistic, individualistic materialism in particular. Did that stem from the collapse of Christianity, as I generally argue? Or was there already something about Christianity that made Western civilization vulnerable to the Jewish-Zionist criminals who have taken over its commanding heights, as Laurent Guyénot thinks?Geopolitically, too, Europe keeps acting against its own interest. It colludes in the coverup of the destruction of its energy supplies via Biden’s bombing of the Nordstream pipeline, then rabidly cheers on the US war on Russia…which was always also a US war on Europe. Now the US wants out, but Europe wants World War III!Europe allows itself to be occupied by an empire that threatens to attack it in order to seize its territory (I’m talking about the US empire and Greenland, of course). It supports the genocide of Gaza and earns the wrath of the Global South...while destroying its own reputation as the home of international legal institutions like the ICC and ICJ. And now, Europe refuses to profit mightily from establishing trade relations with Iran, and instead shoots itself in the foot by becoming a fanatical cheerleader for looming Zio-American war on Iran. In this episode of False Flag Weekly News, recorded in an undisclosed-location bunker deep beneath the Alps, Laurent Guyénot and I marvel at the insanity of the Zionist-oligarch-owned Trump regime…and the European poodles’ pathetically obsequious pandering to that evil empire. 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 TruthJihadRadio linkWho’s irrational, the “conspiracy theorists” or the academicians who are paid to attack them with ad hominems, circular arguments, and other fallacies? I’ve opined on this before. Now let’s find out what a genuine expert—sociologist and expert on conspiracy movements Richard Ellefritz—thinks. He’s an assistant professor of sociology at the University of the Bahamas, and the author of numerous articles on this and related topics.Kevin Barrett: Welcome to Truth Jihad Audiovisual. I’m Kevin Barrett and I’ve been doing this since when Fox News made me too toxic to employ in the academy. So I’ve been pushing back against the dubious portraits of what’s really going on in the world in the mainstream media and academy ever since from outside the academy. But today I’m happy to go back to somebody inside the academy who’s thinking about some of the same things that I think about. That’s Richard Elfritz. He’s a sociologist working at University of the Bahamas who has done participant observation ethnography involving the 9/11 truth movement, which means he hung out with 9/11 truthers and kind of did what they did and observed it just like any other ethnographer would do with a group they were interested in studying. And it’s actually kind of a fascinating topic or confluence of the discipline of ethnography and the 9/11 truth movement. So anyway, I’m really looking forward to this interview. Welcome, Richard Elfritz. How are you doing?Richard Ellefritz: I’m all right. I’m here in sunshiny Bahamas. It’s been cloudy for the last week. You know, apologies to the tourists, but I’ve been working at the University of the Bahamas since fall as a full-time assistant professor of sociology. Prior to that, I worked three years full-time at Oklahoma State University after I earned my PhD there. So they thought I was doing a good enough job. You know, I love what I do teaching sociology, which is, in my opinion, kind of a natural inroad to investigating what are called conspiracy theories. And yeah, that’s that primarily is how I really got interested in studying the 9/11 truth movement, because one of my primary questions is, why are these people called conspiracy theorists?Right. And of course, there are various theories about that, including the infamous CIA memo after the JFK assassination, ordering their media assets to smear people questioning the official story by calling them conspiracy theorists. Is that a conspiracy theory?Well, there’s a there’s a book called The Stigmatization of Conspiracy Theories Since the 1950s: “A Plot to Make us Look Foolish” (by Katharina Thalmann)…the author doesn’t go far enough. Because as I showed in a series of essays published at PropagandaInFocus.com, the CIA did not coin the term conspiracy theory or conspiracy theorist. And the reason that’s important to say is because, as a matter of fact, those terms do appear in some literature and newspapers prior to the release of that CIA memo 1035-960 to their CIA office chiefs overseas.And oftentimes I will hear, and in fact, just last week I was correcting somebody on an essay that they’re publishing: You can’t factually say the CIA coined that term. But what you can say is that the CIA no doubt helped to popularize the term, much like Norman Rockwell and Coca-Cola helped to popularize our modern imagery of Santa Claus.So I think it’s interesting that there’s this academic book out there that claims to have studied the rise of this conspiracy label, as I call it. But then they basically backtrack at a certain point because I think they (Katharina Thalmann) were unwilling, for whatever reason, to just go a little bit deeper. And in my series of essays on the topic, especially in the third installment, I showed that the CIA memo, which anybody can find, very likely led to a regional editorial published by Tom Bethel.Now, Tom Bethel was a very vocal advocate of the Warren Commission that served as the official story of what happened to JFK in November 1963. There are some other blogs and articles I found that drew suspicion that he had direct ties to the CIA. And so he publishes in a regional news outlet in the northwest, I believe, an editorial that then served as the hypothesis for the first psychology publication analyzing conspiracy theories. And so that was in the late 1970s. And they name him, they name his article, they use his postulation, his conjecture in that article as their hypothesis for their theory that big events lead to big explanations. And that logic then was picked up by psychologists in the future to form part of the foundation of the psychologism of conspiracy theories: the claim that the reason that you’re questioning government’s official explanations is because your psychology just can’t handle the fact they say that big events sometimes have small causes, that a kind of a nobody could assassinate a president, that Islamic jihadist terrorists could pull off something as catastrophic as the events of September 11th. “You see, your psychology just can’t handle this.” Never do they explore the empirical evidence. Never do they offer up anomalies like World Trade Center Building Seven. And when they do, for example, in an article called What About Building Seven, they don’t have any time to seriously entertain the peer reviewed publications that analyzed, for example, active thermitic material found in the dust samples of that building. They don’t analyze the physics of the collapse like David Chandler did. So they ignore the strongest empirical claims that are directly made by who they label conspiracy theorists, and rather turn to psychologizing the issue as a way of explaining why it is that some people pose direct questions to the official accounts and narratives.So what I showed in the third installment of the essay series is that the CIA memo laid out the framework that Tom Bethel proposed in his editorial, that his editorial served as the hypothesis for the first psychology study. And that study then led to a blossoming of other studies that do anything but critically interrogate the many anomalies made in the empirical claims by who they label conspiracy theorists.And that’s very much in line with the work of Lance DeHaven-Smith, who wrote Conspiracy Theories in America and drew attention to that CIA memo, among other things. And as far as the psychologizing of the conspiracy theorist goes, it does strike me as kind of counterintuitive, this whole notion that people would really much rather believe that their very powerful insiders had blown up the World Trade Center or killed the president, as opposed to believing the official explanations that these nobodies had gotten lucky. It seems to me that in almost all cases when people are faced with a choice of beliefs, they choose the beliefs that a serve their interests the best and are the most pleasant to hold. Beliefs that don’t serve their interests and are unpleasant and anxiety producing are usually avoided. For that reason, I would think the cognitive bias would always be away from the so-called conspiracy theory, except perhaps for a very small subset of people with some unusual factors in their psyches. But who really wants to believe that the United States is governed by these monsters that would do 9/11 and would be able to get away with it? How can anybody seriously argue that psychological argument? It really floors me.Yeah, and they do. There’s a lot to unpack there in what you said, because I have had a lot to say about all of that. Backtracking through what you’re saying, there are articles published by psychologists that they say show that quote unquote conspiracy theorists want to feel like they’re special, that they have special access to knowledge that the public just doesn’t have. Well, no, that’s not true because most of the 9/11 truthers that I interviewed in Manhattan on September 11 anniversaries are out there in the streets demonstrating with their signs and their placards and their t-shirts and the billboards that they put up. (They’re doing) advocacy of truth to the general public. So if they wanted to feel special in their knowledge why are they sharing it with as many people as they possibly can?Secondly the psychologists say “these ‘conspiracy theorists’ feel more safe and secure knowing that the world is in control by some global network of nefarious elites.” And I’m like, really? Once again, the data I gathered from interviews shows that when when my participants had their conversion experience, let’s say when they woke up due to something like recognition that World Trade Center Building Seven was an indicator that they had been lied to about the events of September 11th, they experienced depression, anxiety, loss of appetite, loss of sleep, disruptions to their personal social relationships,disruptions to their occupation, a sense of panic and dread.So the psychologists are saying “conspiracy theorists feel safe and secure believing that the world is under control when in fact the world is in chaos and global anarchy.” And my data directly contradict that. Most people that I’ve interviewed who woke up to 9/11 told me that they couldn’t sleep for weeks. They were in a dread panic. And I understand that because that’s the same thing that I went through.Now, older members of the 9/11 Truth Movement that I interviewed had already woken up to JFK. A lot of them said that they had already been questioning the Warren Commission report. Some of them said that they they just initially believed the official story of September 11th, because why wouldn’t you? And then others were immediately skeptical, like: “So I had already been questioning things in the past. And so I was immediately skeptical.”For for that vein, what the psychologist will say is that that is the problem of conspiracy theories is that they spread endemically through society causing people to question all of social reality. In some cases that’s very true. Joe Rogan in his comedy special said before the the covid pandemic he fully believed in vaccines. And then after the covid pandemic he he was questioning whether or not we went to the moon. Now that’s Joe Rogan. And certainly there are people who start questioning everything around them. But that’s because…it’s kind of like if a small child finds out that Santa Claus doesn’t exist, they can say, “what else are they lying about? Does the tooth fairy exist? Does the Easter bunny exist? What else have you been lying about?”And, you know, that’s kind of a natural process. If you find out that your spouse has been cheating on you, well, what else have you been doing that I don’t know about? So why wouldn’t we begin to question other aspects of our reality if we find out that information about the events of September 11th were withheld, such as World Trade Center 7? What else about that event were they lying about? And what else about history might have been, let’s say, let’s put it politely, misconstrued?So going back to what you’re saying, there are literally hundreds of peer reviewed publications by psychologists analyzing every dimension and facet of conspiracy beliefs. And I can go through and reinterpret their findings based upon my own findings and interviews. But I also can reinterpret their findings to say that, “well, I think maybe what you’re tapping into is the type of critical thinking and psychological fortitude and resilience that equips certain types of people to entertain the possibility that they’ve been lied to about these big events, and then to work through that to a point where they begin to take it upon themselves to become what Katherine Olstein called ‘citizen sleuths.’” There are a lot of people in the world today who are alert and vigilant. In the American ethos this was spelled out in the Declaration of Independence. This is the logic behind the Bill of Rights and the First Amendment. And JFK pointed this out in his famous “president and the press” speech where he told the press and his audience that they had the tremendous responsibility to alert the citizenry of some of the dark operations or deep politics, as Peter Dale Scott would say, of what was really going on. That it’s the function of the press to be the watchdog, to be the fourth estate, and that we can’t have self-government without that.So why wouldn’t we celebrate citizens taking it upon themselves to investigate and question authority? Well, going back further into what you were talking about, we have social apparatuses that we could call state ideological apparatuses, which comes out of the work of Louis Althusser.And the way that I look at it is, you have mass education, which conditions the human mind over time to accept as normality that there will be an authority who has the answers, there will be an authority who has the questions, and that they are kind of in command of the knowledge structure.And for decades, we had basically three news stations in the United States, ABC, CBS, NBC, Walter Cronkite being the most trusted person. We had The New York Times as the paper of record, which famously published Daniel Ellsberg’s whistleblowing on the Vietnam War. And for a lot of people over time, they trusted the news. And if you don’t trust Walter Cronkite, then you got Tom Brokaw or Dan Rather or something like that: Dan Rather saying on the morning of 9/11 “these buildings” talking about World Trade Center “it looks like a classic demolition, that it came down due to well-placed dynamite.”So for me, you know, the question isn’t about why are people questioning the world around them? It’s why aren’t more people questioning the world around them? And so that’s where we get back to what you were alluding to in terms of psychological biases. And this is a well-known term among the 9/11 truth and other quote-unquote conspiracy communities: cognitive dissonance. There’s a really great paper published by the psychologist Laurie Manuel in a special issue of American Behavioral Scientists that was organized by Lance DeHaven-Smith. And Laurie Manuel’s article, “In Denial of Democracy,” spells out how cognitive dissonance works in terms of DeHaven-Smith’s famous concept, State Crimes Against Democracies, or SCADs. I would encourage everybody to read that article. I think she did a phenomenal job.I believe it was Fran Shure, who’s a psychologist who was featured in Richard Gage and Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth Experts Speak Out documentary, who has also described cognitive dissonance, which is definitely applicable. But I’m a sociologist, not a psychologist. So I tend to have a different view of social behavior than psychologists do. I think cognitive dissonance is an explanatory mechanism of why it is inside our brains that some people are unable to hold contradictory beliefs. And so there’s a psychological partition or compartmentalization that operates. Your primary belief is that most social institutions operate for the benefit of society: Education systems might not be perfect, news systems might not be perfect, but by and large, they’re pretty much doing what they are supposed to do and educating and informing the public.And in fact this logic undergirds anti-conspiracy discourse where the argument will be something like: “And furthermore, the reason that we know JFK or 9/11 or you-name-it is not a conspiracy is because if it were, journalists would cover that story. They would want to blow the lid off it, like Woodward and Bernstein did with the Watergate scandal.”That’s a known conspiracy. And we know that because journalists scrutinized and analyzed that. And, you know, if you dig deep into that, you’ll come to find, I believe it was Woodward, who is a former Navy intelligence officer, never covered those types of stories before. And then lo and behold, he gets this prime story sat in his lap by Deep Throat. And then you go further into that: The Watergate Hotel was allegedly used as a as a honeypot sexploitation blackmail operation, and to distract from that—Epstein before Epstein. Russ Baker’s book Family of Secrets goes into how the Bush family was involved in what appears to have been a coup d’etat against Nixon.Yeah. And you look at Hinckley and you listen to the audio of the shots fired at Reagan and what was allegedly happening with the transfer of power there. But that’s if there were one of these anti conspiracy psychologists analyzing what I just said, they’d say, “See, Elifritz himself is susceptible to these conspiracy theories.”He’s gone native.Yeah. I’ve gone native like Margaret Mead, in Margaret Mead’s classic anthropology. And certainly that’s something I have thought deeply about. But it’s because I think deeply about it… These psychologists and these people who prop up and defend the official stories and narratives have these explanations that kind of fall apart on their face if you actually just look at them a little bit more deeply.In sociology, we have a whole discipline dedicated to the study of social problems and how a lot of times social problems are socially constructed by news agencies. Certainly the work of Peter Phillips, who’s a sociologist at Project Censored, shows that many of the top headline news stories are less important than what gets buried in the back of newspapers or never covered at all.And, it’s known that news agencies were primary agents in disseminating disinformation. For example, the the famous claim that Iraqis were going through Kuwait hospitals and throwing infants out of the incubators. One analyst questioned that and said: “How how many premature infants were born in that hospital? How is it that there are so many of these infants that were in incubators?” But this is like that’s like a part of a classic propaganda campaigns where you dehumanize the enemy: “Those monsters are unlike us civilized human beings and they need to be responded to with force.” And that’s covered really well in a documentary called Toxic Sludge Is Good for You. Because it’s not just governments, it’s corporations engaging in PR campaigns, what they call “strategic communication.”But returning to these counterclaims like: “How we know that they’re not conspiracy or conspiracies is because journalists would have covered them.” Well, that assumes that we have a functioning media system. If you assume that we have a functioning education system, the primary question is, why do why do so many people then have to go off to a two or four year college to further their education? Why can’t these schools get the job done to create self-sufficient human beings in the years that they have the kids?So you can just ask some basic immediate questions about these assumptions that are baked in to the rebuttals and debunking campaigns of these people who make these statements.So sociologically, the way I look at it is that I’m very critical of social institutions like education and media, which are used to propagate the official narratives of significant historical events. And I got that language from Lance DeHaven-Smith in his very good book Conspiracy Theories in America. And I have to say every time I mention his name that he was so kind and gracious to correspond with me while I was working on my doctoral dissertation. He was really generous. And thank God he wrote that book because then I didn’t have to. Necause I had a version of my doctoral dissertation that was basically what he was arguing.So you can stand on the shoulders of giants. That’s right that’s exactly what I did. Him and David Ray Griffin. I gave the third annual David Ray Griffin lecture in December. One of his articles is called “Let’s Get Empirical.” I basically, in my doctoral dissertation, defended a central claim he made at the beginning of that article, which is that the conspiracy label is used to deflect serious empirical claims that contradict official narratives about historically significant events.So there have been many scholars like yourself and several others that have contributed serious investigatory work in various domains and with various methods. But what gets propped up and promoted is the work of the anti-conspiracists, the people whose job, it seems, whether self-selected or top-down engineered, is to explain away all of this.(Read the full transcript by clicking “transcript” above the video image at my Substack.)Stripe is Substack’s only processor and they debanked me, so you can no longer pay me through Substack. Now I am posting everything on Substack free and asking people to sign up for recurring donations at my Paypal donation page…or better yet, the free speech platform SPdonate. Alternately you can Paypal or Zelle to truthjihad[at]gmail(dot)com. Note that Zelle, unlike other methods, doesn’t charge any fees. 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 TruthJihad linkStephen Miller and his B-grade actor Trump aren’t fighting illegal immigration—they’re fighting the Constitution and trying to establish a dictatorship. That makes them traitors who need to be tried, convicted, and executed.Press TVKevin Barrett: Well, really, the strangest thing about these events is the way they’ve been described by the Trump administration–the president himself and some of his administration members and the people in charge, like Greg Bovino, the commander of the ICE war on the Twin Cities, who has just been essentially relieved of his duties and sent home, apparently, after claiming that Alex Purdy was bent on massacring ICE officers.These kinds of statements from him and from the president himself are so obviously gaslighting American citizens, who can see multiple videos from multiple angles, showing that what happened was that the ICE agents attacked Mr. Pretti and threw him on the ground and gassed him, used chemical weapons on him for no reason whatsoever, threw him on the ground, pulled his gun out, disarmed him, and then shot him multiple times, including in the head, shot him dead.Classic death squad style execution. This is what death squads do in Central America. This is what the mafia does to people that it wants to kill. Normally, it’s not what American police officers do. But things have changed, apparently. This administration has encouraged these ICE agents to behave in ways that would have shamed the Gestapo. And by putting out these bizarre gaslighting statements, Trump and his minions have contributed to eroding what popularity he still has. Currently they’re in full-scale retreat, and the people of the Twin Cities are on the offensive with these protests. And it looks like it’s going to be the people who deport ICE rather than the other way around.Press TV: And if it was a one-time incident, but this is the same exact rhetoric, to your point, that was employed with Renee Good, the mother of three fatality, back on January 7th. She was turning to flee the scene, to leave the area, and the Trump administration, Trump himself and multiple others have said that she was turning to ram and run over that agent that shot her point-blank range in the face.Indeed, that’s what’s so crazy about this. Normally, a presidential administration that was doing this would be much more cautious in its defense of the officials involved. But in this case, they’ve gotten way out ahead of the killings when videos clearly show that these officers are just blatantly executing people who pose no threat whatsoever. These officers get angry because they don’t like protesters impeding their operations by filming them, by following them around and blowing whistles. And so they get angry. And then finally, they just go off and kill people. And that, of course, creates even more protests.So if you’re trying to create a civil war in the United States, perhaps Trump’s strategy makes sense. But as a political strategy aimed at winning Republican majorities in the midterm elections, it makes no sense at all. So maybe Trump wants a civil war so he can call off elections and name himself permanent dictator of the United States in the same way that he’s trying to name himself permanent dictator of the world by replacing the United Nations with a private organization with himself as lifetime self-appointed chairman of the board.This would be humorous—the madness of this megalomaniac who’s in charge of the most powerful military in the world—it would be hilarious if it weren’t threatening to basically destroy civilization.Press TV: And it’s funny because people on both sides of the aisle, you very well know, you’ve lived in the States all your life, as I have, almost 40 years. Both sides, the Democrats, Republicans, independents, whatnot, support strong immigration policy to vet people that come into the States and to remove those who overstay. Yet the way that Donald Trump is doing it, that’s what they don’t agree with. It seems that it’s reflecting badly also on him when it comes to the polls.That’s an excellent point. If Trump really wanted to get rid of illegal immigrants, it would be simple. He would just have Congress pass a law imposing severe penalties on anyone who employs or rents to an illegal immigrant. And they would have no more opportunities to live and work in the United States, and they would go home. And it could be done without any violence, without any serious enforcement operations.But instead, what Trump has done is he’s vastly increased the funding for ICE. He’s hired all of these crazy, hyper-ideological idiots who have no policing skills whatsoever. And he’s turned them loose, goading them on to attack the citizenry. And this has actually hurt the popularity of the Republican position on immigration, which is to reduce illegal immigration, which is a very popular policy, as you said—or it was, anyway, until Trump turned it into an excuse to try to create a new American Reich.Great input. Always a pleasure taking with you, Dr. Kevin Barrett. Joining us out of Marseille.Stripe is Substack’s only processor and they debanked me, so you can no longer pay me through Substack. Now I am posting everything on Substack free and asking people to sign up for recurring donations at my Paypal donation page…or better yet, the free speech platform SPdonate. Alternately you can Paypal or Zelle to truthjihad[at]gmail(dot)com. 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 False Flag Weekly News link Imagine: You work in a lunatic asylum. One of the patients insists he has stopped seven wars and demands the Nobel Peace Prize. What do you do?Your dilemma gets worse when you check his file and discover he’s a senile sociopathic narcissist and suspected rapist-murderer. If you try to deal with him rationally by attempting to help him understand that his belief that he deserves the prize is delusory, he will probably fly into a rage and attack everyone in sight. Maybe you should just “give him the prize.” In other words, humor him.But systematically humoring criminally insane people by giving them everything they want is not a sustainable policy. The 3.8 million square mile lunatic asylum known as the USA has been humoring the criminally insane Donald J. Trump for far too long. The result is clear: A once-great nation is reeling on the brink of unprecedented disaster.I woke up this morning to the news that ICE agents in Minneapolis had committed another death-squad-style murder—and the senile, criminally-insane president had once again lied about it, in an effort to encourage more such executions.The good news is that Trump, who cheered on ICE’s brutal execution of mother-of-two Renée Good, now feels bad about her death. The bad news is that the reason the senile narcissist feels bad is that Good’s parents were Trump supporters.And the really bad news is that Trump is once again lying outrageously to cover up a cold-blooded murder, thereby encouraging ICE death squads to believe the madman-in-chief has their backs when they execute people for protesting their thuggery.This time, the demented POTUS’s mendacious attempts to excuse the murder are even more outlandish. When Trump justified the killing of Renée Good, he could later weakly claim he made a mistake based on being shown only the ICE killer’s video, not the other videos that bely the killer’s ludicrous alibi. The excuse that Renée Good was “trying to run over ICE agents” was obviously false, at least if you do your due diligence. But if you only looked at the killer’s phone video, you might not know that. But the murder of Alex Pretti can’t possibly be seen for anything other than what it was: A death squad execution. Pretty was filming the ICE goons and they didn’t like it, so they gang-tackled him, brutalized him, and shot him dead while they were holding him down. It seems that after tackling Pretty, one of the officers noticed the gun in Pretty’s waistband and screamed “he’s got a gun,” which led other officers to panic and murder the man they were holding down. (New York Times video analysis.) Then they lied and claimed that the camera he’d been pointing at them was a gun. And Trump amplified the lie.Is This Really About Immigrants?Trump wants his supporters to believe that he’s sending crazed brownshirt thugs into American cities to assault, kidnap, and murder people in a good faith effort to rid America of illegal immigrants. But nothing could be further from the truth. Trump is waging a personal vendetta against his political opponents. Jeffrey St. Clair notes:Minnesota’s immigrant population ranks 23rd in the US, far behind red states like Texas, Florida, Arizona, Georgia, North Carolina and Utah. But most of Minnesota’s immigrant population is documented. For example, Minnesota has an estimated total immigrant population of 495,352, but only 77,836 are undocumented (16%) Compare that to the undocumented populations of Florida 1 million (20%), Texas 1.8 million (32%), Arizona 250,00 (25%), Georgia 374,000 (32%), North Carolina 325,00 (34%), Utah 100,000 (33%).I sympathize with MAGA-adjacent people like False Flag Weekly News co-host Dr. J. Michael Springmann who like the idea of sending illegals home. But they seem awfully slow to figure out that trying to grab illegals one-by-one, as Trump is allegedly doing, can’t possibly work. There are 10 to 15 million illegals in the US, maybe more if you believe the alarmists. Trump’s goon squads claim to have arrested 3,000, so far, in Minneapolis. But that claim is undoubtedly exaggerated, and may include all of the countless US citizens who have been caught up in the dragnet then released (or, in a few cases, not released). ICE agents are paid a bonus for every arrest they make, even if the individual is released. So they have a strong financial incentive to randomly snatch people off the streets—an outrageous violation of the 4th Amendment. ICE’s banana-republic-style war on the citizenry of Minneapolis and other cities is creating a thunderous backlash that is turning Americans against immigration enforcement. In the long run, it will make it much harder to maintain non-porous borders and send illegals home. If Trump really wanted to rid the US of illegal immigrants, he would direct Congress to pass legislation imposing severe penalties on anyone who employs or rents to illegals. Unable to work, unable to find housing, the illegals would quickly self-evacuate.But Trump’s war on his political enemies has nothing to do with immigration. That’s just the excuse. The truth is, he’s a demented sociopath seeking revenge for perceived slights to his hypersensitive, hyperinflated ego.But is ICE’s war on cities purely Trump’s personal initiative? Or is Trump a mad dog who has been unleashed on Minneapolis and other cities by his owners—whom we can call, for lack of a better term, the Kosher Nostra?The lasting effects of the looming Trump Civil War will very likely include the normalization of extreme repression. We are being habituated to seeing masked federal goons kidnap, murder, and “disappear” people the government doesn’t like. When Trump’s obvious madness finally implodes the current regime, will its Democratic successor decide to go back to obeying the Constitution? Or will it continue to use the expanded toolbox of repression that madman Trump created? Why the Ruling Oligarchy Is Doing ThisThe Kosher Nostra is panicking because people on both the left and right are coming to understand that the US is occupied by genocidal Israel. If Americans retain their Constitutional rights to free speech, free press, and to protest for redress of grievances, get ready for a rebellion against the ruling Jewish-Zionist billionaires. So to retain Kosher Nostra rule, America’s traditional freedoms must be crushed. Jews like Israeli tech billionaire Schlomo Kramer are demanding that America cancel its First Amendment. So we may expect Trump’s successor regime to amp up the “war on antisemitism,” which is a euphemism for a war on people who tell the truth about who rules us and how. It’s no coincidence that pro-genocide supremacist Zionist Stephen Miller, Trump’s Homeland Security Advisor, is egging on Trump’s madness. Miller wants Americans to be treated the same way his genocidal tribe treats Palestinians.Ultimately, Trump’s war on the people of Minneapolis is part of the Jewish-Zionist billionaire oligarchs’ war on the American people. The trained-in-Israel ICE cops are using Israeli-style tactics, including summary executions and outrageous lies. At the end of the day, the Jewligarchs’ contempt for ordinary Americans is no different from their contempt for the Palestinians. The difference is that Palestinians understand who is occupying and destroying them.We need an American intifada. We need an American Resistance. We need Americans to wake up and wage an all-out war of liberation against their supremacist, genocidal occupiers and oppressors.Trump’s “war on everybody” is just the delusional lashing out of a pathetic senile sociopath. The real “war on everybody” is being waged by Trump’s (and the Democrats’) masters. You know who they are because they’re the ones you’re not allowed to talk about.It’s time for everybody to rise up and fight back.Stripe is Substack’s only processor and they debanked me, so you can no longer pay me through Substack. Now I am posting everything on Substack free and asking people to sign up for recurring donations at my Paypal donation page…or better yet, the free speech platform SPdonate. Alternately you can Paypal or Zelle to truthjihad[at]gmail(dot)com. Note that Zelle, unlike other methods, doesn’t charge any fees. 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 linkPress TV: Joining us at the city of Saidia, Morocco is Dr. Kevin Barrett. Dr. Barrett, always a pleasure, sir. Now, this policy of a crackdown on immigration and mass deportations, we saw with the Democrats, we’re seeing with Trump. Why does Trump get so much blowback when what he does it as opposed to that? Is it because of the way he’s deploying in military attire and he’s more in the scene and in the public’s eye?Kevin Barrett: Well, I think Trump actually has gone a couple of steps beyond what his almost equally senile and crazy predecessor was doing in terms of deportations. And the reason is that the blatant illegality of the conduct of these ICE officers, the blatant unconstitutionality, is now fully on display for everyone to see. And that’s led to this backlash.Under previous administrations, although there were plenty of deportations going on, they were following more or less what passes for the rule of law in the United States today, which may not be much, but it’s not absolute and complete chaos and criminal anarchy, which is what we’ve got now. People on X, even though it’s being massively suppressed—you still can’t miss these videos of outrageous violations of people’s Constitutional rights and human rights.Rather than getting a warrant and going after specific people, in calm legal ways, which is what they used to do when they deported people, Trump has sent these barely trained, 50-year-old pot-bellied flunk-outs from the police academy into these neighborhoods to just smash people’s automobile windows, attack them physically, detain them unconstitutionally without any judicial warrant of any kind, based on whim, sometimes having a foreign accent.So it’s an occupation army. It’s an American Gestapo in the streets attacking the American people almost at random. It’s pure political punishment for the city of Minneapolis and other cities which are targeted because they’re Democratic strongholds.And that’s the thing, Doctor, we’re almost out of time. I want to get the second question on to you before we have to wrap it up. Really quick, if you could, please, in about a minute: Why doesn’t he at least deploy them to some Republican-controlled cities as well so he doesn’t look like he’s adding to the polarization of America?Well, that’s a good question. And the answer is that Trump is mentally unwell. He is an extreme sociopathic narcissist who lacks enough reality testing, as the psychologists say, to understand how his actions look to others. As we saw from his crazy letter to the government of Norway recently, where he said, “since you didn’t give me the Nobel Peace Prize, I’m going to wage war on the entire world in revenge.” And he doesn’t even understand that now even his supporters see that he is insane. The man has always been an extreme psychopathic narcissist who found his niche in organized crime, money laundering—that’s all he ever did—controlled by the Kosher Nostra.And now he’s been promoted way beyond his level of competence. His senility is reaching the point that he cannot even pretend to hide his extreme sociopathic narcissism anymore. And everybody now can see it. It’s on full display for the entire world. 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 False Flag Weekly News linkThe people of Iran have spoken. Massive, gargantuan, humongous protests, “the biggest and most beautiful protests the world has ever seen” as Trump would say, have brought countless millions of Iranians into the streets to send the theocrats (and parliamentary representatives) who govern them a message: “We love you! We love the Islamic Republic! We despise the Operation Gladio terrorists Israel and the US keep sending to murder our police officers and vandalize our property.”The patriotic pro-Iran protests were orders of magnitude larger than the comparatively minuscule “please fix the economy” protests infiltrated by the CIA’s Gladio killers and US-taxpayer-financed vandals. The largest “anti-government” protest (which was actually not anti-government at all, just pro-Iranian-economy) brought perhaps 10,000 people AT MOST into streets in downtown Tehran on January 8. Western propaganda media grossly inflated that already-generous number, falsely reported that most protesters were anti-Islamic-Republic rather than pro-economy, and hallucinated various ridiculous numbers of poor, innocent, peaceful demonstrators being killed by police. In reality, CIA-Mossad paid killers were hunting and killing police officers, while rooftop Gladio snipers were shooting at both police and protesters, as during the Maidan Square coup of 2014 and so many similar operations. By the time it was over, more than 100 Iranian police had been murdered, and Western-paid vandals had caused millions of dollars worth of damage, without advancing their regime change agenda one iota.Western Mockingbird media’s ludicrous lies were exposed on January 12, when many millions of Iranians turned out in all of the major cities to mourn the dead police officers and support their government’s response to the US-Israeli terror attacks. Aerial footage of the pro-government demonstrations shows their stunning magnitude. Watch some of it above on False Flag Weekly News.Why did the usually-skeptical Richie Allen get all of this so grotesquely wrong when I debated him almost two weeks ago? Richie knows mainstream Western media echo big lies scripted by their military and intelligence services. But the lies about Iran are so breathtakingly audacious, so over-the-top in their brazen audacity, and so cleverly designed to bypass the defenses of Western liberals and pwogwessives, that they sometimes convince people who are less affected by lesser lies about other issues.I learned firsthand how Western media were lying about protests in Iran when I visited Tehran during the first week of February 2023, in the immediate aftermath of months of Western-orchestrated anti-hijab protests following the death of Mahsa Amini. As with the pro-economy protests of early 2026, the protests themselves were not entirely organic. Mahsa Amini was visibly in perfect health during her court appearance for a traffic-ticket-level hijab infraction, then suddenly collapsed in the courtroom and died for reasons presumably related to her well-documented prior heart condition (though I wouldn’t put it past Israeli intelligence to have covertly killed her as part of a scripted PR stunt designed to trigger the protests). The billions of US taxpayer dollars spent to destabilize Iran then came into play, targeting the small secular pro-Western segment of the Iranian population with “THEY KILLED MAHSA” propaganda. And a relative handful of these secularist types did indeed protest. Those relatively small protests were then used as cover for the usual Operation Gladio killers and vandals to wreak their usual Maidan Square style havoc.-Note: The Iranian government loosened its hijab policy in 2022-2023, and rich secular women in North Tehran who used to prefer “bad hijab” (a tiny bit of cloth not covering more than a couple of hairs) now feel free to go “no-hijab.” In more conservative areas, where the vast majority supports universal hijab, women can still get the equivalent of a traffic ticket by violating the local dress code. (Note: Anthropologists know that what people cover up and what they let hang out varies widely according to culture. So if you think it’s okay for your group to make people cover their genitalia in public, why not allow other groups to decide what their people should cover up and what they can let hang out?! People who want to impose their culture’s dress code on other cultures, rather than allowing each culture to set its own dress code, are arrogant morons. Since Iranians are not arrogant morons, they are not trying to impose Iranian-style hijab on American feminists. Maybe the feminists should extend the same courtesy to Iran.)-I talked to witnesses who had viewed and/or attended the Mahsa pro-Western-feminism protests, including the biggest one in Tehran. They described the size of the crowd, showing the area it occupied in a couple of blocks of downtown Tehran. I forget whether that protest, the very biggest of the Mahsa protests, numbered in the high hundreds or low thousands. In any case, it was minuscule compared to the many millions who regularly turn out to support their government in its defensive battle against the Israeli-occupied USA. Shocked at how tiny the Mahsa protests were compared to the way they were represented in Western media, I dug back through MSM reports and found that they pointedly avoided documenting the size of the crowds, instead featuring relatively close-up photos designed to make us imagine that a protest of a couple of hundred people actually featured millions. You can verify this for yourself by looking at Western media reports of Iranian anti-government protests. You’ll find they never feature sprawling aerial views that could document hugely-attended gatherings. Nor do they feature precise descriptions of how much space is being taken up by a given crowd. Instead, MSM consumers are treated to weaselly imprecise descriptions and absurdly inflated numbers. Witnesses routinely report that protests portrayed by Western media as gigantic actually barely occupied one square block. That’s because THERE ARE NO ANTI-GOVERNMENT PROTESTS IN IRAN BRINGING OUT MILLIONS and never have been, at least not since the ones that brought down the US-backed Shah in 1979. The only documented yuuuuuge “protests” in Iran are the pro-government ones, which, as you can see for yourself, bring out many millions of people—around three million in the case of the recent march in Tehran. I myself participated in a march of three million Iranians in…when was it…2018? It was slightly intimidating to be one of a handful of Americans in the midst of more than three million Iranians, many of whom were brandishing signs reading “Death to America, Death to Israel” and/or chanting those phrases. Naturally people carrying “Death to America” signs would sometimes approach me and ask where I was from. When I sheepishly admitted I was American, their invariable reaction was a big smile and even more sheepish but enthusiastic welcome, followed by assurances that they had nothing against me, they just didn’t like my government’s policies. Naturally I would admit that I didn’t like those policies either. One such group of “Death to America” Iranians initiated a discussion about whether that slogan should be retired, since it was potentially misleading. I replied that if Iranians were smart enough not to blame ordinary Americans for their governments’ evil policies, Americans should be smart enough to understand what “Death to America” really means, and why Iranians would use that slogan.So what is the real story of “Iranian anti-government protests”? In reality, there are all sorts of protests on all sorts of issues going on in Iran all the time, since Iran is a shockingly free society in which every mullah seems to be fearlessly arguing with every other mullah on every possible issue, ditto for the elected politicians, while ordinary citizens show absolutely no fear of publicly criticizing their leaders. (I have had many political conversations with both New York cabbies and Tehran cabbies, and the latter clearly feel free and fearless, while the former often need a lot of coaxing and reassurance before admitting their real political beliefs, presumably due to the pervasive climate of fear installed on 9/11/2001.)So there are always protests of some type going on in Iran. Only a few get amplified by the Western propaganda establishment, like the Mahsa protests in 2022-2023 and the economy protests this month. Both of these Mockingbird-media-amplified waves of protest followed exactly the same script. First, the Western banking establishment mounted an all-out attack on the Iranian rial, creating uncertainty and economic hardship for ordinary Iranians. Then selected small protests were amplified by the CIA-Mossad propaganda network, which spends billions of dollars and has many assets inside of Iran. Once the protests reached a certain size—say several hundred people—chaos was created by Operation Gladio style killers and vandals. The result was grossly exaggerated and distorted in Western mainstream media in an effort to create the false perception that the people of Iran were rising up against their government, in order to provide cover for various regime-change options—just like Maidan Square in 2014. This year, a repeat of June’s decapitation strikes against Iranian leaders was presumably the go-to option. It was probably called off, or at least put back on the shelf, due to the Iranian people’s increasingly sophisticated understanding of what is being done to them, who is doing it, and why.Stripe is Substack’s only processor and they debanked me, so you can no longer pay me through Substack. Now I am posting everything on Substack free and asking people to sign up for recurring donations at my Paypal donation page…or better yet, the free speech platform SPdonate. Alternately you can Paypal or Zelle to truthjihad[at]gmail(dot)com. Note that Zelle, unlike other methods, doesn’t charge any fees. 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