John Cobb, Richard Falk on Halloween Truth Jihad Radio special

Terrify trick-or-treaters by listening to these voices of horrifying truth while you hand out candy!

Saturday 10/31, 5-7 pm Central, Truth Jihad Radio, on
First hour: John Cobb, leading Protestant theologian, co-editor of 9/11 and American Empire v.2: Christians, Jews, and Muslims Speak Out.
Second hour: Richard Falk, Professor Emeritus, Princeton University, U.N. Special Rapporteur for Human Rights in the Occupied Territories, expert on the Goldstone Report, and 9/11 truth-seeker. Read yesterday’s Press TV story: “Falk: Goldstone Report Puts Israel on Trial.”

To be archived a few days after broadcast here.

Holocaustism vs. Islam

Sometimes it seems like there are only two major religions left: Holocaustism and Islam.

According to Gilad Atzmon, “The Israeli Philosophy professor Yeshayahu Leibowitz was probably the first to define the holocaust as the ‘new Jewish religion’.”

But as the persecution of Bishop Williamson makes clear, Holocaustism has replaced Christianity as well as Judaism.

You can tell which story is sacred and which one isn’t by the reaction you get when you commit sacrilege. Nowhere in the West is anyone being brought up on charges of denying the crucifixion-resurrection. People can blithely doubt the crucifixion and the resurrection and the virgin birth and the trinity other tenets of Christianity and still work in the great universities of the West. In fact, if they don’t doubt these things, they might have a harder time getting hired. Admit at a faculty luncheon that you don’t doubt the resurrection or the virgin birth, and you’ll get some very strange looks.

But admit that you doubt any aspect of the sacred Holocaust narrative–six million Jewish victims, most killed in gas chambers, as part of a pre-conceived effort to eliminate Jewry from the face of the earth–and you’ll never work in this town again. Thus we are treated to the spectacle of a Catholic bishop being tried by a new Inquisition for a heresy that has nothing to do with Catholicism.

My wise old kabbalah professor, Jacob Needleman, once pointed out that the Holocaust caused a great many Jews to lose their faith in God. How could a good God let this happen? Abandoning God, these Jews joined the atheist Zionists who were colonizing Palestine. They began worshipping the state of Israel, and its power, instead of God, the true source of all power. So it’s easy to understand why Holocaustism, the sacred foundation of secular Zionism, became the majority religion of today’s ethnic Jews.

But why has Holocaustism replaced Chrisitianity? I suppose it is because Christianity has been in slow decline for several centuries. By the 19th century, neither the thinking nor the ruling classes really believed in God any more. (A.N. Wilson, God’s Funeral.) The reaction against Christianity in post-Christian Europe reached the point that by the post-World War II period, a residual Christian guilt complex met growing Jewish-Holocaustist power in the media…and the result was Holocaustism replacing Christianity as the core sacred narrative of the West.

Islam vs. Holocaustism

Islam, the world’s fastest-growing religion, is immune to Holocaustism for two reasons. First, Muslims understand and oppose the Holocaustist atrocities in Palestine. “By their fruits ye shall know them,” said Jesus, peace upon him…and the fruits of Holocaustist Zionism — millions of people ethnic-cleansed, children shot for sport with impunity, white phosphorus dropped on the world’s most densely-populated space, and on and on — are as visibly evil to Muslims as they are invisibly evil to Westerners.

Second, Islam is built around the core teaching of tawhid: the absolute, eternal oneness of God as the only appropriate object of worship. The worst possible sin, from an Islamic perspective, is worshipping something other than God. So Muslims are not easily drawn into worshipping alleged sons of God, crucifixions, trinities, chosen peoples, or even holocausts.

Since Muslims stubbornly persist in worshipping God rather than the Holocaust, the 9/11 false-flag attack was orchestrated in order to launch a Holocaustist crusade against Islam. Just as the sacred story of the Holocaust was used to brainwash Jews into believing they had been victimized and thus had the right to become vengeful victimizers, the sacred official story of 9/11 was used to brainwash Americans and Westerners into believing that they too had been victimized, and that thus they too must become vengeful victimizers. In both cases the target of vengeance was Arabs and Muslims — though why Holocaustists would take vengeance against Germans by mass-murdering and ethnic-cleansing Arabs and Muslims has never been explained. Le coeur noir a ses raisons que la raison ne connait point.

The Future of an Illusion

The 9/11 truth movement has already succeeded in desacralizing the official myth of 9/11. The question of what really happened and why on 9/11 has become a legitimate topic of debate. As time goes on, it will grow more and more difficult for the high priests of the official myth to do to other skeptics what was done to me, Steven Jones, and Kevin Ryan.

Meanwhile, the world’s Muslims will persist in worshipping God alone and refusing to kowtow to Holocaustism. They will continue to view the Jewish holocaust, small h, as just one of a great many holocausts and genocides, some of which continue today in places like Palestine, Iraq, and Afghanistan. They will continue to insist that the Jewish holocaust, like all other holocausts and genocides, be the subject of free and fearless historical debate in which all viewpoints are welcome, and issues decided on the basis of reason and evidence, not emotion or intimidation or fines and jail sentences. And they will continue to insist that Palestine be returned to its rightful owners.

When the dust settles, insha’allah, I think more and more Westerners will come to realize that the Muslims were right all along — not only about history and politics, but more importantly, about God.

“After all I am a proper Zionist Jew” by Gilad Atzmon

“Yes, I am a survivor, for I have managed to survive all the scary accounts of the Holocaust: the one about the soap (1), the one about the lamp shades, the one about the camps, the mass shooting, the one about the gas (2) and the one about the death march (3). I just managed to survive them all.” (more here)

Gilad Atzmon, living proof that pen and saxaphone are mightier than the white phosphorous sword, will join me on the radio Tuesday, November 10th. Meanwhile, two of my other favorite “proper Zionist Jews,” Richard Falk and Philip Weiss, will join me this Saturday 10/31 and next Tuesday 11/3 respectively. (Check out Weiss introducing Falk’s recent essay on why “Goldstone is a historic blow in the war Israel is losing – the ‘Legitimacy War.’“)

Judaism’s great ethical tradition, which teaches us to question everything (even 9/11 and Zionism!), is slightly the worse for wear these days, but it proudly lives on in Gilad Atzmon, Richard Falk, and Philip Weiss. (Not to mention Anna Baltzer, new star of the Daily Show, who I hope to have back on my show soon!)

Explanation B: The Oil Card

Some folks in the 9/11 truth movement obsess over narrow evidentiary issues. Others focus mainly on the family members and first responders. Quite a few are mainly concerned with the fewer than 3,000 Americans killed on that day, rather than the 1.2 million Iraqis and untold Afghanis who have been and are still being murdered as part of the same crime.

Me, I’m a big picture guy. I want to know WHY they did this. And by “this” I mean the whole shebang — not just blowing up the World Trade Center and part of the Pentagon, but all of the shifts in geopolitical and economic policy that were set in place even before 9/11 was staged as a pretext.

David Ray Griffin
, the unofficial dean of 9/11 studies, blames a hawkish element in the US national security establishment. That is obviously correct as far as it goes. The problem is, how exactly did US “national security” benefit from 9/11 and the 9/11 wars? On the surface, 9/11 and its wars seem to have weakened the US geopolitically, not strengthened it. Instead of the low oil prices and balanced budgets and happily democratic, pro-US, pro-Israel Middle East we were promised, we have high oil prices, an angry, less-democratic less-pro-US Middle East, and most importantly a catastrophic fiscal situation that has produced the worst economy since the Great Depression. What does any of this have to do with “national security”?

Explanation A: Nothing. But it has everything to do with Israeli security. The point of 9/11, in this view, was to trigger a long-term US war against the whole Islamic world on behalf of Israel. As 9/11 Commission coverup-commissar Philip Zelikow said, “Why would Iraq attack America or use nuclear weapons against us? I’ll tell you what I think the real threat (is) and actually has been since 1990 — it’s the threat against Israel…And this is the threat that dare not speak its name, because the Europeans don’t care deeply about that threat, I will tell you frankly. And the American government doesn’t want to lean too hard on it rhetorically, because it is not a popular sell.” In this view, 9/11 was a coup d’etat by the hardline Zionists in and around PNAC, designed to trick the US into perpetually smashing Israel’s Arab and Muslim enemies.

The implications of Explanation A — that the Israeli tail is wagging the American dog to death — are rather astounding. How could the Zionists have convinced people like Rumsfeld and Cheney and Richard Myers to commit treason on such a grand scale?

Enter Explanation B: The Oil Card. As James R. Norman writes in his book of that name, the 9/11 wars may actually be directed against China. By driving up the price of oil and wrecking the global economy (including the US economy) the US National Security State is shooting itself in the foot, but simultaneously shooting China in the heart. China is far more dependent on imported oil than the US is, so by taking Iraqi oil off-line, and throwing much of the Islamic oil-producing world into chaos, along with other measures, the NATSSIs (National Security State Idiots) have jacked up oil prices to the point that, they calculate, China will be unable to sustain its breakneck pace of economic growth, and will fail to emerge as a geopolitical challenger to US hegemony. (It’s actually a bit more complicated than that — for the details, read Norman’s book.)

Norman’s analysis is supported by George Friedman’s very useful introduction to geopolitics, The Next 100 Years. Friedman persuasively argues that national elites rationally pursue their predictable interests within predictable constraints, making history, including future history, understandable. If this is true, the US national elites who staged 9/11 and its pre-scripted wars cannot have done so for any of the reasons they gave us. Whether the real reason was Explanation A, Explanation B, or both of the above, it was an act of the foulest treason against the American people and the people of the world.


Talking Back to the Pope

– Clangnuts cartoon

On Oct 26, 2009, at 10:29 AM, Dr. Robert Moynihan of Inside the Vatican wrote this:

“Though 82, Benedict XVI is moving on all fronts: Lefebvrists, Anglicans, the Orthodox, Jews… He is trying to reunite all those factions and denominations and groups in the West that share common beliefs in the eternal destiny of human beings, in the sacredness of human life (since human beings are “in the image and likeness of God”), in the existence of a moral standard which is true at all times and in all places (against the relativism of the modern secular culture), in the need for justice in human affairs, for the rule of right, not might.

My response: “As one of a growing number of Western Muslims who share all of these ‘common beliefs’ (except that God has an image — us — which is a rather anthropomorphic and narcissistic idea) it seems to me that Benedict XVI is not quite moving on ALL fronts. Why are Muslims left out? …If you (or the Pope for that matter) would be willing to discuss this on one of my radio programs let me know.”

I’m still waiting for Moynihan and/or the Pope to get back to me. So in the meantime I decided to address an open letter directly to Benedict XVI, bypassing the middleman.

Dear Pope Benedict XVI,

I am curious about why your recent efforts toward inclusivity and dialogue have ignored Western Muslims like me.

The West (North America, Europe, Australia and New Zealand) includes more than 50 million Muslims and fewer than 10 million Jews. So why are Jews on this list of Westerners you’re trying to reach out to and include, while Muslims are not? It certainly isn’t because Jews are more religious, and less prone to secular relativist worldviews, than Muslims!

Your Holiness, if I didn’t know you were Infallible, I would suspect you of Islamophobia. (See quotes from your Regensburg lecture below.)

Below is the opening of an article of mine that will soon be published in a book entitled: Reasonable Religion: Atheists and Theists Discuss Religion, to be published by Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc, through its Lexington Books imprint. You may also be interested in a book I edited entitled 9/11 and the American Empire v.2: Christians, Jews and Muslims Speak Out. I would be happy to send you personally autographed papal copies of these books for your Vatican Library if you so desire.

Meanwhile, if you are ever in the mood for a little friendly interfaith dialogue, I would be honored to have you as a guest on one of my radio shows.

Thank you for your attention, and I look forward to hearing from you.


Kevin Barrett

PS 9/11 was an inside job!

* * *

Is Islam Reasonable? In 2006, Pope Benedict XVI delivered a lecture in Regensburg, entitled “Faith, Reason and the University — Memories and Reflections”, in which he contrasted a Christian view that “not acting reasonably is contrary to God’s nature” with an Islamic view, as interpreted by Catholic theologian Adel-Theodore Khoury, that God transcends rationality as well as everything else. The papal speech drew criticism from Muslims and others not only for its apparent attempt to equate Islam with unreason, but especially because it quoted without disapproval the Byzantine emperor Manuel II Palaiologos: “Show me just what Muhammad brought that was new and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached.”

The Regensburg lecture predictably incited anger among Muslims and joy among Islamophobes. James Schall, the Catholic political scientist who sees the U.S. invasion of Iraq as part of a much-needed war on Islam, wrote a book extolling the speech.

The controversial passages of the Pope’s speech exemplify a common Western discourse portraying Islam as a religion of violent fanaticism and Muslims as essentially unreasonable people. Thus we are led to ask, is Islam reasonable? Is there any sense in which Islam as a religion, and Muslims as adherents of that religion, may be shown by rational argument based on empirical evidence to be any more or less reasonable than anyone else? Would a reasonable person who is neither Christian nor Muslim, neither Western nor Eastern, when confronted by the most salient differences between Islam and Christianity, conclude that Christianity is the way of reason, and Islam the way of unreason? . . .

– Kevin Barrett, “Is Islam Reasonable?” From Reasonable Religion: Atheists and Theists Discuss Religion, to be published by Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc, through its Lexington Books imprint. For the rest of the article, you’ll have to buy the book.

Three mega-myths BUSTED by my radio guests!

Webster Tarpley, who appeared on both my radio shows last week, busts the myth of al-Qaeda on Russia Today: “Al-Qaeda is the CIA’s Arab Legion.”

Gilad Atzmon, who will join me on November 11th, busts the myth of the Jewish people and their “return” to Zion: SHLOMO SAND’S THE INVENTION OF THE JEWISH PEOPLE-BOOK REVIEW BY GILAD ATZMON.

And last but not least, Richard Gage got a mainstream paper to help bust the myth of the magically-crumbling World Trade Center skyscrapers: Imperium Watch: Flying Girders, Falling Towers Is the public ready to consider evidence that controlled demolition brought down the World Trade Center skyscrapers?

Go, mythbusters!

Local supporter weighs in on Pomona police vs. Muhammed Abdullah

A local supporter of Muhammed Abdullah, my first hour guest tonight on Truth Jihad Radio (5-7 pm Central,, just wrote to say that actually the Southern California 9/11 truth community DID turn out in force for Muhammad’s court case last June. My response: “I wasn’t complaining so much about the trial not being publicized (though I can’t understand why 911blogger didn’t pick it up) but about the lack of reaction to the recent DHS raid on his house. It’s pretty obvious they were just harassing him for his activism. I would think his fellow activists would want to protest big time. Letting a truther get raided by DHS without major protest sets a bad precedent.”

Reports on Muhammad’s court case:

Below is the email from the Southern California supporter of Muhammed.

Hi, Kevin! Funny you should mention Muhammed Abdullah. The local 9/11 Truth groups (WeAreChangeLA and Orange County 9/11 Truth) did publicize his trial, went to the courthouse to support him, and even organized an impromptu demonstration nearby. FYI, here is my comment after his 2nd court hearing, when he cross-examined complainants and agreed to seek a compromise with the city:

1. As I said after the hearing was over, what a shame that Muhammed did not have an attorney, or at least some close friend who would be knowledgeable enough to dissect the incriminating testimonies and coach him into cross-examining. The witnesses would have gone underground under questioning by even an amateurish lawyer, and the city attorney would have backtracked as fast as he could. Once again, a court illustrated that money makes a lot of difference.

2. Indeed, the testimonies were, at best, very weak:
· The ladies related single, one-time incidents.
· Their feelings were subjective.
· Much of the fear had a sexual overtone, yet there was no mention of any practical action on Muhammed’s part that could be construed as sexual harassment (looking at breasts or crotch or high heel shoes, suggestive postures or gestures, etc.).
· The ladies were afraid enough to launch a legal action, but not enough to consult a psychotherapist; kindly note that public servants, unlike most of us, benefit from socialized or quasi-socialized medicine.

3. Had Muhammed known how to cross-examine, the 3rd lady may have declined to testify:
· He would have asked detailed questions to establish the weakness of their testimonies (see above). In fact, when the 2nd witness mentioned that she vividly remembered the dress or skirt she was wearing, he could have asked what else she was wearing, and then what sexually suggestive attitude he adopted if any.
· Since the witnesses had criminal expertise, they had undoubtedly some training on how to handle dangerous people. If they were afraid of Muhammed, how did they handle truly dangerous situations within the scope of their jobs?
· This would have allowed him to legitimately raise the question as to whether they believed he was making up his allegations regarding 9/11 –“Your honor, I’m trying to make sense out of the witness’ fear; maybe she thinks I am inventing what I claim.”

· He would have asked the ladies why they were not afraid enough to formulate their complaints right away.
· He would have asked why they supported a legal action for a one-time problem instead of having the police give him a formal complaint and an invitation to use more restraint. In fact, wouldn’t this have been an elementary action on the part of public servants bent on serving the public?

· He would have steered the debate away from the fact that he was speaking and into the fact that a small aspect of his speech bothered a few people on one occasion.
· This would have made it obvious that the City’s court action was a waste of public resources and that the solution was just a bit of dialog between the Police Department and Muhammed. The judge would have ended up wondering why the City did not initiate that dialog rather than waste his time.

4. The judge’s “compromise” is what the French would call the use of a hammer to kill a fly. The judge –as a good cross between a politician and an attorney, with a limited sense of ethics like most public officials –probably knows very well what he is doing: giving Muhammed enough help so he cannot argue on appeal that the judge was unfair to him, but not enough to make the case against him crumble; he is earning some points with his Masters while appearing as a defender of the right to free speech.

5. The judge took pride in his blissful ignorance, giving Muhammed his materials back under the pretext that they were irrelevant to the case rather than accepting a challenge to learn something.

See you in Delavan tomorrow!

The good people of Delavan are cowering beneath their desks and covering their eyes and ears, in anticipation of an explosion of truth timed to detonate this coming Saturday, October 24th, in the Delavan Super-8 Hotel Conference Room. See you there! (full story here)

In other stories…tomorrow’s radio show features Muhammed Abdullah, the Muslim Marine vet truther raided by DHS in apparent reprisal for his doggedly persistent truth activism in Pomona, CA. This story has been wildly underplayed in the 9/11 truth movement–the guy lost his job for being a truther, prevailed in court against the Pomona Police Department, then got raided under blatantly false pretenses. Come on people, where’s the outrage? Following Muhammed will be professor Anthony Hall discussing the recent flurry of “arrest Bush” activity in Canada, and lots of other good stuff.

On Monday, 1-2 pm Central, I’ll be appearing on the Mark Maxon show on KTKK in Salt Lake City, “one of the last remaining independent radio stations.” Mark recently interviewed Mossad-fabricated “reformed terrorist” and professional Islamophobe Walid Shoebat, the target of my recent parody “Walid Shoebat’s Evil Twin.” So I’ll be lambasting Islamophobia in general and Shoebat in particular on Maxon’s show.

Then on Tuesday my guest on Fair and Balanced will be Dr. Ian Douglas, Coordinator of the International initiative to prosecute U.S. genocide in Iraq.

By midweek KVMR of Nevada City, California will be posting the archive of my interview last week with Chamba Lane. Go here and click on the Wednesday, October 21st show. There were some great moments on this two-hour show.

Then on Hallowe’en I’ll play host to an amazing pair of guests, John Cobb and Richard Falk, on Truth Jihad Radio. John and Richard are two of the greatest minds in their fields — theology and international law, respectively. For academic reputation and intellectual firepower, these two guys back-to-back is as good as it gets.

Should be a great week!

My radio schedule Saturday 10/24 through Tuesday 11/3

Past shows archived here and here.
General information on my shows here.

Saturday 10/24, 5-7 pm Central, Truth Jihad Radio, on AmericanFreedomRadio:
First hour: Muhammed Abdullah, Marine-corps vet truther raided by DHS in apparent reprisal for his activism.
Second hour: 9/11 truth supporter Professor Anthony Hall, Globalization Studies, University of Lethbridge, discussing Bush-league war criminals and more.

Monday 10/26, 1:20 – 2 pm Central: Guesting on The Maxon Show, KTKK “K-Talk” Radio, Salt Lake City, to be archived here.

Tuesday 10/27, 9-10 am Pacific, Fair and Balanced with Kevin Barrett, on NoLiesRadio:
Dr. Ian Douglas, Coordinator, International Initiative to Prosecute US Genocide in Iraq.

Friday 10/30
, noon – 2 pm Central: Guesting on The Maxon Show, KTKK “K-Talk” Radio, Salt Lake City, to be archived here.

Saturday 10/24, 5-7 pm Central, Truth Jihad Radio, on AmericanFreedomRadio:
First hour: John Cobb, leading Protestant theologian, co-editor of 9/11 and American Empire v.2: Christians, Jews, and Muslims Speak Out.
Second hour: Richard Falk, Professor Emeritus, Princeton University, U.N. Special Rapporteur for Human Rights in the Occupied Territories, expert on the Goldstone Report, and 9/11 truth-seeker.

Tuesday 10/27, 9-10 am Pacific, Fair and Balanced with Kevin Barrett, on NoLiesRadio: First half-hour: William Blum, author, Killing Hope: U.S. Military and CIA Interventions Since World War II. Second half: Philip Weiss, former NY Times journalist, taboo-busting anti-Zionist, author “Do Jews Dominate in American Media? And So What If We Do?

Breaking stories: you heard it here first!

The Israeli-linked “art student” story Jonathan Elinoff broke on my show last Saturday got picked up by Infowars. Congratulations, Jonathan! And thanks to Ed Rynearson of RadioDuJour and American Freedom Radio for helping break the story.

Another breaking story returns to Truth Jihad Radio this Saturday, as Muhammed Abdullah, the Marine vet 9/11 truther who was raided by DHS in apparent reprisal for his activism, will join me for a full hour to tell his harrowing story. Stay tuned to my radio schedule page for updates. Other upcoming guests include professor Anthony Hall of the University of Lethbridge; Dr. Ian Douglas, coordinator of the International Initiative to Prosecute US Genocide in Iraq; 9/11-truth-seeking Princeton University professor and UN human rights official Richard Falk, expert on the Goldstone Report; John Cobb, one of the world’s leading Protestant theologians, who happens to be a 9/11 truth supporter; and William Blum, “the thinking man’s Noam Chomsky,” author of Killing Hope.

And speaking of important stories, Josh Blakeney follows up on Tuesday’s radio show with William Pepper:

Pressure Mounts on Canadian Law Enforcement Official to Arrest George Bush for International Crimes and for Possible Involvement in the 9/11 Debacle!

By Josh Blakeney

Media Coordinator of Globalization Studies, University of Lethbridge

21 October, 2009

Saskatoon Canada. About 300 protesters gathered outside of Teachers’ Credit Union Place in Saskatoon to make a public display of their refusal to welcome George W. Bush to Canada. Bush’s luncheon address to a business audience in Saskatoon was one stop in his three city Canadian tour. While one branch of the protesters worked with police, another branch emphasized the responsibility of the police to arrest George Bush.

This second group has aligned itself with Lawyers Against War. As it did in the prelude to the former US president’s speeches in Calgary and Toronto, LAW delivered evidence to the relevant law enforcement officials right up to Prime Minister Stephen Harper. LAW has documented the case that Bush is credibly accused war criminal who should be arrested in Canada and tried for international crimes as well as for violating the Canadian Crimes Against Humanity and War Crimes Act.

At one point I, Josh Blakeney, who am here in Saskatoon covering the event for Globalization Studies at the University of Lethbridge, took the microphone on the dissenters podium to criticize one of the organizers who publicly thanked the police. I presented the case on behalf of those who believe that Canadian law enforcement officials are violating the rule of law, including the Nuremberg principles, for not arresting former US president for his role in authorizing aggressive war and torture. Following orders, it was decided at Nuremberg and the United Nations, is no excuse for violating international laws as Canadian law enforcement officials have consistently done in refusing to arrest George Bush’s during his Canadian speaking engagements.

I also drew attention on and off the podium to the growing body of evidence that parts of the US government may have been involved in the controlled demolitions of the three World Trade Center towers on September 11, 2001. A recent peer-reviewed article by University of Copenhagen Chemistry Professor Niels Harrit et. al. demonstrates conclusively that military grade nano-thermite was used in dropping the three towers. From the day one of the post-9/11 era the US government has stuck to its initial story that the three steel-frame towers collapsed because of the impact of two plane crashes.

I pointed out that the contested events of 9/11 form the basis of the US government’s Global War on Terror which continues under the Obama regime but with a different name. Most of the the war crimes and crimes against humanity that LAW and other organizations have pressed against George Bush came about because of aggressive wars justified by an explanation of 9/11 that subsequent research and publication by Professor David Ray Griffin and others have shown to be implausible.

The US government alleged on day one that Osama bin Laden and nineteen Saudi hijackers with box cutters acted alone in creating the 9/11 debacle. This version of events would attribute the destruction to a massive failure of intelligence, air defense, immigration, and skyscrapper engineering for which no one has yet been fired for incompetence or malfeasance.

In my short talk at the dissenter’s podium in Saskatoon I called attention to the importance of the upcoming trial next March of Splitting the Sky, a prominent activist in the movement seeking 9/11 truth. The well-known Mohawk activist, who is also known as John Boncore, was arrested in Calgary last March attempting to conduct a citizens’ arrest of George Bush.