And will the Zionist propaganda brigade wage all-out war on me for even raising the question?
Any more rhetorical questions?
BEFORE YOU READ THIS BLOG, PLEASE LOOK AT THE GRAPHIC, THEN READ THIS COURAGEOUS ARTICLE BY PHILIP WEISS:
My in-box is overflowing with praise and blame concerning my "coming out" as an anti-Zionist who thinks Zionism was the biggest motive behind the 9/11 false-flag attack, and who thinks the overrepresentation of Zionist Jews in the U.S. media helps explain the cover-up.
First, some of the praise. A listener writes: "My most profound appreciation for your courageous and vital program of September 1st...You transcended yourself, brought Chris (Bollyn) back to public attention, and broke the omnipresent self-censorship of the diabolical and protracted criminal chain-conspiracy that produced 9/11 for the on-going imperial wars of aggression." And one of the best-known and universally-respected 9/11 truth leaders wrote to a worried Jewish mainstream radio host: "IMO Kevin has always been and continues to be on the level, in the sense that he is authentic and truthful beyond what most of us can accomplish, because he appears to be fearless."
Meanwhile, the Zionist infiltrators of the 9/11 truth movement were not happy.
By Zionist infiltrators, I do not mean honest 9/11 truth-seekers who happen to be pro-Zionist. I mean those whose mission is to destroy the movement by:
* suppressing evidence of the Zionist connection to 9/11 and attacking those who cite this evidence
* preserving the core of the psy-op by defending the long-disproven notion that there might have been "radical Muslim hijackers" involved -- any evidence that proves there were no hijackers, like David Ray Griffin's proof "the cell-phone calls" were fabricated through voice-morphing, the multiple indications that no 757 hit the Pentagon, or even son of holocaust survivors Elias Davidsson's overwhelmingly important proof that none of the 19 patsies ever boarded the planes, are suppressed, downplayed, or viciously attacked
* attacking the most rhetorically successful 9/11 truth films, such as the first two Loose Change efforts, 9/11 Mysteries, and the films of Dave Von Kleist for various reasons, mainly through wildly exaggerating alleged flaws in accuracy that are actually a matter of interpretation, and of little relevance in any case to the only important issue: the film's (rhetorical, not "scientific") power to convince newbies
* viciously attacking many of the most accomplished, talented researchers of the 9/11 truth movement, most recently Rob Balsamo and CIT, for not kowtowing to the attackers' rigidly dogmatic version of events -- and for offering strong evidence disproving the possibility that there were any Muslim hijackers
* viciously attacking many of the most accomplished, talented communicators of the 9/11 truth movement, myself included, supposedly for disagreeing with various aspects of their dogma
Here is a recent attack on me from the leading Zionist-infiltrator site:
"In 2006 he was just supporting holocaust denial in personal emails."
False. The Zionist stalker assigned to me after I produced David Ray Griffin's UW-Madison C-Span talk, Mark Rabinowitz, fabricated this untrue allegation.
"In 2008 he was claiming no Israelis died on 9/11 just on 911blogger."
False. I cited a mainstream report of WTC victims that showed no Israeli deaths on my radio news show (not 911blogger). Then I corrected myself when shown other mainstream sources claiming that one or two Israelies had died in the Towers. But wait -- the Jerusalem Post ran a story saying that 4000 Israelis were expected at work that day! That means that about 400 Israelis should have died in the Towers, if the Israeli community in New York had not been somehow forewarned. Even if the Post were off in its estimate, the gross discrepancy between the expected and actual number of Israeli (NOT "Jewish") casualties is a massive red flag. The attacks on me are designed to distract from this obvious proof of Israeli involvement in the attack on the WTC.
Last July he was toasting Jews on a 50,000 mainstream AM radio station that reached half the country, while holding himself out as an author and an expert on the war on terror.
I am a Ph.D. Arabist-Islamologist and an expert on the war on terror. I did just write an excellent book on the subject. And the only toasting of Jews I have ever done involves raising a glass of non-alcoholic beverage to such Jewish folks as Steve Alten, Daniel Ellsberg, Steve Bhaerman, Douglas Rushkoff, Eric Walberg, William Robinson, Brad Friedman, Richard Falk, Rabbi Michael Lerner, Jay Weidner, Joel Hirschhorn, Swami Beyondanonda, Lloyd DeMause, Barry Chamish, William Blum, the five Jewish contributors to 9/11 and American Empire v.2, and even the surprisingly fair Canadian journalist Jonathan Kay, all of whom are friends and/or radio guests.
In a review of his own book last week Barrett claimed that there was no connection between Islam and terrorism, and mischaracterized the FBI's position on Osama's guilt.
I correctly cited Robert Pape, the world's leading expert on suicide terrorism, as arguing that there is no connection whatsoever between Islam and terrorism. I also correctly cited the FBI's position that Osama is "not wanted" for 9/11. Obviously this Zionist Islamophobe has a hard time accepting such things.
Recent posts at Barrett's truthjihad blog have involved "Jews did 9/11" and "Jews Run the World" themes.
No such words can be found here...though I certainly do think the prime authors of 9/11 were probably of Jewish ethnicity, yet religiously harcore atheists, like their mentor, Leo Strauss. So why is it not okay to say this, yet the whole world talks about "Islamic terrorism" and alleged Islamic involvement in 9/11?
He's also engaging in vicious attacks on one of his critics that are, even if they're true (does anybody know?), shameful ad hominems that he levels instead of discussing the issues.
9/11 truth sex stalker Brian Good is a nutball who has been cyber-stalking me for years due to some sick sexual infatuation with me. If YOU were being stalked by a sexual predator nutcase, would you "discuss the issues" with him? Especially if his endless attacks were incoherent and completely empty of any real content?
I suppose these mendacious attacks from the provocateur brigade at truthassholes.org, a site which is almost indistinguishable from screwloosechange, are proof that I must be doing something right.