If you like this blog

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

Sunday, June 19, 2011

The Architecture of Intimidation, Pt. 1: Detained at O'Hare

The Architecture of Intimidation, Pt. 1: Detained at O'Hare

by Kevin Barrett, http://www.TruthJihad.com

It seems I am back on the slow-fly list.

Returning on Friday from my speaking tour of Belgium and Germany, I was detained by the US Immigration and Naturalization* (sic) Service for roughly two hours. My colleague Dr. Suleyman Kurter and I had our passports confiscated as we attempted to clear Customs at the O'Hare Airport checkpoint. We were forced to remain seated, under observation, without the right to make a phone call or even to use any electronic devices such as telephone or laptop. So we were unable to notify the person who was picking us up that we had been detained. When we asked our captors why we were being held, they told us that they didn't know.

After about ninety minutes of false imprisonment under nonexistent pretext, we were summoned separately to submit to interrogations: What is your profession? Where do you work? How did you get that job? What were you doing in Europe? Where did you go? Who did you see? And so on.

There are basically two ways to deal with this situation. One is to say "Fuck you, this is the United States of America and I'm an American citizen who hasn't done anything wrong, so either charge me with a crime or let me go and kiss my ass." One drawback of this strategy, of course, is that the agents would undoubtedly decide to prove that they did indeed have the right to detain us as long as they wanted, and we'd probably end up sitting there till doomsday. The other strategy, the one I opted for, was to use the occasion as a teachable moment.

I told the interrogators that my profession is "currently unemployed college professor and 9/11 truth activist." They wanted to hear the details, so I obliged. They grew fascinated by my story, which probably is more interesting than what they usually get to hear in the course of their duties. When I got to the part about how I discovered the clear and obvious evidence that 9/11 was an inside job, and faced the choice about whether or not to try to do something about it, they asked what evidence I thought was strongest. I told them about Building 7. One of the agents said he had heard that the owner of the World Trade Center was under suspicion. I gave them the rundown on Larry Silverstein, including his alleged mob connections, his close friendship with Netanyahu, his bizarre decision to buy the WTC just months before 9/11 when it was facing a ten-billion-dollar asbestos-removal court order, his doubling of the WTC terrorism insurance and changing it to cash-payout, his collection of five billion dollars from insurance companies and demands for over ten billion more, his apparent confession to demolishing WTC-7, and the fact that he and his family members always had breakfast at Windows to the World at the top of the North Tower except on 9/11, when Larry suddenly was reminded to visit his dermatologist...Meanwhile, I said, my friend William Rodriguez, the famous 9/11 hero and whistleblower, lost all his friends in Windows to the World that day.

The conversation somehow became exceedingly cordial, and I began to suspect that these guys were 9/11 truthers disguised as Customs agents! I ended up giving them DVDs of Blueprint for Truth and Sifting and Winnowing: Kevin Barrett at U.W.-Madison (the student-made documentary about my academic freedom struggle) and accepting their obviously sincere apologies. These guys, after all, were only doing their job. It was the higher-ups in DHS who had fingered us because we had been in Europe on a truth-speaking tour...and because we were Muslims. So much for freedom of speech and freedom of religion.

As we left O'Hare, I remembered a similar experience on the first leg of our journey. As we were going through security at O'Hare en route to Brussels, I told the DHS cops - as I always do - that I am morally allergic to carcinogenic naked body scanners, so go ahead and give me an enhanced patdown...but please get it over with quickly, because I am exceedingly ticklish, and I would hate to start rolling on the floor screaming in hysterical laughter during such a serious national security experience. But before I could get halfway through my rap, the DHS interrupted me with, "Sssshhh, don't tell anybody, the machines are out of order, just walk over there with the others." And lo and behold, he was right -- people were walking around, rather than through, the infernal machines!

Based on those two experiences at O'Hare, I think we are seeing a covert rebellion by ordinary low-level DHS and Customs agents, who are (understandably) tired putting up with the BS foisted on them by their superiors. The whole effort to turn airports into prison-like labyrinths of intimidation à la Piranesi, with multiple checkpoints, naked body scanners, mandatory partial disrobing (shoes and belts off -- oops, there go my pants!), and PA systems blaring that the threat level has just been raised to orange may be finally wearing out its welcome.

 * * *

* The name suggests that immigrants can become "naturalized" citizens US. This is a very strange word to use in this context. What in the world is "natural" about this process or its result? Political borders themselves are entirely unnatural, as I learned at age four by crossing the border from Wisconsin into Iowa and discovering that there was no black line across the road and that even if Wisconsin was mostly green, Iowa was not as pink as the map would have you believe. And the idea that when people become US citizens they are "naturalized" -- it's almost as idiotic as believing that everything in Iowa is pink because the map says so! In reality, when people come to the land of the freeway and the home of the Braves, Indians, Redskins, and other athletic teams condescendingly named after genocide victims -- the land of squalid shopping malls, paved earth and almost-identical mcmansions sprawling across what once were fruited plains -- it would be more accurate to say they are becoming unnaturalized. That is, they are joining a culture that fears and loathes nature, including human nature, to the point that corpses are preserved semi-eternally in pancake makeup and formaldehyde, and the official national biological formation is the uniformly-trimmed lawn.

Wednesday, June 15, 2011

My 9/11 truth interview (in French) on Belgian university radio


I just did a lively interview, en français, with Frédéric of Campus Radio Bruxelles.

Listen here.

I'm not sure how long they'll be archiving it, so listen quickly!

Also, just a reminder about tonight's talk (more details at Vigli.org)

Conférence du Prof. Kevin Barrett à Bruxelles : Me 15 juin à 20h
au Cercle littéraire Victor Hugo
106 Av Stalingrad. 1000 Bruxelles
(près de la Gare du Midi)
« Comment se réconcilier avec les médias et les politiciens qui nous ont menti pendant 10 ans à propos du 11 septembre 2001 »
Les portes ouvrent à 19h30

Monday, June 13, 2011

9/11 truth talk in Rotterdam, Cologne & Brussels



Details on my talk in Brussels this Wednesday, June 15th are now posted at http://www.vigli.org/ . The title translates as something like: "How can we reconcile with the media and politicians who have lied to us about 9/11 for the past ten years?" I guess one way would be to reconcile with them while they twist slowly in the breeze. For the long version, come to the talk!  I haven't done a talk in French since speaking to the Nibraz Institute in French and Arabic back in 2008, so be ready for some unintentional humor ; - )

So far the highlights of my tour have included an informal discussion with staff at the Islamic University of Rotterdam, and a talk to around 1,000 attendees as the Yeni Asya annual convention in Cologne.

The president of the Islamic University of Rotterdam, Dr. Ahmed Akgunduz, is a truth-speaker in his own right. Dr. Akgunduz told us about meeting with Bush I National Security Advisor Sandy Berger, along with some high government officials from the Netherlands, after 9/11. Dr. Akgunduz told Berger that the Bush Jr. administration was insane. The Dutch officials, before they left, told Dr. Akgunduz he could expect the university to lose its accreditation. But the next day Berger praised Dr. Akgunduz for his frankness and sincerity, and the Dutch government relented. (I hope to let Dr. Akgunduz speak for himself on a future radio show...)

Then yesterday in Cologne, I was a featured speaker, along with my colleague Dr. Suleyman Kurter, Professor Emeritus of Political Science, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, at the Yeni Asya convention. Yeni Asya is the bravest and most politically active of the groups carrying on the work of the great Turkish Islamic reformer Bediuzzaman Said Nursi. I told the group that the methods Bediuzzaman used to save Islam in Turkey -- nonviolence combined with uncompromising, eloquent truth-speaking and organizing -- should be employed today to resist the current Zionist-instigated war on Islam. I explained that all over the world, the enemies of Islam are staging acts of false-flag terror designed to be attributed to "radical Muslims." 9/11 was simply the biggest and most obvious of these deceptions; others have included the pre-empted Ergenekon plot a.k.a. the Turkish 9/11; the Russian intelligence services' bombing of an apartment complex to launch Russia's invasion of Chechnya; Mubarak's bombing of Coptic churches in Alexandria, which were blamed on the usual "radical Muslim" suspects until documents were found proving Mubarak's goons did it; CIA and DEA agent David Headley's attack on Mumbai, and other proven false-flag events in India; CIA agent Raymond "Bin Laden's handler" Davis's "Pakistani Taliban" bombings of mosques and markets in Pakistan; and so on.

The talk in Cologne was extremely well-received. Wednesday in Brussels, I intend to challenge the media to inform the public about the ubiquity of false-flag terror, the most powerful weapon in the arsenal of governments seeking to control and oppress their own citizens.

Small-scale false-flag terror probably happens all the time. When the Governor of Wisconsin admits to contemplating a false-flag terror attack, and one of his Republican colleagues specifically urges him to stage a false-flag attack with firearms, the Wisconsin and American national media should be all over the story.  Yet I'm sure that only a small minority of Wisconsin residents has heard about this. The media is allergic to informing the public about false-flag events, no matter how well-documented they may be.

The media's unwillingness to report on potential false-flag terror stories is what allowed top Bush Administration operatives and their allies to get away with blowing up the three World Trade Center skyscrapers and staging what amounted to a Zionist coup d'état in the USA. This leaves those of us in the GAM (genuinely alternative media) with a lot of work to do. If we don't push the topic of false-flag terror to the highest levels of national and international concern, even worse events may be expected.

Sunday, June 12, 2011

Was that Bush's bus heading for the Hague? My European tour turns weirde from the outset

Back when I was young and weird -- before I became a nice, normal radical Muslim conspiracy theorist -- I wrote Dr. Weirde's Weirde Tour Guide to San Francisco, the book that paid for the first couple of years of my Ph.D. program. (You can tell it's a cult classic because "like new" copies are selling for a lot of money.)

My tour of Belgium, the Netherlands and Germany started off like something out of my own weirde tour guidebook. The first place my hosts took me to see was Brussels' biggest tourist attraction, the mannekin pis -- a statue of a child urinating. For some reason the tourists really love this, and the locals have obliged by making it the unofficial mascot of Brussels. To my Muslim hosts, of course, the cult of the mannekin-pis is classic illustration of Western decadence. I can't say I disagree. Worshiping statues is bad enough -- that was precisely the sin of the pre-Islamic idolators -- but flocking to pay obeisance to a stone child squirting water from his male organ is WEIRDE with an e.

The next stop on our weirde tour was the atomium, a gigantic sculpture representing the unit cell of an iron crystal magnified 165 billion times. Kind of cool, but utterly pointless. A much better idea would be to build a gigantic sculpture of a nanothermite molecule multiplied 165 million times...right on Ground Zero. That's almost as good an idea as my "build the world's biggest mosque on Ground Zero, complete with two 110-story minarets, as an apology to Muslims for falsely blaming them for 9/11" proposal that Obama rejected and Mike Pintek and Matt Taibbi  really hated.

What if this were a gigantic sculpture of a nanothermite molecule on Ground Zero?

After spending the day in Brussels and the night in Ghent, we passed through Rotterdam en route to the Hague, and passed a very weirde bus on the freeway. It looked like this:


I assumed that Interpol had finally captured George W. Bush and was transporting him, on this aptly-named bus, to the International Criminal Court. My hosts informed me that, unfortunately, this was just the odd appellation of a German bus line that is apparently named after its oddly-appellated owner.

Okay, enough weirdness! Tomorrow I promise to get serious and tell you about the 9/11-truth-related stuff I've been doing, including today's talk to roughly 1000 very receptive people at the Yeni Asya convention in Cologne.

Wednesday, June 8, 2011

En route to the New Europe (leaving tomorrow)

Perhaps you are old enough to remember 2002, when Thierry Meyssan's 9/11 truth classic L'Effroyable imposture (The Hideous Fraud) sold more copies upon publication than any other book in French history, Chirac was saying "non" to the Iraq invasion, and Germany's former intelligence chief Andreas Von Bulow was saying that the Mossad and CIA had collaborated to perpetrate the 9/11 attacks.

In January 2003, a frustrated Donald Rumsfeld launched an angry diatribe against "the old Europe," suggesting that European opposition to the American Reichstag Fire and subsequent "war on an expanding Islam" was somehow...passé.

In reality, Rumsfeld had it backwards. The Old Europe, the Europe of the Dark Ages from Charlemagne through the Crusades, was in the grip of an Islamophobic psychosis--rather like post-9/11 America. As Europe gradually awoke from its barbarism, it became less and less Islamophobic. The new post-Enlightenment Europe has drawn ever closer to the position of Goethe, a candidate for all-time-greatest European intellectual, who was at the very least a virtual Muslim.

The traditionalist philosophers, who were largely responsible for founding the discipline of Religious Studies, believed that only Islam could save Europe from decadence and barbarism. Their position was seconded by the great Turkish thinker Bediuzzaman Said Nursi, who famously said: “The Ottoman State is pregnant with Europe, and it will give birth to an European state one day. And Europe is pregnant with Islam; one day it will give birth to an Islamic state.”

I am leaving Thursday for the New Europe, where Christianity has become a minority religion, Enlightenment values dominate but are not in themselves sustainable, and Islam is arriving to help shape those Enlightenment values into something sustainable. (Germany's continued embrace of Enlightenment reason, rather than postmodern "we create our own reality now" neocon madness, is reflected in the recent poll showing that 89% of Germans reject the official US version of 9/11.) This "New Europe" is likely to become a world leader in human rights, sustainable environmental practices, and many intellectual pursuits. It will slowly become a Muslim-majority region, with Enlightenment values and Islamic traditions mutually enriching each other and bringing out the best of both heritages...insha'allah.

I will be speaking to Muslim groups in the Koln-Dusseldorf-Bonn area this weekend, then on to Brussels for a talk on June 15th in the center of Brussels, at the Au Cercle littéraire Victor Hugo, 106 Av Stalingrad. 1000 Bruxelles (Près de la Gare du Midi) -- sometimes referred to as the "Cercle Littéraire Arabe" se réuniant dans la "Salle Victor Hugo".  Hope to see you there!

Tuesday, June 7, 2011

Benny Morris: Hero or Psychopath?


I have a high regard for truth - so high that my dear friend Shaykh Yusuf Estes says I should change my name to Abdulhaqq, "The Slave of Truth." (In Arabic, the word al-Haqq, meaning "Truth" or "Reality," is one of the most beautiful names of God.)

I told Shaykh Yusuf that yes, truth has made me its slave: I've done a whole lot of work on behalf of truth without being paid a penny.

But is dedication to truth enough? Take Benny Morris - please.

From the standpoint of dedication to truth, Benny Morris is one of the greatest heroes of our time. An ardent Zionist, Morris nonetheless pioneered the Israeli New Historians' movement and demolished some of the biggest lies of Zionist pseudo-history. Morris helped prove that the the Zionist version of the history of Israel was a lie, and that the Palestinian version of the nakba -- the horrific ethnic cleansing of 1948 -- was much closer to the truth.

Yet Morris is not only unapologetic about the monstrous crimes against humanity that created the State of Israel,  he actually argues that these crimes did not go far enough -- that more and larger crimes should have been committed. Apparently he thinks that hundreds or thousands more Palestinian women and children should have had their guts ripped out with bayonets. (Google Deir Yassin for the bloody details.) His position could be summed up as: The genocidal founders of Israel should have finished the job. "Sometimes ethnic cleansing is justified..Even the great American democracy could not have been created without the annihilation of the Indians." 

Certainly Morris is being uncommonly truthful in openly expressing his support for genocide. But is that heroic? Imagine a German saying yes, Hitler's regime intended to eradicate the Jews from Europe, killed roughly six million in the process...and should have killed the rest and finished the job. Would this German equivalent of Benny Morris be a hero of truth--or a psychopath?

Psychopaths usually lie like they breathe. They spin everything they say to support their own interests. This is what most Zionists have always done. But occasionally psychopaths are capable of the most breathtakingly truthful admissions about their own horrendous conduct. The same psychopath who had been lying to get away with murder for decades might, after he is caught, truthfully describe in clinical detail how he raped, murdered, and cut people into little bitty pieces, all without the slightest hint of shame or guilt...and even express regret that one of his victims got away.

I suspect that Benny Morris, far from being a hero, represents the latter category of psychopath.

* * *

References/inspirations:

Foundation Myths, Stifling debate on the Nakba—the Arabic word for catastrophe and how Palestinians refer to Israel’s founding—prevents a free and open discussion of the historical record (Tablet Magazine)


Survival of the Fittest?, An Interview with Benny Morris (Counterpunch)


The Rise of the Second-String Psychopaths by David Schwartz

Twilight of the Psychopaths by Kevin Barrett

Jeff Gates, in Guilt by Association (p.21) finds that the "psychological profile that accurately described...key operatives (in the Zionist criminal syndicate)" was: "Psychopathy: A mental disorder (featuring) superficial charm, pathological lying, egocentricity, lack of remorse, and callousness..."

And for the most fair-minded, readable and comprehensive history of Israel-Palestine available in English, read Alan Hart's Zionism trilogy.)

Sunday, June 5, 2011

Naksa Day surprise: I now support a Jewish state!


From the moment I started learning about the question of Palestine until today, I never supported the idea of a Jewish State. Instead, I always supported the One State Solution: Let Israel-Palestine be a state for all its people, including the Palestinian ethnic-cleansing victims, without any discrimination based on religion or ethnicity.

But as of today, Naksa Day 2011, I have changed my mind. I now support a Jewish State.

What changed my mind?

Today I read a terrific article by Franklin Lamb (who will insha'allah be a guest on tomorrow's radio show) and watched the famous video of Helen Thomas talking to an importunate rabbi.

The rabbi asked Helen Thomas if she had any advice for Israeli Jews and she said, "Yes - tell them to get the hell out of Palestine." Asked where they should go, she told them to go back to Germany (and Poland and America if they like).

Franklin Lamb explains that this is precisely what more and more Israeli Jews are planning to do. Already more than 100,000 have German passports. That's right -- Germany is fast becoming the #1 haven for worried Jews!

And suddenly a light bulb over my head went on. And even in the absence of an AIPAC bagman showering me with bushel-baskets-full of cold hard cash, I decided to express my undying loyalty to the ever-loving Jewish State.

And placing one hand over my heart and the other behind my back (no fingers crossed!) I solemnly pledged my undying support for the establishment and maintenance of a Jewish State.

In Germany.

After all, the rationale for a Jewish state is that the Jews suffered so terribly during the holocaust that solemn reparations are due.

So far, the solemn reparations from Germans have consisted of bushel-baskets full of deutche marks that pay for wholesale Zionist butchering of the rightful inhabitants of Palestine. That's right: after perpetrating one holocaust, the Germans are paying for another one!

So I say to the Germans: Save your god-damned deutche-marks! Instead, give the Jews a piece of German land on which to establish their beloved Jewish State. That way, they won't have to keep taking your money to butcher Palestinians and build nuclear weapons to frighten off any potential supporters of the Palestinians.

In the long run, giving the Jews land instead of cash will be a whole lot cheaper. The Germans will feel like they've really made restitution, the Jews will have a state with sufficient water resources, and the Palestinians will get their country back.

Everybody will be happy.

Especially the Palestinians.

And AIPAC will suddenly have a nice, secure Jewish state with nothing to worry about. They won't know what to do with the tens of billions of dollars in their slush fund.

The honorable thing to do would be to split it between me, Helen Thomas, and Franklin Lamb. After all, this was our idea.

Got that AIPAC? You can send my portion to:

Dr. Kevin Barrett
POB 221
Lone Rock, WI 53556

And while you're at it, you can nominate me for the Nobel Peace Prize.

I sure as hell deserve it more than that other guy.

Friday, June 3, 2011

Double Standards, OUTRAGEOUS double-standards...and then there's Jonathan Kay

I hate to criticize a book I haven't read yet, even if those who have read it tell me I am libeled in its pages.

But if the author won't send me the promised review copy in a timely manner...and then libels me in a TV interview....I had better respond sooner rather than later.

Last March, I emailed Jonathan Kay to ask for a review copy of Among the Truthers and a radio interview. (I had helped him with the book by agreeing to interviews, despite knowing that it was a hit piece in the making, so I figured the least he could do was provide an advance copy -- as almost everyone does when I invite them on the radio to discuss a new book).

Kay replied:

"Youre in the book  (sic)
Im happy to send u a copy, but wont be able to till early May."


On May 2nd I send Kay a reminder email. He replied:

"The publication date is May 17
But I bet I can get you one before that
Does this address still work:
Kevin Barrett
POB 221
Lone Rock, WI 53556"

I replied that yes, thank you, that address still worked, and I looked forward to the book.

Then on May 27th, I emailed him again and he replied:

"Yes -- its in the mail
Sorry for delay"

Well, today is June 3rd, a week after it was supposed to be in the mail, and it still hasn't arrived. So much for the pre-publication review copy!

Might Kay be unconsciously putting off mailing me his book because he has a bad conscience about how he treats me in its pages? Just because I'm a paranoid Freudian conspiracy theorist doesn't mean Kay isn't out to get me! Anthony Hall, after pointing out Kay's Zionist commitments, writes:

Kay’s book, therefore, illustrates well his trepidation that the quest for 9/11 Truth, if allowed to gain yet more ground, might lead to increased criticisms of Israel. This line of analysis in Kay’s book finds its best target of attack in Kevin Barrett. Barrett is a convert to Islam with a Ph.D. in Arabic Studies. Barrett regularly receives much criticism even from fellow travelers in the quest for the truth of 9/11 because of his no-holds-barred approach to castigating the actions of the Israeli state whose agents, he alleges, were deeply involved in the terror plot of 9/11.

As Kay sees it, Barrett’s interpretive emphasis  “absolves Islam of a terrible crime.” (167) This turn of phrase suggests that Kay should answer to the same kind of criticisms he and others point at Barrett. The idea of 9/11 as a crime not of individual human beings but of a whole religion spells Trouble with a capital T. It illustrates the extremity of the threat posed to the continuing viability of our diverse, multicultural societies by leaving unaddressed the religious antagonisms embedded into the sacred myth of 9/11. What would have been the response if Kay had characterized the assaults on Blacks by the KKK as a crime of all Christians? Why are Muslims regularly subjected in the mainstream media like those that employ Kay and publicize his book to smears and slurs so extreme that they would be obviously unacceptable if directed at any other group?

Kay's claim that ISLAM is guilty of the terrible crime of 9/11 would be a genocidal blood libel even if it were true that the people who committed the 9/11 crimes were in fact Muslims. But if we know anything about the alleged 9/11 hijackers -- whether or not they had anything to do with 9/11 -- it is that they (or those impersonating them using their stolen passports during the run-up to 9/11) were about the least Islamic young men on the planet. The alleged hijackers never prayed, never went near any mosques, never fasted or gave charity. Instead, they spent most of their time drinking, whoring, gambling, and snorting the cocaine with which they were being provided in unlimited quantities by the drug smugglers they associated with, including the Jewish-Zionist gangster Jack Abramoff. Muhammad Atta's girlfriend, a stripper named Amanda Keller, tells us that the "Atta" she knew was a vicious, loudmouth, hard-drinking psychopath who spoke fluent Hebrew...and relished, as his very favorite food, the humble (and not very Islamic) pork chop. (All of this is detailed in Daniel Hopsicker's Welcome to Terrorland).  Since the original, Egyptian Atta was a shy, sensitive, soft-spoken and kindly youth who was innocent of both the Hebrew language and the sorts of debauchery the alleged hijackers indulged in, it seems that he, like most of the other 19 original identities, may have fallen victim to passport theft, then murder.

Kay believes, or pretends to believe, that the 9/11 criminals were fanatical Arab Muslims acting on behalf of "radical Islam"; while after seven years of research I have concluded, and cite evidence to back it up, that the most important group of 9/11 criminals were fanatical Jewish Zionists acting on behalf of what they took to be the interests of the state of Israel. Yet while Kay asserts that the whole religion of Islam (and by extension all Muslims, or Muslims in general) is somehow guilty of the "terrible crime" of 9/11, I would never assert such a thing about the religion of Judaism (or all Jews, or Jews in general).

If I had said that Kay's official conspiracy theory "absolves Jews and Judaism of a terrible crime," I would expect to be called a bigot. But the fact is that I have never said any such thing, or anything remotely like it. So how can Kay try to blame a terrible crime, committed by a small number of individuals, on a whole religion of 1.5 billion people...and then call ME a bigot for simply mentioning the ethnicity (Jewish) and national loyalty (Israeli) of such key 9/11 suspects as Dov Zakheim, Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle, Phillip Zelikow, Larry Silverstein, Benjamin Netanyahu, and so on? (In my speeches and writings, I also regularly mention that several non-Jews, including Cheney and Rumsfeld, are high on the list of suspects.)

Kay and many of his fellow Jews, and the media they dominate, never miss a chance to emphasize the alleged Islamic identity of those they blame for 9/11--and often cross the line into blatant bigotry by blaming a whole religion, or a "radical" portion of it, for the crimes of a few dozen individuals. Indeed, they have created a monstrous wave of Islamophobia, and sparked the murder of roughly two million Muslims, by blaming Muslims and Islam for 9/11. Yet they claim it's unfair and bigoted for those of us who have actually investigated the crime to mention the Jewish-Zionist identity of most of the actual suspects! Isn't sauce for the goose sauce for the gander? Listen to Kay libel me by distorting my words in an effort to paint me as a bigot on the Michael Coren Show:

I was at a 9/11 truth convention in New York City, and one of the presenters, Kevin Barrett, was saying "that one is an ethnic Jew, that one is an ethnic Jew, ethnic Jew." As I say, he wasn't even bothering to hide by euphemism.

Q: What was the reaction? 

It was actually very interesting. There was a novelist in the crowd, a guy by the name of Alten...he became famous many years ago for writing novels about giant crocodiles...they were called the Meg novels, M-E_G. You can google him. I only found out this later, because I interviewed him. And he actually got up at the convention and gave this speech and said 'Kevin, you're disgracing the 9/11 truth movement, you know, I came here to learn the truth about 9/11, and here we are in New York City' -- this was 2009 -- 'and you're giving this speech about the Jews. No one can discredit our movement more than you can with this sort of hate speech.' And then they got into this huge fight. And I was in the bizarre position of cheering on the virtuous conspiracy theorist, they guy who merely believed 9/11 was the work of the CIA. And he was the good guy, because the other guy believed 9/11 was the work of the Jews. And I actually got drawn into the conversation, because I had appeared on Kevin Barrett's internet radio show, and he knew me, and he brought me in to adjudicate some point of Israeli history. And it was one of the most surreal moments I had in writing this book. But it actually was very instructive, because it showed me that in this day and age, anti-Semitism has become so taboo that even conspiracy theorists -- many of them at least -- draw a line and will call each other out on it. So actually that was kind of gratifying to see.


Kay's description of my talk is wildly distorted, as I will soon show by posting the entire power-point and narration at TruthJihad.com. First, he fails to mention that my talk, entitled "A Muslim View of the 9/11 Truth Movement," described not so much my own viewpoint, but what I take to be the Muslim-majority viewpoint based on various polls as well as my own experience as a member of the Muslim community. My point in mentioning the Jewish ethnicity and Zionist loyalty of key 9/11 suspects was that this is what most Muslims focus on. (The truth of this assertion was borne out by my recent trip to Turkey, during which most of the Turkish Muslims I met said they knew 9/11 was yet another Zionist false-flag operation from the moment it happened.)

Kay's memory and/or notes are also flawed concerning my conversation with him and Steve Alten following my presentation. Alten claimed that I was distorting the Muslim-majority position on 9/11 and Zionism. I called on Kay not to "adjudicate some point of Israeli history," but to counter Alten's argument that most Muslims have a positive view of the state of Israel and certainly don't blame Israel for 9/11! Kay supported me by telling Alten in so many words that "yes, unfortunately Kevin is right, most Muslims are anti-Zionist and probably suspect an Israeli hand in 9/11."  (Listen to my interview with Steve Alten, conducted a few weeks after this conversation.)

By claiming that I stated that 9/11 was "the work of the Jews" -- a ludicrous, defamatory, and completely unsubstantiated assertion -- Kay commits libel.

Is Kay claiming that I think 9/11 was the work of Peymon Muttahadah, my (Iranian-Jewish) co-host of Truth Jihad Radio and the new Coordinator of the Muslim-Jewish-Christian Alliance for 9/11 Truth, which I co-founded? Is he claiming I think 9/11 was the work of my many Jewish friends and radio guests including Rabbi Weiss, Richard Falk, Richard Curtis, Elias Davidsson (the son of holocaust refugees), Lenni Brenner, Henry Makow, Steve Bhaerman, Rabbi Michael Lerner, Lloyd DeMause, Leland Lehrman, Paul Levy, Hannah Mermelstein, Martin Schotz, Carl Weiss, Jonathan Elinoff, Adam Stulberg, Peter Kirstein, William Blum, Leonard Horowitz, Alan Sabrosky, Ira Chernus, Max Ajl, Jeff Blankfort, Adam Shapiro, Andrew Mathis, Stephen Lendman, Douglas Rushkoff, Philip Weiss, Barry Shainbaum, Ken Biegeleisen, Brad Friedman, and probably quite a few others?  If I were such a bigot, why would I value hearing what these Jewish folks had to say, and why would they want to talk to me?

Does Kay think that if a Muslim commits a crime, it's okay to say (or even emphasize) their Islamic identity -- but if a Jew commits a similar crime, only an anti-Semite would mention the Jewish ethnicity of the criminal?! Does Kay think that any crime purportedly committed by one or more Muslims can be ascribed to the entire religion of Islam -- whereas we must not even mention the Jewish ethnicity of such criminals as:

*All but one of the Russian gangster "oligarchs" who looted the national wealth of the former Soviet Union.

*The top tier of organized crime in North America (i.e. the heirs of Meyer Lansky and subsidiaries like the Canadian Bronfman family, who supplied Lansky with illegal booze during prohibition, and continue to run the Canadian mob while also sponsoring Zionism in Canada).

*The majority of leading neocons--including most of the members of Project for a New American Century (PNAC), the group that called for a "New Pearl Harbor" in September, 2000 and is widely viewed as the intellectual author of 9/11 -- the criminals with whom Kay disports at the new, renamed PNAC, the "Foundation for the Defense of Democracies."

*The leadership of the criminal state of Israel since its foundation, as documented by Jeff Gates in Guilt By Association and Alan Hart in Zionism: The Real Enemy of the Jews.

The Jewish ethnicity and accompanying Zionist loyalties of these specific individual criminals is obviously relevant -- just as the Columbian ethnicity of "the Columbian cartel" is relevant, only more so due to the more extreme tribal loyalty of Jewish Zionist extremists, and their association with a rogue nuclear-armed state with a powerful and murderous intelligence service.

Likewise, the fact that the mainstream media is dominated by Jewish people is supremely relevant to any discussion of how that media reports Middle East related issues--including the question of what really happened on 9/11...just as it would be supremely relevant if suddenly the media were bought up by Muslims, and most of the editors and key reporters were replaced by people with names like Abdul-Aziz.  If Muslims rather than Jews had dominated the media on 9/11/01, I have no doubt that the crime would have been reported very differently, with the "Dancing Israelis" getting screaming front page headlines and the "19 carousers" being consigned to the memory hole (or quickly unmasked as Mossad agents using stolen passports).

Let's face it, whatever the facts of 9/11, Palestine, etc.,  Muslims and Jews have different world-views -- and Jews have largely inflicted their Jewish worldview on the non-Jewish portion of the American public, at least as far as Middle East issues are concerned, by way of their domination of big media. My favorite essayist (since Gore Vidal slowed down) happens to be a Jewish guy named Morris Berman, who points out that Jews, like everybody else only more so, see the world through the filter of "tribal consciousness":

...Proust argues that we should hardly be surprised, for example, to learn that some Jewish person we might know (this around 1900, say) is heatedly on the side of Alfred Dreyfus. For this is pre-ordained, he says; it's in the blood...The claim here is that we would expect Jews to be on the side of Dreyfus without worrying too much about the evidence pro or con, in the same way that it is not too much of a shock to learn that 96% of the black American population voted for Barack Obama. These are not really freely chosen rational decisions, in short, and we are kidding ourselves if we think they are.
(A Question of Values, pp 199-200).

The problem is that the Jewish domination of big media is invisible, and kept invisible by the threat to sic attack dogs like Kay on anyone who, like me, is impolite enough to mention it. So Americans have no idea that their picture of the world in general, and Middle East issues in particular, is largely the product of Jewish tribal consciousness.

This point was driven home to me during one of my first-ever 9/11 radio interviews. It took place, at least a year before I attained notoriety, in the studios of Pacifica affiliate WORT in my hometown of Madison, Wisconsin. The interviewer, a nice, slow-talking old lady named Leah Zeldin (who has since passed away, Allah yarhamha) began the interview roughly as follows:

Leah Zeldin: Today we're here with Kevin Barrett, an Arabic scholar who has some unusual views on 9/11. Now I want to begin by saying that I believe in full disclosure. Before you state your opinions, I think our listeners need to know exactly who you are and where you're coming from. They need to know that you are a Muslim. So in the interest of full disclosure, Kevin, isn't it true that you are a Muslim?


Kevin Barrett: Honestly, Leah, I didn't think I was coming here to talk about my religion. I've never heard anybody on WORT, anybody who was here to talk about a political issue, have to tell the listeners about their religion.


Leah Zeldin: Well, I don't know about other radio hosts, but I believe in full disclosure. Full disclosure! So is it or is it not true that you are a Muslim?


Kevin Barrett: Yes, I am. I came to Islam in 1993 after I lost faith in nihilism. But I thought I was here to talk about the empirical facts of 9/11, not religion.

After the show, I told Leah that I had felt uncomfortable with her "full disclosure," and she reiterated that she felt it was necessary.  Then I asked: "By the way, Leah, I've been listening to your shows for the past ten years and I never knew what religious or ethnic background you were from."  "I'm Jewish," she said. "Really?" I said. "I never knew that! So much for 'full disclosure'."

For Leah, a certain kind of Jewish tribal consciousness -- secularized left-leaning Midwestern variety -- was as natural as the air she breathed. She took no more note of it than a fish takes note of the water, and the idea that "full disclosure" would require her to reveal her Jewishness, in the same way that she insisted that I reveal my Muslim identity, was simply incomprehensible to her, no matter how many times I tried to explain.

Leah Zeldin was a very sweet, kind woman -- a friend of mine and especially of my wife. But she was the unconscious prisoner of an atrocious double-standard, a good person who just didn't realize how outrageously bigoted she was. Our friendship with her was not unlike a black couple's friendship with a sweet old incorrigibly racist white woman in the old South.

Speaking openly and honestly of such matters does not indict all or most Jews, or the religion of Judaism, in any way, shape or form, any more than pointing out the Jewish identity and Zionist loyalties of most 9/11 suspects means that Jews or Judaism in general were responsible for 9/11.

Blaming "Islam" for the "terrible crime" of 9/11 DOES indict an entire religion and an entire people.

If Jonathan Kay wants to go after a bigoted 9/11 conspiracy theorist, he should look in the mirror.

# # #

[Note: My invitation to Jonathan Kay to discuss his book on my radio show still stands, assuming the book finally arrives; perhaps he will also be able to explain why he feels he can blame Islam and all Muslims for 9/11, while at the same time charging me with bigotry for mentioning that specific 9/11 suspects are Jewish Zionists. Meanwhile, while we're waiting for the book to arrive, check out my Jonathan Kay interview from last year.]