If you like this blog

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

Tuesday, August 28, 2012

Questioning the Syria hype on Russia Today

In a recent Russia Today interview I questioned the official Western version of events in Syria. While I don't doubt that the Syrian government and allied forces are committing atrocities, as would any sovereign government attempting to save itself from a rebellion armed and partly directed from abroad, the bottom line is that when the Syrian opposition chose to start a civil war and ally itself with the Zionist-US-Saudi-NATO criminals, it robbed itself of the moral legitimacy it might have otherwise enjoyed.

excerpted from  http://rt.com/news/daraya-massacre-reports-syria-590/ :

'Orchestrated PR event?'

The timing of the "massacre" reports is of no coincidence, believes Middle East expert and radio show host Kevin Barrett.

They come as the UN Security Council is scheduled to hold a ministerial meeting on the humanitarian impact of the conflict on August 30.

Right before this UN ministerial meeting coming on August 30 we have a big orchestrated PR event designed to smear the government in Damascus and prod the West into intervening in Syria,” Barrett told RT.

He reiterated that in his belief much of the killing in the Houla massacre had been perpetrated by the rebels, warning that the “the same thing might be true this time.”

“We really need to resist this intense psychological warfare campaign which is mainly based on lies and distortions that’s being waged by the Western countries.”

The expert claims that the real target of Western forces in the Syrian conflict is to destabilize the country and make it a “nonviable state” such as with Iraq.

They don’t want to stabilize Syria. They don’t want to bring peace to Syria. They want to break Syria up and make it a nonviable state,” he argued.

In Barrett’s opinion this is part of a wider US plan to bring the region and its energy resources under its control.

“It’s easier to be dealing with small states – that’s why they love all these Gulf sheikhdoms. Dealing with such small states is very-very easy. The US and the West have so much more leverage that way.”

Monday, August 27, 2012

Don't believe the Islamophobic hype!

Hello Kevin,

I've raised the issue of Muslim extremism with you before. An anxious friend sent me the attached link:


 and it does certainly seem to augur vast changes in Europe, and not for the better.  The West is in moral decline,  which lends ammunition to the extremist Muslim position. But Shariah law is in such deadly opposition to Western values it's difficult to see anything but an extremely violent outcome, if developments continue as predicted here.  As usual, the majority are silent, while a very small, fanatical minority takes control. Cannot moderate Muslims rein these people in?  Or is this what our moral depravity logically leads to?


Dear P,

Regarding the "Belgistan" video you sent me:

I think you're unconsciously buying into the Zionist media's anti-Islam propaganda wave.

First, the demographic projections for Brussels are not those for the whole of Europe.  Muslims will not become a majority in Europe through demographics alone, at least in our lifetimes. Today, Muslims are 6% of Europe's population, and are expected to rise to only 8% by 2030. Beyond that, predictions are meaningless - like trying to forecast next month's weather. This genocidal hate video is basically inciting people to get rid of Muslims from Europe (which will lead to murders) and it's doing so by lying about the demographics.

Second, as the "radical Muslim" in the video says, "shariah law" is not about amputations!  Shariah means "God's law," which humans never understand perfectly, yet are always trying their best to imperfectly understand and follow. Actual implementation of law in Islam is called "fiqh" not shariah. And it is always being disputed and revised. One person's fiqh is not necessarily another's.  There is tremendous pluralism in Islamic law - if you don't want to follow one ruling, you just go and ask a different judge and get a different ruling!!  For instance, most Muslims believe you can't have dogs in the house.  I choose to follow the Malaki law school, which has no problem with dogs in the house.  Our dog spends a lot of time curled up on our sofa next to us. I follow one ruling, most Muslims follow another. Al-hamdullilah for Islamic legal pluralism!

Yes, there are a very few insanely narrow-minded asshole "Muslims" who might resort to violence against me for having a different fiqh than they do.  But such "takfiri" lunatics are extremely rare, virtually nonexistant. The "radicals" in this video are not nearly that bad. They're just young, overly-enthusiastic kids.

Islamic law is hardly enforceable at all.  It's designed to work in the virtual absence of any enforcement mechanism. It appeals to people's faith in God and righteousness and truth and justice. And non-Muslims are not obliged to obey most Islamic legal strictures (fiqh) even in Islamic states.

So the "radical" Muslim in the video, who is being slandered by the hatemongers who made the film, is on the right track in pointing out that in over a thousand years, only 60 hands were amputated.  The purpose of having the "image" of amputation for theft is to discourage theft.  And it works!  Human suffering would be vastly reduced if this version of fiqh were implemented. Imprisoning millions of people in rape-infested cages, as we do in the US, is infinitely worse than threatening amputation, and even carrying it out a few times, in order to virtually eliminate theft (and prisons).

Shariah law,as interpreted by the infinite versions of fiqh, is only in opposition to TOTALITARIAN Western values (and atheist-satanic Western values).  The West has a totalitarian law system, one size fits all, that is theoretically supposed to be completely and absolutely enforced, down to the last jaywalking ticket, by a huge bureaucracy that owns a monopoly of violence. Hence we have a society of violence run amok and cops run amok and prisons run amok.  The best thing that could happen to Europe would be conversion to Islam, and to the tolerance, pluralism, and spiritually-oriented, mostly unenforceable guidelines (replacing violence-enforced secular laws) that would follow. That's what "shariah" means.  The "radical" brother in the video is right: Only a tiny minority of absurdly misguided Muslims reject the notion of shariah, "the broad and straight path" that tells us to pray five times a day, fast during Ramadan, and so on.

Europe is dying out because it has lost sight of the spiritual dimension of life - the real purpose of why we're here. As the Traditionalist thinkers who founded the field of Religious Studies knew, only Islam is in a position to save Europe. An Islamic Europe would be a light unto humanity - though it would mean an end to the Rothschilds' atheist-satanic usury-based NWO dynasty that rules the West today with an iron fist.

The Zionist media's demonization of "shariah" is a genocidal hate crime. So is the "Belgistan" video you sent me. The perpetrators have an obvious agenda: Removing the biggest obstacle to their one-world NWO bankster dictatorship.

So, in my view, Europe is going to have to convert to Islam - not just wait for a nonexistent demographic wave.  I urge you to start looking into more accurate information about Islam and consider whether a religion based on your own personal relationship with God, with no bureaucracy or hierarchically-imposed orthodoxy, and a set of guidelines that actually WORK to bring inner peace as well as social peace, might be for you.


Sunday, August 26, 2012

US rewarding Myanmar for massacring Muslims

An undated photo shows a Rohingya refugee woman carrying a child in an unregistered camp in Kutupalong, some 400 kilometers southeast of Dhaka. 

US accomplice to Rohingyas massacre in Myanmar: Analyst

A political analyst says the United States is responsible for the genocide of the minority Rohingya Muslims in Myanmar, Press TV reports.

“The United States of America bears responsibility for this genocide, since the US has been rewarding the Myanmar regime with ever-closer political and economic ties during recent months of accelerating atrocities,” Kevin Barrett wrote in an article published on Press TV Website.ll

(full Press TV story here)

* * *

Open Letter to American Buddhists: Please Stop the Myanmar Genocide!

By Kevin Barrett,  Press TV

Dear American Buddhist brothers and sisters,

I am writing to every contact listed at Buddhanet.info's American Buddhist Directory to ask:
Are you aware of the ongoing genocide in Myanmar (Burma) - a genocide that is being committed in the name of Buddhism?

And did you know that the United States of America bears responsibility for this genocide, since the US has been rewarding the Myanmar regime with ever-closer political and economic ties during recent months of accelerating atrocities?

As American Buddhists, you are in a position to help stop this genocide, by pressuring the US and Myanmar governments as well as international human rights organizations. Your visible participation in the campaign to save the Rohingya people from extermination by murderous Buddhist fanatics will not only help draw the world's attention to this horrific situation, but also help restore the image of Buddhism as a religion of compassion.

The facts about the genocide in Myanmar are not in dispute. The fanatical Buddhist nationalists, who unfortunately represent a large segment of the roughly 60 million Buddhists in Myanmar, admit that they are trying to uproot and exterminate the roughly one million Muslim Rohingya from land that the Rohingya have lived on for centuries.

Here is what a typical genocidal Buddhist fanatic from Myanmar wrote in a comment on a Wall Street Journal article:

"Burma is Buddhist nation created for the 135 Tibeto-Burman tribes. People do not get citizenship just because born there or illegally lived there for centuries. Please do not interfere with the law and internal affairs of Burma just as you do not like other nations to poke their nose in your internal affairs."

"People do not get citizenship just because born there or illegally lived there for centuries." This statement, which aptly sums up the official policy of the Burmese regime, could get the person who made it, and the government that follows it, hanged for crimes against humanity. OBVIOUSLY being born in a modern nation to a family that has been there for centuries automatically confers citizenship. And OBVIOUSLY any modern nation that denies citizenship to such people, burns their homes and communities, and murders them en masse, with the aim of removing them from the nation of their birth, is committing the internationally-recognized crime of genocide.

In recent weeks, many thousands of homes, and more than 20 mosques, have been burned by murderous Buddhist mobs, backed by national security forces, in the Arakan state of Myanmar. Estimates of the number of Rohingya Muslims murdered, whether directly or by drowning in the Naf river as they flee the killers, range from the thousands to the tens of thousands. Every one of the more than 500 mosques in Arakan has been taken over by the genocidal regime's security forces and shut down, and they are being demolished one-by-one. (This happened during the holy month of Ramadan, when Muslims are supposed to spend as much time as possible in a mosque.)

Muslims have been living in Burma since roughly 800 c.e. - that is, nearly for as long as the religion of Islam has existed. And Arakan has been a Muslim region, ruled by Muslim kings and/or populated by Bengali Muslims, since 1430. The most notable population increase of Muslims in Arakan took place in the 1600s. The idea that the Rohingya people are somehow "recent immigrants" to the region is clinically insane - a symptom of the larger insanity known as nationalist fanaticism.

Both Buddhism and Islam are universalist religions: They proclaim truths that are valid for all people, indeed for all of existence. And the core truth that both religions proclaim is the primacy of compassion. In Buddhism, a central feature of the Buddha nature is compassion for all beings. If one were to choose a single hallmark of a successful advanced practitioner of Buddhism, it would be a highly-developed sense of compassion.

Whatever has happened to the Myanmar Buddhists' compassion for their fellow citizens who happen to be born as Rohingyas?

Islam, too, views compassion as a central reality of creation. Muslim theologians, like the more advanced Christian and Jewish religious thinkers, view God as ineffable; but the primary and overriding tangible characteristic of God in Islam (with the proviso that no tangible characteristics fully express the reality of the one ineffable God) is rahma, or compassion. The two adjectives Muslims use the most to "describe" God are ar-rahman ar-rahim, usually translated as "the merciful, the compassionate." (The root of rahma and its cognates derives from the word for "womb," suggesting that this "compassion" has something in common with the nurturing, all-embracing, unconditional love that mothers feel for their children.)

Additionally, both Buddhism and Islam teach us to transcend or even annihilate the (tribal) ego. Buddhism offers a set of teachings that take its practitioners beyond the ego, which is the source of the endless desire that is the cause of the pervasive suffering or disappointment that characterizes ordinary human existence. Likewise, Islam teaches its serious practitioners to annihilate the "ego that desires evil" through absolute submission to God. Each religion offers a very similar cure for the unhappiness of the ordinary human condition.

The kind of chest-thumping egotistical nationalism that proclaims "I am a Buddhist, my heroic nation is Buddhist, I am so much better than those non-Buddhists that I must kill them or exile them" is about as far from the compassionate teachings of the Buddha as it is possible to get. Likewise, extremist Muslims who proclaim that their narrow version of Islam is the only truth, and that everyone who disagrees should be killed, are equally far from the universal, all-compassionate message proclaimed by God through the Prophet Muhammad (peace upon him).

Muslims and Buddhists ought to unite against ego-driven nationalist fanaticism, which is an affront to both religious traditions. A good starting point would be joining forces against the genocide in Myanmar. Below are some suggestions for action.


Kevin Barrett
American Muslim Political Action Committee (AMPAC)

Suggestions for action:

Write and call Myanmar's government contacts pointing out that every modern nation agrees that anyone born inside a nation, whose parents and ancestors also lived on that territory, is automatically a citizen of that nation and must be protected by that nation's government.

Contact Amnesty International's International Secretariat and Amnesty International USA to demand that they issue an Appeal for Action to save the Rohingya people.

Contact Human Rights Watch to thank them for their attempts to bring attention to the plight of the Rohingya, and ask them to do more.

Contact the Center for Justice and Accountability to ask that they seek the prosecution of Myanmar leaders for genocide.

Contact The Carter Center to suggest that Jimmy Carter attempt to visit Arakan to bring humanitarian relief and stop the genocide.

Contact the Genocide Intervention Network and ask them to accelerate their efforts to stop the genocide in Myanmar.

Contact the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights , the UNHCR Refugee Agency, and the UNHCR Special Adviser on the Prevention of Genocide to demand an end to the genocide in Myanmar.

Contact your congressional representative and ask him or her to introduce legislation to pressure the Myanmar junta to stop the genocide.

Friday, August 17, 2012

Morsi joining alliance against Zionist terror?

Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi (L) shakes hands with an Egyptian soldier who was wounded in an attack in Sinai during a visit to soldiers at a hospital in Cairo, August 7, 2012.
Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi (L) shakes hands with an Egyptian soldier who was wounded in an attack in Sinai during a visit to soldiers at a hospital in Cairo, August 7, 2012.

First published at Press TV
Thu Aug 16, 2012 9:42AM GMT
By Kevin Barrett
With Iran's president demanding 9/11 truth and fighting off Mossad terrorism, and the democratic elements of Turkey's leadership surviving such false flag terror plots as Sledgehammer and Ergenekon, will Egypt's President Morsi join in an eventual regional alliance against Zionist-assisted false flag terror?

By firing some of Egypt's leading Mossad-assisted false flag terrorists last Sunday, he may have taken a significant step in that direction.
According to Asia Times analyst Pepe Escobar, Egypt's new president Mohammed Morsi has “started to move more boldly against the army after an attack by militants in Sinai that killed 16 border guards.”

To say that the Egyptian president is “moving boldly” is an understatement. Last Sunday, President Morsi fired the chiefs of Egypt's navy, air force, and air defense forces, along with the defense minister and army chief of staff. All of the fired military leaders were closely associated with the defunct Mubarak regime.
In public, President Morsi claimed that he was firing the military officials for incompetence. Like John F. Kennedy in the wake of the Bay of Pigs fiasco, who used the failed operation's “incompetence” as an excuse to fire CIA spook-meister Allan Dulles, Egypt's president appears to have won his battle with the military on the battlefield of public opinion.
But like JFK, who did not tell the world the full truth about the CIA's and military's attempt to hoodwink him into invading Cuba, President Morsi may not yet be telling the whole truth about what really happened in Sinai and why he really fired his military leadership.

Egypt's top military officials, especially those closest to Mubarak, were notorious for their collaboration with Israel's Mossad in arranging false flag terror attacks designed to be blamed on “radical Muslims.” The attack in the Sinai, which killed sixteen Egyptian border guards, may have been such a false flag.

Whenever a spectacular, widely-reported terrorist attack occurs, the first question that must be asked is cui bono, or “who gains”? Israel's Ha’aretz correspondent Akiva Eldar said of the Sinai attack: “The Israelis are in a way quite happy that the Egyptians have learnt their lesson, that they have to listen to us, and have had to pay the price.” In other words, the only party with anything obvious to gain from the Sinai attack was Israel, which wanted to punish Egypt for starting to open up its borders with Gaza.

While the attack was publicly attributed to Salafi jihadists, its extreme professionalism suggests that it must have had a state sponsor. As Dr. Ashraf Ezzat wrote in Veterans Today:

“Regardless of how the brainwashed jihadists view it, this terrorist operation only benefits Israel. And in fact, some Egyptian analysts have strong doubts as to the role of Israel in this terrorist operation and how it had been anticipated by the Israeli intelligence only two days before.

“What are the chances for two armed vehicles haphazardly storming the Israeli borders of surviving the attack, let alone achieve anything. Were the assailants not aware that they would be spotted on the Israelis’ radar the moment they crossed the line and stepped into the Israeli side of the borders? … Or were they assured otherwise?”

The Mubarak cronies running Egypt's military were notorious for their collaboration with Israel in similar false flag operations. As I wrote in the immediate aftermath of the Egyptian Revolution:

“One of the biggest sparks that set off the Egyptian revolution was blacked out of the US media.

“That spark was widespread anger that Mubarak's regime collaborated with the Israeli Mossad to bomb a Coptic church in Alexandria on New Years’ Eve - and blame it on Muslims. The whole Middle East saw right through it immediately, and the Egyptian people's disgust was a big part of what led them to overthrow Mubarak.”
President Morsi is fortunate that the Egyptian people understand that Mubarak's military and their Zionist friends were behind much of the “radical Islamic terrorism” that afflicted Egypt during the Mubarak era. The majority of the Egyptian people, unlike most Americans, understand false flag terrorism all too well, because they have suffered so much from it.
A Western poll taken in Egypt showed that 72% of Egyptians do not believe that al-Qaeda was responsible for the 9/11 attacks in America. In this, they are in complete agreement with Egypt's leading public intellectual, Mohammed Heikal, who said in October 2001: “Bin Laden has been under surveillance for years: every telephone call was monitored and al-Qaeda has been penetrated by American intelligence, Pakistani intelligence, Saudi intelligence, Egyptian intelligence. They could not have kept secret an operation that required such a degree of organization and sophistication.”

President Morsi, for his part, may be following in the footsteps of Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad by publicly opposing false flag terrorism and standing up for 9/11 truth. Like Ahmadinejad, Fidel Castro of Cuba, Hugo Chavez of Venezuela, and former Italian President Cossiga, Egypt's new president has publicly stated that he does not believe the official story of 9/11.

Additionally, President Morsi publicly supports the movement to free Omar Abdel Rahman, the so-called "blind Sheikh," who was falsely blamed for the mobbed-up New York FBI office's bombing of the World Trade Center in 1993. (The FBI also orchestrated the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing, according to convicted bomber Terry Nichols.)

With Iran's president demanding 9/11 truth and fighting off Mossad terrorism, and the democratic elements of Turkey's leadership surviving such false flag terror plots as Sledgehammer and Ergenekon, will Egypt's President Morsi join in an eventual regional alliance against Zionist-assisted false flag terror? By firing some of Egypt's leading Mossad-assisted false flag terrorists last Sunday, he may have taken a significant step in that direction.

Wednesday, August 15, 2012

Zionist extremist Chamish admits Bollyn is right, Zionists did 9/11!!

Barry Chamish admits the Zionist mob did 9/11: "But not MY right-wing Zionist mob! It was those other guys, those Labor Zionists! Really! Trust me!"
Barry Chamish is one of the most radical, out-of-control Zionists you'll ever meet. Chamish is so extreme right-wing pro-settler, pro-Greater-Israel, pro-Jabotinsky, pro-Zio-terrorist, he makes Netanyahu look like a peace-loving statesman.

But one thing you can say about Chamish: He's not stupid, he has guts, and he pretty much calls it the way he sees it. At the personal level, I actually like the guy.

So when Chamish recently wrote what he intended as a hostile review of Christopher Bollyn's Solving 9/11, but couldn't help admitting that Bollyn was basically right, that the big-money Zionist mob did 9/11 with the help of Mossad and its American assets...well, that's about the highest praise Bollyn could ever get.

Chamish claims it was the "Labor Zionists" that did 9/11, and faults Bollyn for failing to exonerate the likes of Netanyahu. But the evidence shows that Bollyn is right, and Chamish is wrong: Netanyahu was obviously a key player in the 9/11 conspiracy.

Bollyn cites Netanyahu's 1979 Jerusalem Conference on International Terrorism(JCIT) where the whole game-plan for the upcoming "war on terror," i.e. the war on Israel's enemies, was developed. Chamish fatuously writes: "In 1980, Netanyahu was selling furniture at the RIM company and not formulating plans for 9-11."  The seminal importance of Netanyahu's JCIT in creating the "war on terror" out of whole cloth, and setting the stage for 9/11, is obvious to anyone who reads Netanyahu's book that came out of JCIT. In that compilation, arch-Zionist Orientalist Bernard Lewis reveals his plan, supported by the pro-Israel wing of Western intelligence agencies, to create a modern version of the medieval assassins - namely, al-CIA-duh - and use it to smash the Middle East to pieces on behalf of Israel (the Oded Yinon plan). If that isn't the game plan for 9/11, what is? (Bernard Lewis was the first person from outside the government to meet with George W. Bush in the immediate aftermath of 9/11; obviously he was there to quarterback 9/11 and its intended aftermath.)

If there are any doubts that Netanyahu is at the top of the list of 9/11 criminals, they should be dispelled by the reports informing us that Netanyahu and confessed insurance fraudster and 9/11 demolition criminal Larry Silverstein is such a close friend of Netanyahu's that they speak on the phone every single week.

Chamish claims that Bollyn fails to see that Likud and Netanyahu are the good guys, and the Labor Zionists the bad guys, due to Bollyn's supposedly anti-Zionist or anti-Jewish ideology. But it is actually Chamish who is letting his raving-extremist Likudnik ideology blind him to some of the simple, obvious facts of 9/11, including the involvement of his heroes Sharon and Netanyahu.

Sunday, August 12, 2012

Top ten reasons to vote in American presidential elections

10. You can pretend to help decide which CIA-groomed figurehead will front for the banksters during the next four years.

9. If the rigged voting machines break down, your vote might actually be counted.

8. With a bumpersticker like "Don't blame me, I voted for Cynthia McKinney" (or your favorite 3rd party candidate) you'll feel superior to the sheeple for the next four years.

7. Poking little holes in computer cards is good exercise for the muscles in your hands and wrists - and since you only do it every four years, you won't get repetitive motion syndrome.

6. Voting offers an opportunity to do your civic duty: While standing in line waiting to vote, you can hand out 9/11 truth DVDs and explain to the sheeple that if voting changed anything, they'd make it illegal.

5. If each of the two major party candidates gets exactly fifty million votes not counting yours, your vote will determine which candidate can brag about getting the most votes. Unfortunately, due to the mysteries of the electoral college system, getting the most votes has nothing to do with being elected President.

4. You'll get to play a minor role in an outrageous, over-the-top farce, without having to get yourself hired as an extra in a Mel Brooks movie.

3. Since your vote has no effect whatsoever on the actual governance of the nation, you can go ahead and vote without feeling guilty about the mass murders and genocide that the government is guaranteed to keep right on perpetrating, regardless of the electoral outcome.

2. You can cast a write-in vote for a relatively honest president of some relatively honest country, like Hugo Chavez or Fidel Castro or Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, and hope that your local newspaper will mention it along with the write-in votes for Donald Duck, Ted Nugent, Ted Kaczynski, OJ Simpson, and Mishka the Talking Dog.

1. Casting a meaningless vote in a system rigged to victimize people like you is better than masturbation: It allows you to screw yourself, without requiring you to assume an anatomically impossible position and risk serious injury.

Wednesday, August 8, 2012

Is the Pentagon developing genocidal anti-Islam bio-weapons?

The Pentagon 

An apparent Pentagon video, leaked by the hacker group Anonymous, details US military plans to develop and deploy a biological weapon that would destroy people's receptivity to religion in targeted Muslim populations.

The proposed bio-weapon would be distributed in flu vaccines in Muslim countries. It would alter human genomic expression to produce a sort of “chemical lobotomy,” destroying the part of the brain associated with religiosity and spirituality. 

(read my Press TV article)

Monday, August 6, 2012

Plugging 9/11 truth, bashing al-Jazeera on Press TV

Arab media in bed with Western intelligence services: Analyst

8/5/2012 Press TV Interview with Kevin Barrett with the Muslim-Jewish-Christian Alliance from Wisconsin

(watch interview)

Former al-Qaeda leader, Osama Bin Laden, who has always been depicted by Western media as the United States’ worst enemy, always trusted the Qatari al-Jazeera agency to publish his messages to the world and now the two mentioned news agencies are exclusively broadcasting the armed foreign insurgents' messages to the world including footage of Iranian pilgrims kidnapped by these terrorist groups.

Press TV has conducted an interview with Kevin Barrett of the Muslim-Jewish-Christian Alliance from Wisconsin to further discuss the issue.

The video also offers the opinions of two additional guests: Peter Eyre, Middle East consultant from London and Lebanese political analyst, Roula Talj.

What follows is an approximate transcription of the interview.

Press TV: Mr Barrett, your take? If we look at this situation right now, let us say the story about Syria, it almost appears that it is so many different stories taking place depending on what network we actually turn to, to see what is really unfolding in Syria.

What has happened as far as in actual reporting, what is going on in the news industry? We have seen a deterioration of independent news journalism it seems, especially from the mainstream media since 9/11.

What is your take on this? What exactly has happened?

Barrett: Well, it is true, it got much worse after 9/11, but this really is not anything new. We have seen the American foreign policy establishment almost completely controlling and dominating big American media as far back as a coup in the early 50’s in Iran, when the Prime Minister Mosaddegh was overthrown.

CIA officer Kermit Roosevelt confessed that this campaign to overthrow the government of Iran included waves of false flag terrorism to be blamed on Mosaddegh supporters among other tactics and the BBC was brought on board as a partner in this campaign to overthrow the democratically elected government of Mosaddegh.

We have seen the same pattern repeat itself with other major foreign affairs issues, certainly the Kennedy assassination is a big one. President Kennedy was on a path to total disarmament and he was killed by the hardliners in the US military and industrial complex, with the complete complicity of the big American media.

There is actually a clip you can watch of I think it is a CBS reporter, if my memory serves, on the morning of November 22, 1963 stating that the President is likely to be killed by a lone nut because there is not good security in Dallas.

This was broadcast just hours before the president was killed ostensibly by a lone nut.
And as for the 9/11, anybody who Googles WTC7 BBC, can watch the BBC reporting the controlled demolition of building seven, although they did not call it that, 20 minutes before it happened.

So this kind of media complicity in key foreign policy actions, especially of the black ops variety is an old, old story and it is obviously still going on in Syria.

Press TV: We know that a couple of members of Aljazeera resigned earlier this year because what they saw as biased reporting on Syria.

What does that say exactly to that degree that top people in a news organization could not tolerate even working there any longer because of what they saw, biased and sometimes even ‘creation’ of new stories against Syria?

Barrett: Well, it is pretty ironic because when Aljazeera was first created, it hired these same kinds of people who were journalists with integrity, who did not like working as propaganda mouthpieces for these various Arab regimes.

And Aljazeera started off with a bang and these people did report with integrity and there are some good Aljazeera reporters, but I think that they have degenerated over the past decade.

I have actually had some contact with people of Aljazeera, there were folks there who wanted to do a story on me and the 9/11 truth movement in the USA and that was canceled by top management who told them they simply could not touch that topic and the Aljazeera source told me, the direct quote from his email to me is, “Aljazeera is not what you think it is.”

And looking back in retrospect now all of that hyping of al-Qaeda, where they are constantly showing you Bin Laden tapes, that was part of the Western intelligence operation, which the Mossad and elements of the CIA were perpetrating to deceive the world, to make the world believe that somehow Bin Laden who was not even ever indicted by the FBI for 9/11 was guilty of the 9/11 attacks.

So, Aljazeera has been in bed with the Western intelligence services, for at least the past decade and that should not surprise us since the nation of Qatar is basically one big US military base

Press TV: Do you agree with what our guest (Roula Talj) in Beirut has said that a lot of it is related to the military complex? Do you think that with some of the mainstream media or corporate media I should say, that it is hand in hand with certain Western governments that it is working, for example, as she said, to cause conflict in order to sell more weapons or to destabilize the region?

How do you see it? What is the real reason behind this?

Barrett: I think the guest is absolutely right.
The strategy is being set by the hard line Zionists in Israel.
They have been working to smash the Arab countries into pieces. They have been planning this for decades and the obvious way to do that, is to strike the fault lines of this sectarian differences and they are trying to turn Sunni against Shiite and they are trying to also incite ethnic nationalism among Kurds and other groups

They want to destroy all of these Middle Eastern states, break them into much smaller pieces that could never be a threat to Israel.

So that is the grand strategy that is being played out, but
it is the US that is actually implementing that strategy because unfortunately the US is currently completely controlled by the Zionists who instigated the 9/11 coup d’etat to consolidate their power here.

So, yes the military industrial complex is full of corrupt people who were happy to take money to build weapons and murder huge numbers of people.

But the strategy is the strategy of the Zionists
and I think that we have to keep in mind, especially, when we are talking to the American people and tell them that they have been bankrupted and bled dry by these hard line extremists Lukudnik Zionists who murdered 3000 Americans in the twin towers on 9/11.

If the American people ever figure that out, we will stop this crazy destabilization of the Middle East.

US Army psy-ops behind Wisconsin massacre?

Wade Michael Page, the “man with a 9/11 tattoo” blamed for the Wisconsin Sikh temple shooting, turns out to be a US Army psy-ops specialist.

Does the US military, or corrupt forces within it, stage false-flag massacres of civilians inside the US and other “friendly” countries as a kind of “psychological operation”?
Of course it does.

Remember Operation Northwoods? Every member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff signed off on a document proposing that the US military massacre civilians in American cities in order to achieve a political objective: Demonize Cuba and grease the skids for war.

Remember Operation Gladio? The Pentagon, through NATO, organized bombings and shootings in the streets of Europe. When one of the terrorists got caught, he explained at his trial: “You had to attack civilians, the people, women, children, innocent people, unknown people far removed from any political game. The reason was quite simple. They were supposed to force these people, the Italian public to turn to the State to ask for greater security.” He later explained the “strategy of tension” to the BBC: “To create tension within the country to promote conservative, reactionary social and political tendencies.”

Is somebody trying to “promote conservative, reactionary social and political tendencies” in the US today by staging massacres like the recent shootings in Wisconsin and Colorado? Reports of multiple shooters, and other witness statements that don’t fit the official “lone nut” story, suggest that this may be the case.

We recently learned that the notorious “DC Sniper” – the US Army Special Forces whiz who changed his name to “Muhammad” just in time to go on a shooting spree – was a government-sponsored false-flag operation.

When someone starts killing “civilians, the people, women, children, innocent people, unknown people far removed from any political game,” it causes public opinion to swing towards acceptance of hard-line government authority. It makes people run to the state for protection. It stops the people from questioning their leaders, and makes them more willing to do insane things like march off to war.

The neocon agenda aims to turn the US into an authoritarian state at perpetual war with the enemies of Israel. Today, the Zionist plan to smash the Middle East into pieces is running up against the intransigence of Russia, China, and Iran. World War III looms.

Are we being reduced to mental slavery to prevent us from protesting as our leaders get ready to kill most of us in a big nuclear exchange?

That is a big question to ponder on Hiroshima Day.

Thursday, August 2, 2012

Mobbed-up US “justice” system hands down 9/11 injustice

They've shredded the Constitution. They've endorsed 9/11 treason.

"If there were any justice in the USA, the entire federal bench would be hanged by the neck until dead. (But don't worry, there isn't.)" 

Read my controversial new Press TV article: Mobbed-up US “justice” system hands down 9/11 injustice