If you like this blog

Don't miss Kevin Barrett's radio shows! And visit TruthJihad.com for more...

Wednesday, October 31, 2012

Holocaust apologist Jonathan Kay: A Bully Among the Truthers

Here is a terrific new review of Jonathan Kay's anti-truth diatribe Among the Truthers.  The author, Yehuda Littman, is a young Orthodox Jewish man who has recently joined the Muslim-Jewish-Christian Alliance for 9/11 Truth. Yehuda is booked for today, Wednesday 10/31/2012, on Truth Jihad Radio. I hope he will return to debate Jonathan Kay - if Kay dares show his face after this!
Jonathan Kay libels me outrageously, getting nearly all his facts wrong, in his book. Please help me find a pro bono libel lawyer! - KB

Holocaust apologist Jonathan Kay: A Bully Among the Truthers

by Yehuda Littman, for the Muslim-Jewish-Christian Alliance for 9/11 Truth

You know what the psychologists say: When a person is being bullied it is a reflection on the person who is doing the bullying.

The same thing could be said about the people who demonize the 9/11 truth movement. Take Jonathan Kay – please!


Tuesday, October 30, 2012

Egypt’s president a 9/11 truther: less America-centrism offers hope for Truth movement

Great article here by Barrie Zwicker! (Read the whole article at TruthJihad.com)  -KB

Egypt’s president a 9/11 truther: less America-centrism offers hope for Truth movement

By Barrie Zwicker, Truth and Shadows

Sunday, October 28, 2012

Al-Qaeda operates on behalf of Israel, West

-Press TV (watch video)

The al-Qaeda mercenaries in Syria operate on behalf of the Israeli regime and the West, aiming to break up the Middle East and spread sectarianism, an analyst tells Press TV.

Al-Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahiri recently called for support for the foreign-backed insurgents in Syria in their fight against the government of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.

Meanwhile, despite a temporary truce that took effect in Syria on Friday, the insurgents launched attacks in several areas, killing dozens of people and injuring tens of others.

Syria has been experiencing unrest since March 2011. Many people, including large numbers of security forces, have been killed in the turmoil.

Damascus blames the West and some of its regional allies, including Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Turkey, for arming and funding the insurgents.

Press TV has conducted an interview with Kevin Barrett, an author and Islamic Studies expert, from Madison, to further discuss the issue.

Barrett is joined by two additional guests: Sheikh Omar Bakri, a Salafist activist from Tripoli; and Omar Nashabi, with Al-Akhbar newspaper, from Beirut. The following is a rough transcription of the interview with Barrett.

Press TV: Why do you think that the Syrian government even agreed, to begin with, to this ceasefire?

Barrett: I think the Syrian government has a lot of tough choices in front of it. In the long run, the Syrian government knows that it’s going to have to reform; but right now, it’s fighting a destabilization campaign which is being led by the US-Zionist axis of evil, as we might term them, with support from Saudi Arabia and, unfortunately, Turkey, which looked like it was going to be an honest player in the Middle East just a year ago.

Of course, a ceasefire is a good idea. It’s Eid al-Adha. Eid Mubarak to everyone. Muslims should not be killing fellow Muslims any time and especially not on Eid al-Adha. Naturally, the idea of a ceasefire is very appealing.

As I understand it, the Syrian government entertained or accepted the idea of a ceasefire, and the first party that rejected it was one of these groups that called themselves an al-Qaeda affiliate.

The idea of an al-Qaeda affiliate which claims to be fighting for Islam, to be destabilizing an Islamic country on behalf of the Zionists and the American empire is kind of laughable.

I think one of the reasons that they won’t honor a ceasefire for Eid is that al-Qaeda is essentially an infiltrated organization that operates on behalf of the empire rather than fighting against it.

If you look at who al-Qaeda has actually killed over the years, they’ve killed almost entirely their fellow Muslims. In these embassy bombings in Africa that they claimed credit for, they killed almost entirely Muslim Africans. In the fighting that they’ve done against the Russian empire, they ended up killing a lot of fellow Muslims there.

They’ve killed very, very few Americans and Israelis.

Al-Qaeda, of course, did not have anything to do with the 9/11 attacks. That was an inside job run by people in the US and Israeli intelligence apparatus.

Al-Qaeda is really a manipulated group that serves to smear Islam. It’s created a negative brand name that only about seven percent of Muslims like, and the other 90 percent-plus don’t like. It’s destabilizing the Middle East on behalf of Zionism and the US empire.

That’s what we’re seeing in Syria today. When it rejects a ceasefire for Eid al-Adha, that just shows us that this group is really not much more of a Muslim group anymore than the people who are pretending to be 9/11 hijackers in Florida were actual Muslims. These were people who were well known to be taking drugs, visiting prostitutes and so on...

(In response to rhetoric by previous guest speaker, Sheikh Omar Bakri) He’s kind of insisting that al-Qaeda is a wonderful Sunni group fighting on behalf of Sunnis; is a perfect example of the sectarian nature of this group.

These people are tasked by the Zionist and the empire with spreading sectarianism in the Muslim world, that is breaking up Muslim countries into different sects and different nationalities.

Of course, al-Qaeda is mainly about sectarianism and it’s part of this crazy takfiri ideology of this tiny minority of extremist Muslims who say that anybody who doesn’t believe exactly what we believe is an evil apostate that could be killed - an evil unbeliever. This is nonsense...

Press TV: Looking at the situation now, the Syrian government said that it was going to abide by the ceasefire. Of course, we know that there have been attacks and now the opposition is claiming that the Syrian government is actually the one that broke the truce.

Your perspective, from a political perspective, do you think that it would be in the interests of the Syrian government, on the one hand, to say that they would stand by a ceasefire and then breaking it themselves? Let’s look at this, from your perspective. I would like to hear your take.

Barrett: As I understand it, the Syrian government did some serious reflection before they accepted the ceasefire proposal. There was some dissidents within the ranks of the Syrian army. There were people who thought that a ceasefire would be in the interests of those fighting against the Syrian government.

But in the end, as I understand it, the Syrian government did accept the ceasefire, and that it was first broken by these people claiming to be al-Qaeda.

One never really knows precisely what’s happening on the ground in these kinds of situations. The first casualty of war is always the truth. The narrative, as I understand it, that makes the most sense is the way I described it.

Again, I think that stabilization in Syria, calming things down, ending the killing, ending the suffering and bloodshed that the other guest referred to is in the interests of the Syrian government and in the interests of the people of the Middle East.

It’s not in the interests of the people in the region to have the situation deteriorate and fall apart into bloodshed and chaos.

I agree that the Syrian government does need to evolve and become more representative of its people. There’s no question about that. The way to make that happen is not through a divisive civil war pitting different Alawites against Sunnis, against Kurds and so on, breaking it up into little pieces.

That’s exactly the... Israeli plan, to destroy the Middle East by breaking it into tiny little pieces along ethnic and sectarian lines. That’s exactly what these al-Qaeda people are working for. If one didn’t know better, one would think al-Qaeda was a brand invented by the Israelis themselves.

In fact, it may have been because Bernard Lewis, the Zionist strategist and Orientalist, has been talking for years before there was al-Qaeda, for decades, actually, about needing to create a group modeled on the Ismaili assassins of the Middle Ages to destabilize the Middle East on behalf of Western intervention.

I think that stability is obviously in the interests of the people in the Middle East and in the Syrian government. So, I think that they did accept the ceasefire. It’s the forces of destabilization that have rejected it and broken it.

Press TV: What is the key to bringing peace to Syria, your perspective?

Barrett: I don’t know if there’s a single key. I think we have to get back to the spirit of Islam. We’re in the Eid al-Adha holiday right now and we need to think about the spirit of unity.

“Tohid”, which is the absolute Unity of God, is reflected in the unity of creation and all of God’s creatures, all Muslims and all people. We shouldn’t be splitting off into different sects, hating people who don’t believe what we believe.

We need to reach out to people from other sects. As Muslims, especially, we need to reach out to other kinds of Muslims who don’t think the way we do, and cross this kind of divide, and end this kind of crazy sectarian conflict that’s being sponsored by the enemies of the Middle East, the enemies of Islam, the people who want to break it up into pieces. We really need to start talking to each other instead of killing each other.

Saturday, October 27, 2012

Mitt Romney Originally Planned to be in NYC on 9/11

Did Bibi "9/11 is very good" Netanyahu warn his old friend Mitt to stay away from Ground Zero on 9/11?

Change of Schedule Saved Mitt Romney From Being Near the World Trade Center on 9/11

-Shoestring 9/11 blog
Mitt Romney, the Republican presidential candidate, was originally going to be at a public event near the World Trade Center on the morning of September 11, 2001, but a late change to his plans meant the event was rescheduled and he was out of harm's way when the 9/11 attacks occurred. Romney is therefore one of a number of prominent individuals known to have avoided danger--and possible death--due to a change to, or a deviation from, their plans for September 11.

Romney was, at that time, the president of the Salt Lake Organizing Committee (SLOC) for the 2002 Winter Olympic Games. He went to Washington, DC, on September 10 to talk to members of Congress about security at the Winter Olympics. [1] The final $12.7 million of federal money needed to cover security for the games had mistakenly been omitted from Congress's budget, and although the Olympics organizers were "confident" the error could be corrected, Romney went to Washington to make sure the money didn't "slip away," according to the Deseret News. [2] As well as meeting with members of Congress on September 10, Romney also met with FBI Director Robert Mueller that day. [3]


Mitt Romney's original plan for the morning of September 11 was to attend what Romney called "an elaborate press conference" in Battery Park, just a few blocks south of the World Trade Center, at which the names of the torchbearers selected to carry the Olympic flame across the United States to Salt Lake City would be announced. Those who would have attended, along with Romney, included other SLOC officials, representatives of the Olympic torch relay sponsors, and a number of torchbearers from the New York area. [4] The event was set to take place at 9:00 a.m., around the time that planes crashed into the Twin Towers. [5]

The original date for the press conference had been set by the SLOC's "public relations people," according to Romney. [6] But a couple of weeks before September 11, the event was rescheduled to take place on September 12 instead of September 11. [7] The reason for this, according to the Philadelphia Inquirer, was that "Romney had extended a series of meetings in Washington with U.S. Congressional leaders." [8] Cindy Gillespie, the vice president of federal relations for the SLOC, had arranged a meeting with House and Senate appropriators at 10:00 a.m. on September 11. Romney has written that on the morning of September 11, therefore, he was with Gillespie in her office in Washington, helping to put the finishing touches on their presentation. [9]

As a result of this late change of plans, Mitt Romney was well away from the WTC at the time of the terrorist attacks there. A spokeswoman later commented that it was "really a blessing" that the date of the SLOC press conference was changed. "We were very fortunate," she said. The Deseret News noted that those set to attend the event in Battery Park "would have been standing near the base of [the] World Trade Center when airplanes slammed into it had SLOC president Mitt Romney's schedule not changed." [10]


Although it was about half a mile from the World Trade Center, Battery Park was still a dangerous place to be when the Twin Towers collapsed, as has been made clear by people who were there at the time. For example, Lisa Stein, the deputy national editor of U.S. News & World Report, was just north of the park when the South Tower came down at 9:59 a.m. on September 11. She described what it was like there, writing: "All hell broke loose. The air filled with thick smoke and ash. Emergency crews screamed at us to leave. There was a new sense of danger and panic. People rushed to get to the tip of Manhattan." Stein continued: "[T]he smoke was moving so fast I could barely breathe or see. I thought we were going to choke to death. Everyone was drenched in soot and smoke. People covered their faces with their shirts or anything they could find to keep from inhaling ash and smoke." [11]

Brian Gregorek was also in Battery Park when the South Tower came down. When the "plume of soot and ashes" from the collapse "worked its way toward Battery Park," he and many others reportedly "huddled on the ground, pulling their shirts over their faces so they could breathe." Gregorek has recalled: "When I peeked out, I couldn't see two feet in front of my face. People were being trampled. I was terrified; all I could think of was, 'How do I get out of here?'" Gregorek added: "I was praying, thinking of my family and friends. I didn't really know how much danger I was in, but I prepared myself for death." [12]

Romney and the other people set to attend the SLOC press conference avoided this terrifying scene because their event was moved back a day, to accommodate Romney's schedule. Furthermore, had the press conference taken place on September 11, as originally planned, it is possible that Romney or others at the event would have headed toward the World Trade Center after the planes hit the Twin Towers, to see what was happening. Had they done so, they could have been in particular danger when the towers collapsed.

In fact, even though the press conference had been rescheduled, one of Romney's colleagues, SLOC spokeswoman Caroline Shaw, was supposed to be in Battery Park at 9:00 a.m. on September 11 to prepare for the following day's event. But, fortunately, she was in the lobby of her hotel when the attacks occurred and came to no harm. [13]


Other prominent individuals, besides Mitt Romney, are known to have avoided the chaos--and the possibility of being killed--when the Twin Towers were attacked and subsequently collapsed on September 11, because of changes to, or deviations from, their original plans.

For example, Jim Pierce, a cousin of then-President George W. Bush, should have been at a business conference on the 105th floor of the South Tower. But on September 10, it was decided that the meeting would take place in a different building, reportedly because the number of people scheduled to attend it "had outgrown the conference room" in the South Tower. [14] And Larry Silverstein, the WTC leaseholder, should have been at work on the 88th floor of the North Tower at the time of the attacks, but, instead, he was at home. Reportedly, this was because his wife had insisted that he go to an appointment with his dermatologist that morning. [15]

Sarah Ferguson, the former wife of Britain's Prince Andrew, should have been on the 101st floor of the North Tower for a meeting at 8:45 a.m. on September 11--a minute before the plane hit the tower. However, according to ABC News, she "was running late" and so she arrived at the door of the tower "seconds after the first plane hit." Her car then "sped off to safety." [16] And pop star Michael Jackson was supposed to be at a meeting at the top of one of the WTC towers that morning, but missed it because, he said, he'd overslept. [17]

It is plausible that some people changed their plans, or deviated from their schedule, and thereby avoided being at, or near, the World Trade Center when the 9/11 attacks occurred simply as a result of luck. However, investigators should determine whether any of these cases of apparent good fortune were due to something more sinister.

Could some people have changed their plans, or made sure they were running late, because they were advised to do so by individuals who had foreknowledge of the 9/11 attacks and therefore knew it would be dangerous to be in the vicinity of the WTC on the morning of September 11? If anyone did indeed know in advance what was going to happen, this would imply that the terrorist attacks could, and should, have been prevented.


1] Mitt Romney, "Mitt Romney Delivers Remarks to the National Guard Association Conference." Romney for President, September 11, 2012.
[2] Derek Jensen, "SLOC Aims to Cinch Fed $$$." Deseret News, September 10, 2001.
[3] John Meyer, "SLOC Chief Expects Changes: Security Will be 'Re-evaluated.'" Denver Post, September 12, 2001.
[4] Jo-Ann Barnas, "Olympic Flame Sputters in Wake of Attack." Detroit Free Press, September 11, 2001; Dennis Romboy, "Delay Keeps SLOC From Harm." Deseret News, September 12, 2001; Lisa Riley Roche, "Training of Games Volunteers to Go on as Scheduled." Deseret News, September 13, 2001; Mitt Romney, Turnaround: Crisis, Leadership, and the Olympic Games. Washington, DC: Regnery Publishing, 2004, p. 301.
[5] Bob Ford, "Security Needs Intensify for Salt Lake Winter Games." Philadelphia Inquirer, September 16, 2001.
[6] Mitt Romney, Turnaround, p. 301.
[7] Dennis Romboy, "Delay Keeps SLOC From Harm."
[8] Bob Ford, "Security Needs Intensify for Salt Lake Winter Games."
[9] Mitt Romney, Turnaround, pp. 301-302.
[10] Dennis Romboy, "Delay Keeps SLOC From Harm."
[11] Lisa Stein, "On 9/11, a Smoky Sprint to Safety and 'Flesh in the Street.'" U.S. News & World Report, September 14, 2001.
[12] Ted Meixell, "Former Lafayette Football Player Reprioritizes After New York Attack." Allentown Morning Call, September 19, 2001.
[13] Dennis Romboy and Lisa Riley Roche, "SLOC Cancels NY Torch Event." Deseret News, September 11, 2001; Lisa Riley Roche, "Training of Games Volunteers to Go on as Scheduled."
[14] "President's Cousin Escaped Death Thanks to Schedule Change." Ananova, September 18, 2001; Barbara Bush, Reflections: Life After the White House. New York: Scribner, 2003, p. 388.
[15] Tom McGeveran, "Mike Sees City Taking Control at Ground Zero." New York Observer, March 17, 2003; Robert Kolker, "Who Wants to Move to Ground Zero?" New York, May 21, 2005. See also "The WTC Leaseholder and His Associates That Cheated Death on 9/11: Was it Coincidence or Did Someone Have Foreknowledge of the Attacks?" Shoestring 9/11, May 28, 2010.
[16] "Fergie Just Missed WTC Attack." ABC News, September 16, 2001; "Andrew's Fear for Fergie on 9/11." Metro, September 11, 2006.
[17] Jermaine Jackson, You Are Not Alone: Michael, Through a Brother's Eyes. New York: Touchstone, 2011, p. 355; "Michael Jackson Saved by 9/11 Lie-in." The Sun, September 16, 2011.

Thursday, October 25, 2012

My friend Ed's sleazeball brother, Tommy Thompson, a 9/11 perp?

Tommy Thompson needs to be hauled into court and questioned about 9/11. His late brother Ed supported 9/11 truth, and recognized that Tommy is a sleazeball.
For the record: I don't think my late friend Ed's sleazeball brother, Tommy Thompson, was a conscious participant in the treasonous 9/11-anthrax false flag attack.

Tommy is running for Senate here in Wisconsin. He's in a neck-and-neck race with Tammy Baldwin, and is drawing flak for running a deceptive ad trying to make Baldwin look unpatriotic on 9/11.

Tommy may be a sleazeball, as Ed admitted to me many times, but he isn't a complete scumbag. (At least I hope not.) Since I haven't seen convincing evidence against Tommy, I think his name should be removed from this list of suspected 9/11 perpetrators.

But even if he wasn't a conscious participant in the worst crime in American history, Tommy was in the middle of those who were. And he made big money from the huge false-flag perpetrated by those surrounding him.

As Bush-Cheney's HHS Secretary, Tommy Thompson hired Jerome Hauer, a key perpetrator of the 9/11-anthrax attack, as Director of the Office of Public Health Preparedness. (Listen to Hauer's very revealing conversation with Sander Hicks - a textbook case of what cops call "guilty demeanor.")

Tommy needs to be hauled into court and asked who told him to hire Hauer.

And since he was right there in the middle of the gang that pulled off the worst crime in US history, he should stop trying to flog Baldwin on 9/11. Some day it will come back to bite him.
Tommy Thompson, who hired key 9/11 perp Jerome Hauer, then profited mightily from the crime, is running deceptive ads trying to make Senate opponent Tammy Baldwin look "unpatriotic" on 9/11.

Monday, October 22, 2012

Exclusive! Larry Silverstein explains why United Airlines should be held liable for 9/11

Larry Silverstein - the reputed organized crime kingpin who gallantly relieved New York City of its asbestos-riddled, money-hemorrhaging World Trade Center - has been collecting billions in insurance money. His current lawsuit targets United Airlines:

World Trade Center Property Owner Claims United Airlines is Liable for 9/11 Terrorist Attacks 

According to the above Travelers Today news report, Silverstein "feels that both airlines should be held liable for the loss of property and business."

Silverstein "feels"? The reptile-faced capo actually has feelings?! In order to get to the bottom of the mystery of what exactly could be going on in the mind of Larry Silverstein, repeat winner of the All-Time Award for Chutzpah, I sat down for an exclusive interview with "Mr. Pull-It." The interview was conducted at Silverstein's new luxury condo, beautifully situated overlooking the blazing beach of the Ocean of Everlasting Fire in the Seventh Circle of Hell, where Silverstein plans to retire and spend the rest of eternity after his execution.

So Larry, you certainly have a lovely view here.

Yes, the big boss downstairs had it built specially for me. After I retire as a mass murderer, crimes against humanity specialist, and insurance fraudster, I look forward to a nice, long, eternal retirement, sizzling on the blazing beach, swimming in the boiling ocean of fire, and being endlessly ripped apart by the sharks of everlasting justice.

Cool. So tell me, why do you "feel the airlines should be held liable" for destroying those asbestos-riddled buildings you demolished on 9/11?

It beats blaming Greyhound or Amtrak, doesn't it?

Not really. The videos purporting to show passenger airliners hitting the Towers are a joke. They show "Flight 175" going almost 600 miles per hour! A Boeing airliner near sea level couldn't possibly go that fast, much less fly accurately. It's just as absurd to say that those videos show a 757 piloted by hijackers as to say they show a Greyhound bus or an Amtrak train.

So what does that say about the airlines?

That they're innocent, because there were no hijackings on 9/11?

Wrong. It shows that they are guilty…of criminal stupidity! Any moron with two functioning synapses and eyes can see that my terminally-asbestos-infected skyscrapers were blown up, not knocked down by planes. And yet the airlines pretend to agree with me that their two planes knocked down my three buildings. That level of idiocy and cowardice is off-the-charts. Paying me billions of dollars is a very small penalty, compared to what they deserve.

I see your point.  But the news story says you "believe that because of a poor security system, hijackers Mohammed Atta and Abdul Aziz al Omari were easily able to board the plane that was used in the attack." You've already admitted explosives, not planes, destroyed the World Trade Center. So what makes you believe that Atta boarded a 767 in Boston? How did he call his father from Canada on September 12th? Why did ten of the alleged nineteen hijackers turn up alive after 9/11, as confirmed by scholarly research published by Europe's leading academic press? Why are there no actual, numbered, correctly-dated security videos showing any Arab hijackers boarding any of the alleged attack planes? Why have we heard no testimony from any airline employee who would have ticketed and boarded them? Why have the actual ticket stubs, required by law to be saved, never been produced? Why are there no Arab names on any of the absurdly-short, mutually-contradictory unofficial passenger lists? Why was there never an official passenger list for any of the four planes? Why have all the non-Arab passengers allegedly been identified by DNA evidence, yet the US government has refused requests by the alleged hijackers' relatives to do similar tests to identify the alleged hijackers? Why are so many of the names on those passenger lists people who work in highly-classified military research, including developing remote-hijacking devices?  Why were two of the planes not even scheduled to fly on 9/11, while the other two were flying around long after they'd crashed, and only de-registered by the FAA many years later?

That's why the news story says I BELIEVE the official nonsense. "Belief" does not have to entail supporting evidence. People believe all sorts of crazy things in the absence of evidence. One of the greatest Christian theologians even said: "I believe because it is absurd." Why shouldn't I affirm my belief in something absurd, just like everybody else only more so?

The Travelers Today news story says: "Atta and al Omari boarded the American Airlines flight that was headed to Boston at Portland International Jetport. The plane never made it to Boston and was used as a weapon to take down the World Trade Center." In other words, it says a small commuter plane hit the North Tower. Yet the actual official story claims that Atta took a small commuter plane from Portland to Boston, changed planes in Boston, and flew Flight 11, a 767 not a commuter plane, into the World Trade Center. Did Travelers Today screw up, or has 9/11 scriptwriter Philip Zelikow made yet another change in the official story?

You'll have to ask Zelikow. I'm just a producer. He's the scriptwriter.  And don't get me started about Zelikow. Zelikow never tells me anything. He never told me the cover story for Building 7. So I had to ad lib about "how there's been such a terrible loss of life, maybe the best thing to do is pull it." That one didn't go over too well. But it's Zelikow's fault - he's the scriptwriter, and he didn't give me my lines in time.

Well, something obviously went wrong with WTC-7; blowing it up in full view of the world at 5:20 in the afternoon was not part of the script. You should have been able to ad lib a better excuse than "we decided to demolish it to save lives," especially since nobody had been inside WTC-7 since around 11 a.m.

Listen, smarty-pants, if you think you can do better at illegal demolition, mass murder, and multi-billion-dollar insurance fraud, you just go right ahead! Historically unprecedented crimes against humanity are not as easy as some people seem to think. You kibbitzers have all the answers: "Larry's an idiot, he confessed to demolishing 7 on national TV." Well, what would YOU have said? We have to blow up a goddamned 47-story building in plain sight, the most obvious, perfectly symmetrical, free-fall-speed controlled demolition in history, crimp at the top, countdown goes out over police radio, the works…what am I supposed to say, that it just fell down because of a couple of tiny office fires? It just committed suicide for no reason? How the hell am I supposed to know that they're going to choose such a ridiculous alibi? "It just fell down from tiny office fires." What a goddamned joke! That's only about a million times stupider than saying Elvis blew it up from outer space. Zelikow thinks he's such a genius, but he's the biggest goddamned idiot I ever met in my life. He couldn't cover up a fucking teacup with a tablecloth.

The article says: "Silverstein has already received damages from his insurer,  but he is looking for more. The hearing of his case was on Thursday and focused on  the destruction of 7 World Trade Center which also collapsed after the attacks, according to Reuters." How can you be asking for billions of dollars in insurance money from the airlines for the destruction of Building 7, when not only was Building 7 never hit by a plane, but you've actually confessed on national television to blowing it up yourself?

I told you earlier: Since the airlines are going along with the "blame the planes" ruse, they are guilty of terminal stupidity, cowardice, and complicity in crimes against humanity. Every executive from those airlines, and every one of those lawyers, deserves to be right up there on the scaffold next to me. When my close mafia associate Judge Hellerstein orders them to pay me billions of dollars, they'll be getting off lightly.

Maybe so, but you'll be getting off a lot more lightly. At least for awhile.

Well, they didn't name the chutzpah award after me for nothing. Listen, I have to get going - I used my first round of WTC insurance money to buy the Sears Tower, and we're setting up some "eye-rainian" mini-nukes there, if you catch my drift.

Okay, thank you, Larry Silverstein. Here on Truth Jihad Radio we do appreciate people telling the truth boldly and frankly, like you did when you confessed to demolishing Building 7. I'm glad you're still speaking as boldly and frankly as ever.

Happy to have gotten away with it.

That was Larry Silverstein, all-time Chutzpah Award winner, self-confessed demolisher of World Trade Center Building 7, insurance fraud criminal, and conspirator in crimes against humanity, "telling it like it is" right here on Truth Jihad Radio.

Election fraud storm-clouds loom over Presidential race


by Kevin Barrett, for Press TV

Will Mitt Romney try to steal the US presidential election?

And if he does, will Americans – especially African-Americans – take to the streets?

These are the two key questions of the 2012 election season. Yet the mainstream media, owned by the same interests behind the “black-box” voting machines that manufacture election outcomes, won't touch the issue. 

Despite the thunderous silence of the media, all signs are pointing towards another neocon-Republican election theft attempt, like the successful ones of 2000 and 2004.

One warning sign: The appearance of blatantly fraudulent public opinion polls giving Romney a substantial lead over Obama. While all other polls show that Obama has enough of an edge in the swing states to constitute an electoral-college “firewall,” Gallup's national polls – using a “likely voter” model that apparently posits an inverse correlation between voting and skin pigmentation – currently give Romney an edge of more than five points in the popular vote. 

Why would the Republicans falsify a prominent national poll? To give Romney “momentum,” and create the illusion of plausibility when rigged voting machines hand him a “surprise victory.” 

But why just one poll? 

Because it's doable. Rigging ALL the polls is a herculean task, even for a party backed by the world's biggest crime syndicate.

Is there any evidence that Romney will try to steal the swing states he needs to capture the White House? Unfortunately, yes.

Believe it or not, Romney actually OWNS the black-box voting machines that will fabricate – not count – the votes in Ohio, the most important swing state. (“Black box” machines are designed with no transparent link between the votes that go in, and the “results” that come out.)

As my recent radio guest Bob Fitrakis and two co-authors explain in their article Does the Romney Family Now Own Your e-Vote:

Will you cast your vote this fall on a faulty electronic machine that's partly owned by the Romney Family? Will that machine decide whether Romney will then inherit the White House?
Through a closely held equity fund called Solamere, Mitt Romney and his wife, son and brother are major investors in an investment firm called H.I.G. Capital. H.I.G. in turn holds a majority share and three out of five board members in Hart Intercivic, a company that owns the notoriously faulty electronic voting machines that will count the ballots in swing state Ohio November 7. Hart machines will also be used elsewhere in the United States ( Hart Intercivic).

In other words, a candidate for the presidency of the United States, and his brother, wife and son, have a straight-line financial interest in the voting machines that could decide this fall's election. These machines cannot be monitored by the public. But they will help decide who "owns" the White House. 

They are especially crucial in Ohio, without which no Republican candidate has ever won the White House. In 2004, in the dead of election night, an electronic swing of more than 300,000 votes switched Ohio from the John Kerry column to George W. Bush, giving him a second term. A virtual statistical impossibility, the 6-plus% shift occurred between 12:20 and 2am election night as votes were being tallied by a GOP-controlled information technology firm on servers in a basement in Chattanooga, Tennessee... (Read the complete article here.)

And it gets worse. Karl Rove and the Republican election fraud machine not only stole the 2004 elections, they murdered the computer expert who orchestrated the theft, Mike Connell, shortly before he was scheduled to testify in court against Rove.

Since the appearance of black box voting machines, a massive five-point gap has opened up between actual vote counts, as documented by exit polls, and the “official results” manufactured by the machines. In every single case, the five-point edge favors the Republicans. 

This should not be surprising, since the voting machines (like the votes they fabricate) are manufactured by Republicans.

Last summer, here in Wisconsin, the exit polls showed that Republican Governor Scott Walker did not win his recall election. But the black-box machines gave him the obligatory five-point Republican edge. 

Since the discrepancies between exit polls and black-box-machine-manufactured results are so obvious, the powers-that-be have decided to get rid of exit polling in 19 states - a decision that virtually guarantees a fraudulent 2012 election. As the Washington Post suggests, "The Fix" is in.

Former President Jimmy Carter says that American elections, unlike elections in banana republics, are so hopelessly corrupt that they are not even worth monitoring. Carter should know; he was overthrown in an “October Surprise” coup d'état by the Bush Crime Family in 1980, as revealed by former Bush Administration official Barbara Honegger.

Since the Republicans blatantly and shamelessly stole the presidential elections in 2000 and 2004, why did they refrain from stealing the 2008 elections? Perhaps Obama's margin of victory was simply too wide for a “surprise McCain win” to be even remotely plausible. And perhaps they actually didn't mind allowing Obama, a timid, compromising Democrat, to put anti-Bush-war Americans back to sleep for a few years.

Republicans are blanketing African-American neighborhoods with these billboards to try to terrorize people into not voting.
There is one more factor that may have prevented an election theft in 2008, and might complicate one in 2012: The fear that Obama supporters in general, and black people in particular, might engage in widespread, unruly protests that would draw unwanted attention to the Republican election fraud machine. 

As my Truth Jihad Radio guest John Hankey put it, African-Americans, unlike white liberals, are not “a bunch of pussies.” Kill white liberal heroes JFK and RFK, or steal the presidency from white liberals Jimmy Carter, Al Gore, or John Kerry, and the white liberals are too terrified to even whimper. Kill a black hero like Martin Luther King, or even just beat up an ordinary black guy like Rodney King, and African Americans might just get angry enough to protest in a fashion that cannot be ignored.

If Romney steals the election, and African-Americans pour into the streets, they will be joined, at least in some areas, by angry whites, hispanics, and others.

After Rodney King was brutally beaten on-camera by police, I participated in the huge protests that shut down San Francisco's Financial District. And I wasn't the only white guy out there. All kinds of people – white, black, latino, male, female – took to the streets to make the owners of the Financial District take a multi-million-dollar hit, driving home the message that we weren't going to stand for this kind of racist outrage.

If the Republicans steal another presidential election, this time from the first African-American president, and award it to a career criminal responsible for flooding America's black neighborhoods with crack cocaine – an empty-suit android who perfectly embodies every negative stereotype about rich white guys, and then some – America might experience a wave of protests that would make the aftermaths of the Martin Luther King assassination, and the Rodney King beating, look like a picnic in the park.

Thursday, October 18, 2012

FBI says "Want to blow up the Fed?" Hey, don't give us any ideas!

Some day the FBI is going to try to entrap the wrong guy.

Re: FBI agent poses as al-Qaeda facilitator, supplies man with 1,000-pound fake bomb, then indicts him 

If an FBI agent approached me and said "here's a 1,000 pound bomb, want to blow up the Federal Reserve?" I would say "no thank you."

And then add: "It will take at least a 10,000 pound bomb to get the job done, so come back when you're serious."

But seriously, folks...I'm sure that by now there are at least fifty million Americans who would blow up the Fed if you gave them half a chance. Maybe closer to a hundred million.

Polls show that about 100 million Americans know 9/11 was an inside job. And "Fed Truth" is even more popular than 9/11 truth. Everywhere Ron Paul goes, huge crowds gather and chant "END THE FED! END THE FED!"

In another year or two, even bigger crowds will be chanting, "Blow up the Fed!"

And yet, few days ago, a Muslim kid from Bangladesh was arrested because he went along with an FBI plot to blow up the Fed.

If people keep waking up to the truth at the current rate, five years down the line, if some Muslim immigrant actually succeeds in blowing up the Fed, he'll be elected Caliph of the USA by unanimous acclamation, given a chestful of medals, and be welcomed at ticker-tape parades across the land as a conquering hero. The FBI agents who helped him will get big promotions and bonuses...paid in real money, not Fed funny-money.

Every day, more and more Americans HATE the Federal Reserve. More and more folks are learning that about 42 cents of every dollar we spend is stolen as "interest" by the banksters. And they are using the hundreds of trillions they're pilfering to drag America into wars for Israel, buy up all the media, and build a New World Order dictatorship.

Memo to the FBI: Better stop running around asking people to help you  blow up the Fed. Pretty soon, you won't find anybody who'll turn you down.

Like 100 million Americans, he wanted to help the FBI blow up the Fed.

Wednesday, October 17, 2012

Mind-controllers chant "anti-Semite!"

When you point out simple, obvious, yet taboo political facts, you're going to get smeared.

Here is my latest Press TV interview:

Because I'm willing to speak such simple, obvious truths, and because Press TV occasionally invites guests who say such things, both Press TV and I are under fire.

Press TV has been taken off the air by the European Fascist Union (protest here) and I have been smeared for the second time by the Defamation League. Why? For the crime of letting an occasional word of truth escape the containment bubble and float into the public sphere.

Taking the bizarre witch-hunt against Greta Berlin of the Free Gaza Movement as my example, I just penned a meditation on how the whole smear-the-truth process works:

Mind-controllers chant "anti-Semite" to prevent thoughtcrime

By Kevin Barrett, for Press TV

I met a nice working-class Jewish guy while covering the Economic Democracy Conference in Madison, WI this weekend. When he figured out that I was Kevin Barrett, the "notorious 9/11 truth professor," he turned visibly pale. "Are you really a…a holocaust denier?" he asked, his voice trembling...  (Read the article)

Tuesday, October 16, 2012

Talking "peace economics" with Dr. Peace, a.k.a. Bob Reuschlein

Tuesday, October 17th, 11 a.m. to noon Central (9-10 Pacific) on NoLiesRadio.org (archived here a few hours after broadcast).

Guest: Dr. Bob Reuschlein of RealEconomy.com goes by the moniker "Dr. Peace." Dr. Bob was a presenter at the recent Economic Democracy Conference in Madison, Wisconsin.  He's an expert on the many ways that excessive military spending kills economies, debases whole societies, and brings down empires.

His research indicates that of all the ways the government can spend money, military spending is by far the most economically destructive.

My take: A handful of special interests are getting rich on gargantuan military spending - namely:

*  the arms manufacturers

* the Israel lobby

* the drug lords using the US military to ensure their market dominance in Afghanistan & Columbia

*and perhaps most importantly, the bankers who use war to drive nations into debt, then collect the exponentially-accumulating compound interest, and end up owning EVERYTHING.

These parasites are killing the host - the real economy. Today, ten years after the 9/11 coup d'état doubled military spending, concealed the Pentagon's missing 2.3 trillion dollars, and cemented power in the hands of neocon pro-Israel extremists, the real economy is on its last legs.

It's either us or them.

Time to get on with it.

Monday, October 15, 2012

Israel Tries to Assassinate Top US General, Then Invites Him for Tea

by Kevin Barrett

The Israeli government, like its New York special agent Larry Silverstein, has never been criticized for lacking chutzpah.
But Netanyahu and company may be setting a new record for diplomatic chutzpah by inviting America’s top military commander over for tea -  two months after they tried to assassinate him!

(read full article: http://www.veteranstoday.com/2012/10/15/israel-tries-to-assassinate-top-us-general-then-invites-him-for-tea/ )

Is a massive, seismic fault opening between US and Israeli interests?

Saturday, October 13, 2012

Bill "Kill 'em All" Maher: Smirky Avatar of West's DeathCult

Bill Maher hates people and wants to kill them.

The islamophobia industry says "Islam is a culture of death." They point to the fierce warriors of Palestine, Iraq, Afghanistan - wherever an Islamic country has been invaded - who say: "We love death as much as you love life."

The islamophobes are missing the point. What the fierce Islamic warriors are really saying is: "We're not afraid to die, because our cause is just." They're saying: "You Western Zionist-slave chickenshit pussies blow up our women and children from hundreds of miles away with drones and bombs and missiles because you're afraid to risk your pampered fat-ass lives in a fair fight." And: "Maybe that's because you know you're a bunch of war criminal scumbags, murdering innocent people in a country halfway around the world in an unjust war." And: "You feel so guilty about what you're doing, you're afraid to meet your Maker. Well, guess what? WE aren't. BOOM!!!"

Obviously they're right.

America, with its long-distance killing machine, has become the most cowardly war-criminal nation ever to disgrace the face of the earth.

And it's the West, not Islam, that is enmeshed in a sick, twisted, kinky love affair with death.

The latest example: Comedian Bill Maher, he of the perpetual smirk, has apparently signed a contract (in blood) with his new agent, the Grim Reaper. Maher says he wants to see more and more abortions, suicides, and executions. He wants hangings, gassings, shootings, electrocutions. Maybe even dismemberments, disembowelments, defenestrations, beheadings, and crucifixions. Why? Because "the planet is too crowded and we need to promote death."

Here is Bill Maher's proposal for a new planetary national anthem, to be officially adopted by the United Nations.

 I have been calling for the execution of Bill Maher for years, only half tongue-in-cheek, since Maher regularly commits a capital war crime: Incitement to genocide.

Now that Maher has come out for killing off "the right people," maybe I could help him with an assisted suicide? I'll bet it would be Maher's highest-rated show ever. And draw the biggest round of applause. Telegrams of congratulations would come pouring into his coffin from all over the world.

Maher is "the right people" to kill in more ways than one. It isn't just that he cranks out propaganda for the 9/11-triggered anti-Islam genocide, and actively covers up the monstrous crime of 9/11 itself. It isn't just that he's a half-Jewish 100%-rabid-Zionist charged with brainwashing Americans into supporting the Palestinian genocide. It isn't just that he's a half-bright, half-talented nitwit whose ego far outstrips his IQ. It isn't just that he can't seem to wipe that filthy smirk off his ass, I mean his face.

The real issue here is that Maher is using far more than his share of the planet's limited resources. Even average middle-class Americans are already killing the planet with their bloated energy consumption and obscenely lavish lifestyles (while the people in Iraq, Afghanistan and Palestine that Maher wants to kill are using a tiny fraction of that).

 But Maher ain't no average American. He's a super-rich fat cat, one of the 1%, maybe even the 1% of the 1%. His smirking pretense at defending the middle class is a sham, since he's living the multi-millionaire Hollywood lifestyle while taking huge tax subsidies from poor people.

Words like "hypocrite" don't even begin to describe people like Bill Maher. How did America ever get to a place where not-very-funny creeps like Maher (compare him to genuine talents like George Carlin and Bill Hicks - funny how the no-talents who get promoted beyond their level are so often Jewish Zionists, like their bosses) are applauded on a nightly basis by the liberal elite? How did America become a culture of death?

Maybe it's because we're in deep, deep denial about death. And as Freud said, whatever we're in denial about, will come back to bite us.

You haven't really grown up until you know, deep in your bones, that you're going to die. And are okay with that.

Most Americans have never really grown up.

We actually pickle dead people in hopes that they won't really look dead, won't decay, won't go back to the earth:  

Alas, poor Yorick! How surprised he would be to see how his counterpart is whisked off to a funeral parlor, and is in short order sprayed, sliced, pierced, pickled, trussed, trimmed, creamed, waxed, painted, rouged, and neatly dressed -- transformed from a common corpse into a Beautiful Memory Picture. This process is, known in the trade as embalming and restorative art, and is so universally employed in the United States, and Canada that the funeral director does it routinely, without consulting corpse or kin. ...Yet no law, requires embalming, no religious doctrine commends it, nor is it dictated by considerations of health, sanitation, or even personal daintiness. In no part of the world but in North America is it widely used…. -Jessica Mitford

We don't take care of our own old people. We don't kill our own meat. (At least Bill Maher's urban liberal audience doesn't.) We don't wash and bury our own corpses.

The people who have their dead pets stuffed by a taxidermist who "tries to re-create their spirit and expression" are just carrying this ubiquitous American death-denial to its logical conclusion.

Pretty soon we'll be stuffing old Uncle Fred and mounting him on the wall and carrying on the same kind of conversations we've had with him since he lost his hearing a few years back. And guess what? He probably STILL won't understand the significance of World Trade Center Building 7.

 Just like Maher. Even if we killed, stuffed, and mounted Bill Maher (and I'm certainly not advocating anything like that, at least not the stuffing and mounting part) and had a professional corpse-pickler "try to re-create his original spirit and expression" by squeezing his facial muscles into that expressionless rictus smirk that he wore throughout his life, the sonofabitch would STILL be deaf to the people trying to wake him up to the implications of World Trade Center Building 7.

This quintessentially-American death-denial is what makes us frenetically export death to the rest of the world. Maybe we think if we export it, we can get rid of it.

And make no mistake, death is our #1 export. It's becoming pretty much our ONLY export.

It isn't just the millions of innocent people we murder in Iraq and Palestine and Afghanistan and Yemen and Somalia and Columbia and elsewhere with our cowardly drones and missiles and bombs.

We also export death in the form of GMO-tainted food. It's killing off everyone who eats it, slowly but surely. And our GMO scientists are celebrating the massacre. Ain't population-reduction wonderful?

We've exported almost 30 million deaths via laboratory-manufactured AIDS.

 And don't get me started about US bio-war-manufactured Lyme disease. (If each of us whose life has been made living hell by Lyme disease could kill just ONE biowar scientist, we could easily take them all out, and leave an infinitely nicer planet for our kids...though naturally I'm not advocating that - death is far too kind a fate for a bio-war scientist.)

We're also spreading death around the planet by forcing everyone to take our dead presidents, printed on worthless green paper, which the hungry slaves in countries shipping us their stuff can't eat. If we put dead presidents on toilet paper, at least they'd be good for something.
The dead presidents, at least the post-1913 ones, have been slaves to the real planetary death machine behind it all: The Rothschild bankster syndicate. Roughly 40% of the cost we pay for everything we buy goes for interest…usury…riba. In the West, most of that gets funneled into the Rothschild-and-friends criminal syndicate: the deep state, the government-behind-the-government.

You can buy a lot of social control, a lot of propaganda, a lot of hit men, a lot of universities, a lot of black ops specialists, a lot of TV stations and newspapers and Hollywood studios, if you're collecting forty cents from every dollar ever spent on anything.

And once you've got all that control, all that power, why not use it? Why not develop weather weapons, earthquake weapons, mass-disease weapons? Why not buy a surveillance and control system to enslave the whole world?
Why not kill off all the "useless eaters," the seven billion people currently inhabiting the planet, and just save a few million microchipped zombies to serve as slaves on your planetary plantation?

So that's where we stand: Cogs in a gigantic planetary-scale death machine, waiting for our New World Order overlords to pull the switch and start the die-off. They'll be able to smell the pile of six billion rotting corpses all the way to Alpha Centauri.

Hey, as long as Bill Maher goes first, I'm down with it.

Monday, October 8, 2012

Last words of 9/11 denier Juan Cole; Deconstructing US "democracy" on Press TV

I haven't been in the mood for pulling punches lately.

Check out this clip of my slapdown of 9/11 denier Juan Cole, courtesy of EddieLeaks.

And here's one of the all-time-great three-way slapdowns of US "democracy" featuring Mike Harris, Linh Dinh, and yours truly.

Watch the video  (looks like blogger is blocking embeds from Press TV?)

US suffers from corruption and lack of democracy: Analyst

Mon Oct 8, 2012 1:42PM GMT, Press TV

Interview with Dr. Kevin Barrett, Co-founder of the Muslim-Christian-Jewish Alliance, Wisconsin.

"It is hard to overstate corruption and lack of democracy in the American system and I think that is probably one of the reasons why 55 percent of the eligible voters stay home every presidential election. More than twice as many (boycott the election) as vote for the winning candidate and I am sure that will happen again this year. Probably it will be 60 percent that stay at home this year, I would imagine."
Former US President James Carter has criticized the US electoral process, describing it as riddled with "financial corruption” that dramatically favors the elite.

"We have one of the worst election processes in the world right in the United States of America, and it's almost entirely because of the excessive influx of money,” Carter said speaking at the Carter Center last month.

Carter said the candidates in the upcoming presidential election, Republican Mitt Romney and incumbent President Barack Obama will be receiving a staggering 6-billion dollars in funding their election campaigns to ensure corporation profit interest trumps the interests and well being of the American population at large.

"You know how much I raised to run against Gerald Ford? Zero. You know how much I raised to run against Ronald Reagan? Zero,” Carter said while referring to his party’s presidential fundraising campaign that accepted only public funding.

Press TV has conducted an interview with Co-founder of the Muslim-Christian-Jewish Alliance, Dr. Kevin Barrett to further discuss the issue.

The program also offers the opinions of two other guests: managing director of AMT Capital Partners Mr. Mike Harris and political analyst and writer, Linh Dinh. The following is an approximate transcription of the interview.

Press TV: Dr. Barrett, we have been talking about, hopefully you heard us, but in general now what our two guests are saying, that basically, the country (the US) has been taken over.

What does it mean for the country itself when it seems that it has been hijacked by these special interest groups, by corporations, by other entities; but it is not being run in the way the American people would want it to be run?

Barrett: Well, that is right. There is a paradox here because the American people realize that the two major parties are lying 24/7/364 and yet there are third parties running good candidates in elections including the presidential elections.

We have Merlin Miller running on a ‘third alternative party‘ticket’. He has actually come right out and stated forthrightly that 9/11 was a Zionist-Israeli sponsored coup d’état in America.

It is the first time that a presidential candidate has ever been that forthright. We also have Roseanne Barr on the Peace and Freedom Party Ticket and we have Garry Johnson on the Libertarian Ticket. I am forgetting who is on the Green Party Ticket, but these are candidates who are not beholden to the special interests.
Unfortunately, the American voters have been successfully propagandized and manipulated by the corporate monopoly media.

And they have been drawn into this play, this fictitious scenario that is being staged between the two major parties as if it were an actual fight over real issues and it is not, it is basically two wings of the same party and that same party is owned by special interests.
There are nuance differences between the Democrats and Republicans. This year the Republicans are owned by the extremist Likud faction of the Israeli Party, shall we say, and it is very interesting that Dov Zakheim is the lead foreign policy advisor for the Romney campaign.
Dov Zakheim is on everyone’s list as the number one suspect in the 9/11 attacks who swindled 2.3 trillion dollars from the Pentagon that was announced missing on September 10th 2001 by Donald Rumsfeld and that was presumably used to finance the 9/11 coup d’etat.

This is the man who is the number one advisor for Mitt Romney. It makes the Obama side look actually relatively good, which is really saying something because Obama is also owned by the same pro-Israel interest in foreign policy and by other corrupt interests in domestic policy.
Press TV: How likely are we going to see Americans protesting on the election day? Because as Mr. Dinh has talked about, the world’s perspective sometimes, of Americans, it does appear to many people in the outside, not living in the United States, that Americans accept it and they are apathetic and really are not even caring to take the time to even protest, your take?

Barrett: Well, unfortunately there is some truth to that. If you ask the average American, which is worth....., let me just back up a moment here and say that I think that both of the previous guests are perfect, absolutely right, on the money in their statements.

And in particular it is pretty hard to exaggerate just how great the margin is between the people who stay home and the winning candidate.

In an average American election, as we heard about 25 percent of the eligible voters vote for the winner, about 20 percent of the eligible voters vote for the loser of the two major parties and the other 55 percent stay home; so that means that more than twice as many people are staying home and not voting as vote for the winning candidate.

And I think that speaks volumes about the state of American democracy today. We really do not have one anymore.

The 9/11 coup d’état was only the latest in a series of coups d’état in America including the murders of the Kennedy brothers, and the Bush hijacking and overthrowing of the Carter presidency by making a deal with the leaders of Iran to keep the American hostages locked up until after the election.

That is what destroyed the Carter presidency in a CIA-sponsored coup d’état led by the drug smuggling wing of the CIA under the Bush family, America’s leading crime family.

So really it is hard to overstate corruption and lack of democracy in the American system and I think that is probably one of the reasons why 55 percent of the eligible voters stay home every presidential election. More than twice as many (boycott the election) as vote for the winning candidate and I am sure that will happen again this year. Probably it will be 60 percent that stay at home this year, I would imagine.

Press TV: Dr. Barrett I am going to ask you the same question that I asked Mr. Dinh. When Mr. Harris talked about..., he said that basically you need regime change in the United States, which of course means revolution in the United States.

Do you agree with that? Is that the only thing that is going to change your status quo?

Barrett: Yes, we do need some kind of revolution in the United States; hopefully a non-violent one. We need to take the country back from the special interests and especially the banking criminal syndicate and related criminal syndicates that have made the US essentially a government by organized crime.

And as for how to do it? You know, I do not see a single compelling third party candidate right now that I would necessarily urge everyone to vote for. People could boycott the election, they could vote for their favorite third party candidate. Merlin Miller is the one who is the most appealing to me right now.

They could even write in someone. I actually published a blog piece saying I am considering writing in Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the president of Iran.

I think that is making a bit of statement. They actually publish the write-in votes in the newspaper sometimes. Unfortunately some of them are just people who write in Mickey Mouse or Donald Duck or something...

But when the local newspaper points out that somebody voted for Mahmoud Ahmadinejad at least it would make people think. The Iranian president’s speech to the UN, I thought, was quite brilliant as have been his other speeches to the UN.

They have been vilified by the Zionist-controlled media here in the US and so, you know, what better way to tell the powers that be that we are not accepting what they tell us then by writing in someone like that.

So there are a lot of ways that people can protest and work for regime change in the US, but honestly I do not think that what we do with the elections is really the issue. We need to get organized and get focused outside of the electoral system, we need to mobilize people; the Occupy movement and similar moves to get people on the streets I think are better means for effecting that kind of revolutionary change.

And I think getting a million people to Washington DC and refusing to leave, sitting down and making them call every single person out. For them to actually physically remove a million people from Washington DC that would take a long time.

That is what Martin Luther King wanted us to do before he was assassinated. That is why they killed him. One of these days we are going to do that, Insha’Allah [God willing]