Today’s guests: Sufi Muslim writer Anab Whitehouse, 9/11 truth candidate Craig Hill

Truth Jihad Radio Sat. 2/27/10, 5-7 pm Central, American Freedom Radio (to be archived here.) Call-in number: 512-879-3805.

First hour: Anab (Bill) Whitehouse is the author of more than eight books including The Essence of September 11th, Democracy Lost and Regained, and Sam Harris and the End of Faith: A Muslim’s Critical Response. “He graduated with honors from Harvard University, and, then, by the Grace of God, successfully completed a Ph.D. program in Educational Theory at the University of Toronto. Dr. Bill (Anab) became a Muslim and stepped onto the Sufi path at the same time, back in 1973, at the hands of his shaykh, Dr. M. Qadeer Baig.” (Sufi Circle) The timing is propitious, since Sufi-inclined Muslims are celebrating Friday’s Mawlid al-Nabi this weekend.

Second hour: Craig Hill, 9/11 truth candidate for House and Senate in Vermont. Craig’s anti-anti-Zionist email polemic below seemed to me to be unduly broad and harsh. What do you think?

Call-in number: 512-879-3805

Funny thing is, i do not believe there is much mystery about the Israeli govt, which i liken to a govt best referred to as Nazisraeli. It is not hard to find out details about them. Ha’aretz, the most accurate anti-zionist outfit i’ve read, is filled with them. And funnily enough, rarely referenced by anti-zionists prejudiced like white southerners against blacks, which is what The Evil Drumbeat mostly resembles. Cuz referencing Ha’aretz would direct drooling booger-eating Jew-haters away from their wall-to-wall slam dunk against Jews, er um oh yeah, “Zionists”. Did you know there are orthodox Jews who get interviewed by media you would never read if it killed you who call the Nazisraeli govt they hate “illegal and immoral”? Of course you don’t. Too busy gazing longingly at your wallet photo of Hitler. It is the FINGERING of Jews as SOLE EVIL in the world, the force that drives all those benign innocent little overwhelmingly Christian-led govts, that i find blatantly literally retarding. I guess 0bama and Bush would have to be Jews wearing yarmulkes before any of the anti-zionist crowd could POSSIBLY see them as their own evil greedy killing agent, out for himself and his corporate military ilk, not being pushed around as innocents by der juden. And that is what the anti-zionist crowd produces: A very convenient villain hiding behind everyone else who’re doing 99% of all the evil in the world, who are then not focused on cuz they ain’t Jews. Just another govt psy-op to lead the easily led astray. First, everything is blamed on Muslims. If it’s not them, it’s the Jews. It’s never the fucking Baptists, or name your evil-doing Christian sect. Evereverevereverever. “You people” are such total saps. You protect by redirecting attention away from that which you supposedly hate, but don’t. Because if it’s not done by someone you can call a zionist, whether he is or isn’t, you’re down with every single murder. Whose side are you really on? Idiotic prejudice, and precious little else. ~~ Craig Hill

Cognitively Infiltrating Cass Sunstein

re:  Obama staffer wants ‘cognitive infiltration’ of 9/11 conspiracy groups

Sent January 15th, 2010

To ,

Dear Cass R. Sunstein and Adrian Vermeule,

As the world’s best-known Muslim “conspiracy theorist,” forced out of the University of Wisconsin in a McCarythist purge for sharing the Muslim-majority viewpoint on 9/11, I would love to expand the cognitive diversity of my radio show  by having one or both of you as guests.

Current openings include Saturday 2/6 (and subsequent Saturdays) 7-8 pm ET, and Tuesday 2/9 (and subsequent Tuesdays) noon-1 pm ET.

My audience of elite “conspiracy theorists” (what I do is “Alex Jones for intellectuals”) would be very interested in your views, which I suspect are not quite as nefarious as they have been portrayed in the alternative media.

Thank you for considering this, and I look forward to hearing from you.


Dr. Kevin Barrett
Author, Questioning the War on Terror: A Primer for Obama Voters

* * *


* * *

Sent February 27th, 2010

Dear Cass R. Sunstein and Adrian Vermeule,

 I cannot understand why you have failed to respond to my invitation to cognitively infiltrate my radio show. If you were sincere in calling for the “cognitive infiltration” of the 9/11 truth movement, why not take me up on my offer? Barrie Zwicker has accurately observed that I am a “radical informational democrat” and my shows have no taboos, so you would be free to inject as much cognitive diversity as you like.

Quoting Daniel Tencer’s Raw Story article:

Cass Sunstein, a Harvard law professor, co-wrote an academic article entitled “Conspiracy Theories: Causes and Cures,” in which he argued that the government should stealthily infiltrate groups that pose alternative theories on historical events via “chat rooms, online social networks, or even real-space groups and attempt to undermine” those groups.

Chat rooms, online social networks, and real-space groups are all wonderful…but what about radio shows? I’m beginning to really feel left out! I know you must be incredibly busy posting stuff on Facebook under aliases like “9/11 Truth Nazi” and “Elvis Did 9/11,” but hey, radio shows are important, too!

If you continue to refuse to cognitively infiltrate my radio show, I will be forced to conclude that your activities are indeed nefarious–specifically, that you are part of an elite conspiracy to undermine alternative radio by pretending to ignore it.  In fact, I’ll bet you intentionally left alternative radio off your list of targets as a psychological warfare tactic to make people like me, Jack Blood, Alex Jones, Joyce Riley, Jeff Rense, Mike Rivero, Cheri Roberts, Dave Von Kleist, Mark Glenn, and other pro-9/11-truth radio hosts feel insignificant.

If I am wrong about this, please contact me IMMEDIATELY so we can schedule an infiltration date.

Yours in cognitive diversity,

Kevin Barrett

Dr. Kevin Barrett
Author, Questioning the War on Terror: A Primer for Obama Voters

The Attempted Arrest of George W. Bush for Murder

Splitting-the-Sky, the hero who attempted to citizens-arrest Bush last spring and was arrested himself, will join me on Saturday, March 6th,  5-6 pm Central on Truth Jihad Radio (listen at

I spoke with Splitting-the-Sky Sunday. He’s in excellent spirits, though wishing he were getting more support for his heroic effort to put Bush on trial for war crimes. Recently the prosecution offered a plea-bargain in which he would be sentenced to community service. Splitting-the-Sky turned down the offer, telling them his attempt to arrest Bush WAS community service! 

A lot of us are still growing the guts to do something as audacious as Splitting-the-Sky’s citizen’s arrest attempt. Please let this modern North American hero know you appreciate his work by emailing him at splitting_the_sky(at)   Remember, this guy could be facing hard jail time for doing what all of us should be doing. And while you’re at it, a contribution to his defense fund, however small, would also lift his spirits. Checks should be made out to John Boncore.

John Boncore
P. O. Box 1492
Chase, BC

Below is Sacramento peace and truth activist Tom King’s review of Vincent Bugliosi’s #1 New York Times bestseller The Prosecution of George W. Bush for Murder.

* * *

Hi Kevin,

Since various of your current radio guests are concerned with getting the guts, as you put it, to citizen-arrest W, I thought you might like to take a look at a review I recently finished writing.  Here ’tis.

All best regards,

The Prosecution of George W. Bush for Murder, by Vincent Bugliosi

Hard to say where one will find, looking not only in courts of law but any profession or field, a more formidable reputation than that of Vincent Bugliosi.  His win-lose record in his career as prosecutor in the office of the Los Angeles County District Attorney strains credulity:  105 felony jury cases won, 1 lost; 21 murder convictions, no acquittals.  Yet equally noteworthy is his career as an author.  He had three non-fiction books reach #1 on The New York Times hardcover bestseller list.  One of these, Helter Skelter, became the best-selling true crime book in publishing history. Given the high distinction of attorney Vincent Bugliosi and the anything-but-coy title of his iconoclastic indictment, a would-be reader is apt to suppose he knows exactly what he’s in for.  In my own case, the expectations were pinned on a man of magnitude in his field, a courtroom attorney of the first order, and one who wrote lucidly enough to reach a wide audience.  In a book whose title was radical enough I was sure few publishers would have been likely to adopt it, I supposed he would put his expertise at my service in the attempt to deliver the goods.  I was not disappointed.  Surprises come, however, in unexpected bonuses.  The rewards consist not only in the sum and substance of what he has to write, but how he writes it.
What surprised me most was this author’s passion, his passionate mode in writing.  To be more precise, the astonishment springs from his application of the most thoroughgoing, carefully reasoned argumentation in combination with what I would call a rhetorical command of righteous outrage.  For example, dealing with the Bush’s brazen rewriting of the CIA’s classified NIE report to accommodate the agenda to mislead the public,

How, you may ask at this point, would these thugs have the guts to change the language of an official document that they had to know at some point would become declassified?  I guess for several reasons.  First, by the time the NIE document was declassified, it would be long after the start of the war the Bush administration wanted so badly.  Secondly, they know how completely out of it the American public (the Walking Dead) is and how they only focus, if at all, on what’s happening today, their memory lasting as long as a breath upon a mirror.  And finally, they know from experience that with the very weak “liberal media” and pathetic liberal TV personalities like Charlie Rose, Ted Koppel, and George Stephanopoulis—physiological marvels who are somehow able to sit erect in front of a camera without a spine—they can literally get by with murder…  (p. 113)

The fury is there throughout, the hot sparks assuring that a reader is never in danger of nodding off over dry legalese.  When Bugliosi has dealt with the Bush administration’s gigantic deception operation that led us into our most ineradicable shame as a nation, dealt with it in all its intricate twists and turns, exhaustively analyzing and exposing it, he drops a final benediction on his reader.

            If all of the above, enough to enrage a saint, doesn’t make your blood boil, it’s only because you are a bloodless wonder, and belong as a feature exhibit in the Smithsonian.  (p. 130)

Nothing unctuous here!
Most unforgettable of all are the passages early on, in the prologue to the prosecution, where the anger merges with profound grief.

            In talking about the horrors of the Iraq war, one of the problems is that numbers on a page are so lifeless and mean little to most people.  Saying that 100,000 people have died in the war in Iraq is just a number to them.  But obviously, if they could have seen, up close, the horror and carnage of all 100,000 people dying, the number 100,000 would have a totally different meaning to them… (p. 48)

When you have finished reading this chapter you will not be supposing its author to be one of those for whom deaths in Iraq are mere numbers; he gives page after page of true accounts, heartbreaking tales, of the young soldiers whose dreams were dashed, lives spilled for a worthless cause, and the agony and ululation of those affected by their all but unbearable losses.  It is as though the fallen in Iraq were his own family, his loss a personal one, and that he is thrust forever into mourning.
            This portrait of disregarded, collective misery of bereavement becomes the initial premise of a syllogism in which the second premise is a portrait of George W. Bush.  Supplying us scores of telling glimpses, he displays the Commander in Chief as not merely the prime mover behind the least of all justified wars, but an unfeeling idler who lives out his happiest years, joking with cronies and clicking his heels, while thousands die at his bidding.  We can have little doubt as to the syllogism’s conclusion, given his book’s title.
As a courtroom lawyer accustomed over the course of decades to scrutinizing with utmost care the mindset of juries, Bugliosi writes with full cognizance of his reader’s inevitable doubts.  He knows Joe Public, his reader, begins as skeptic.  You want us to believe that we could throw the former President of the United States into a cell like a common hoodlum?  Indeed, that is exactly what he wants us to believe.

…All I can tell you is that as a former prosecutor with twenty-one murder convictions without a loss, seeking and obtaining a death penalty sentence against eight of the murder defendants, I am probably in a better position than the average person to know what type of evidence is necessary to go to trial with and secure a conviction of murder.  And in my opinion there certainly is enough evidence against Bush to justify bringing him to trial and letting an American jury decide whether or not he is guilty of murder, and if so, what the appropriate punishment should be.  I am very confident that, based on the evidence I set forth on the following pages, a competent prosecutor could convict Bush of murder.  (p. 86)

Continuing to confront his dubious reader directly, supposing him to believe a courtroom is not the appropriate place for George Bush, he throws out this challenge in the realm of the hypothetical:

…if you maintain this position you therefore must be willing to say that if a president takes America to war under false pretenses (even those as base, hypothetically, as for his own personal gain), and if thousands of Americans, even 50 million Americans, die as a direct result,… the president should be absolutely immune from all criminal responsibility and punishment…. There is no third alternative. (p. 91)

In such fashion, then, does he speak as a man to men and women, grabbing them by the lapels.  But he speaks esoterically as well, a lawyer dipping into his tool kit.  To begin with he assures us, had we any doubt, that in the case of murder there is no statute of limitations to run out.  But he moves penetratingly to the finer points.
To this day there is still a mystery as to the primary cause for Bush’s preemptive invasion of Iraq.  Though only the gullible right wing buys in to the later-revised rationale of “freeing the Iraqi people from the yoke of a dictator,” some respectable observers will not entirely dismiss the idea that it might have been at least in part a vendetta against Saddam Hussein for the attempt he made on his father’s life.  And of course there’s the predominant explanation: oil.  Bugliosi makes no claim to have the answer.  He makes it clear, however, that there is no need in a murder case for the prosecution to establish motivation, but only to demonstrate intent.

            …in most states, to obtain a conviction of first degree murder, a prosecutor must prove a premeditated intent to kill.  However, in the federal courts, the best place to prosecute Bush, there is authority for the proposition that the premeditation necessary to constitute first degree murder does not have to be an intent to kill.  It can also be a premeditated intent to do an act “without regard for the life and safety of others,” which is implied malice.  In the 1983 case of United States v. Shaw, the premeditation was in the form of  “lying in wait,” but not specifically to kill, only to fire at a passing car, the defendant thereby doing an act exceedingly dangerous with reckless and wanton disregard for the consequences, though no specific intent to kill was shown…  (p. 98)

Here we observe the author doing the thing we expect of a good lawyer—citing precedent from the history of court cases which establishes what constitutes living law.  The reader will find Bugliosi doing this throughout, precedent after precedent after precedent.
His challenge is to establish that Bush, for whatever reason, willfully lied to the American people in order to take them into a war without any claim to the national interest; that he did so with reckless and wanton disregard for the consequences; and that there is ample warrant in what has played out previously before twelve good bipeds to see that Bush answers before the bar of justice.  (He also suggests with the strongest circumstantial evidence that Bush felt perfectly merry about all those thousands dying for him—not part of the substance of the case, but scarcely of dismissible interest to an imagined jury.)  The volume of pages with which he makes this case reveal a command of the details of the diurnal march of events in American political life that establish this author to be a phenomenon in his profession.  But it is not a display merely of the widest grasp of law case histories; it is continually a display of insight, judgment—the knitting of significant fact with deductive thought.  A good example of this is offered in an end note to his chapter “Why George Bush Went to War.”  He points out that with the endless debate focused so many months on the question of whether Hussein had WMD, a more important question was never pondered in all the wastepaper of the media:  even if he did, SO WHAT?

            The first argument in support of the proposition that Hussein was not a threat to this country is that—are you ready?—Saddam Hussein was not really an enemy of this country, and no one was pointing this out.  Since one goes to war with his enemies, it bears repeating that Saddam Hussein was not an enemy of the United States of America!  Although Bush has said that Hussein held “an unrelenting hostility towards the United States,” he never offered any credible evidence to support these words.  (p. 257)

Bugliosi expands capaciously on the point in his end notes, pointing out the warm handshake with which Bush’s father had assured Hussein he could count on America being in his corner in his war with Iran—and the fact that we were “his biggest oil customer,” maintaining him in his regal lifestyle.  Most tellingly of all, If Hussein cared about going on living—as he proved when he crept into the hole of his hiding place in which he was finally discovered—why would be ever attack the world’s superpower, thereby assuring his death?

                                                 *         *          *

If strict critical standards are applied, the book suffers from serious structural weaknesses—or One Big Weakness.
The inevitable logic here calls for a thorough presentation of the reasons Bush deserves indictment followed by a legal expert’s demonstration of the unobstructable practicability of his prosecution.  By page 168, with the wrap-up of Part Two, the case against Bush as war criminal non pareil only requiring the simplest action of a single hero to be brought to inevitable justice has been made.  Part Three, focused on Bush’s ineptness as administrator in the war on terror, can scarcely be seen as relevant to a murder indictment, and stands at best as anti-climactic.  Nor can the book’s final chapter, “America, Up or Down?” be justified beneath the book’s title.  Having identified his quarry and targeted it with a large round bullseye, Bugliosi overshoots so far as to write as many pages beyond his cinched case as he takes for spelling out the actual prosecution.  His demonstrated contention that Bush is a mass murderer who beyond any question may be brought to justice might have been leaner and cleaner at half its length.
Yet once this major defect is admitted, there are major compensations.  It might well be argued that the tome is unified by the mind and personality of its author.  “While I have your attention,” he seems to be saying, “let me get a few things off my chest.”  In this time when the media grovel as submissive establishment shills, his explosive candor comes forth like a great wind that sweeps clean.  And in the process of the clean-up we are given trenchant history lessons.

Consider, for example, what he offers us in an end note to Chapter Four, the heart of his case.  (In this book, the end notes attached to the close, rather than mere addenda, are more on the order of additional chapters!)

            On February 15, 1848, in a letter to a friend, then U.S. House of Representatives member Abraham Lincoln wrote: “Allow the president to invade a neighboring nation whenever he shall deem it necessary to repel an invasion, and you allow him to do so, whenever he may choose to say he deems it necessary for such a purpose—and you allow him to make war at his pleasure… If, today, he should choose to say he thinks it necessary to invade Canada to prevent the British from invading us, how could you stop him?  You may say to him, ‘I see no probability of the British invading us,’ but he will say to you, ‘be silent; I see it, if you don’t… This, our [Constitutional] Convention understood to be the most oppressive of all Kingly oppressions; and they resolved to so frame the Constitution that no one man should hold the power of bringing the oppression upon us…  And Lincoln wasn’t even talking about a president taking this nation to war under false pretenses, just to taking the nation to war at his whim.  (p. 278)

            Bugliosi, we learn, has pursued his hugely successful career as a seven-day-a-week workaholic, his zeal keeping him in harness 365 from early morning to late night.  As we think of him finally retired we can’t but imagine his applying all that ardor to his habit of indefatigable research.  So when he enters upon the controversies in our history revolving around false flag operations, we do well to give him an attentive hearing.
            Admittedly his defense of FDR, accused of looking the other way while knowing of the impending invasion of Pearl Harbor, is rather loosely deductive at best.  To believe that Roosevelt would have sacrificed twenty-four hundred American lives for a political agenda would require that he believe Roosevelt to be an evil man, and he cannot believe it.  “…there’s simply no way to compare Roosevelt’s conduct to what Bush did in Iraq.”  (p. 290)
LBJ and the Gulf of Tonkin are afforded a more scholarly pondering.  In defending Johnson against the charge of using the attack on the Maddox as a subterfuge for attacking North Vietnam,  “… in addition to the very important fact that no credible evidence has surfaced in almost forty-five years that the Gulf of Tonkin incident was provoked or staged, there is one reality that I believe clearly demonstrates everything was on the up-and-up, at least as far as Johnson and his advisers were concerned…”  (pp. 287-8)  The evidence he offers is a transcript of taped telephone conversations between LBJ and McNamara during the actual moments of the attack.  Certainly what Bugliosi brings to the page, the President’s surprise at what is transpiring, seems authentic.  But the most inspired passage is what he offers in his wrap-up of these discussions of false flag controversies.

            But here’s the clincher with respect to Johnson and Roosevelt.  If, in fact, they did what many Bush supporters and conservatives say they did, then they should have been prosecuted for murder, too.  And if they had, the punkish college cheerleader from Crawford, Texas, may have thought twice before lying to the nation to take us to war in Iraq.  (p.290)

One having forgiven this author for carrying him far beyond the book’s purported objective, the reader may find the rewards continuing unabated.   Consider for example that final “irrelevant” chapter where his opinion is advanced that America is no longer the great nation that formerly it has been.

            America, for better or worse, has been a leader of pop and cultural change throughout the world for many years.  Other nations take their cue from us.  What type of nation do we still have whose movies are routinely laden with profanity of the worst kind and gratuitous, unrelated-to-the-plot grunting sessions of sex in bed or against the wall; whose movies are actually beginning to show people sitting on a toilet going to the bathroom; even, unbelievably, wiping themselves—something, of course, we all want to see very badly…    (page 241)

As Bugliosi sees it, it is not just our government that has gone rotten.  The American people are not what once they were.  And nothing proves it more decisively than the fact that we allowed George W. Bush to be elected twice, “someone who is actually the object of scorn and hatred throughout the civilized world.” (p.245)
Having thoroughly scourged his country and his countrymen with whiplash after refreshing whiplash—did these decidedly unpatriotic-looking sentiments emerging from his keyboard look suddenly scary?  At least the closing pages of his last chapter seem a bit disingenuous in their blind grope for something positive to say in way of counterbalance.  (“Despite all the danger signals, America remains, today, fortunately, a civil society.”)
However disaffected, he leaves us his card: unswerving watchdog and gadfly, at your service, America.

            I would be more than happy, if requested, to consult with any prosecutor who decides to prosecute Bush in the preparation of additional cross-examination questions for him to face on the witness stand.  I believe the cross-examination would be such that they’d have to carry the arrogant son of privilege off the stand on a stretcher.  ((p. 166)

Ah! to take on the monster who became a president, if only the prosecutor stepping forward might be himself, Vincent Bugliosi!  O consummation devoutly to be wished.

T.J. King

Tuesday’s guest: Channeled spirit of assassinated rock star

Tuesday, February 23rd, 9-10 a.m. Pacific (noon-1 pm Eastern) on, to be archived here a few hours later…

A mystery guest from will channel the spirit of Mr. GimmeSomeTruth.

While we’re at it, don’t miss this video:

Funny video: John Lennon Shuts Down The US Government!

And let’s not forget his benefit performance and endorsement of my 2008 Congressional campaign:

Controversial Barrett ‘supports the truth,’ backers say

Taking a page from Russ Feingold’s 1992 “endorsement” from Elvis Presley, Barrett got Tim Biancalana, a dead ringer for John Lennon, to perform at the Dardanelles. About 30 people attended the event and watched the 2006 documentary, “The U.S. vs. John Lennon.”

Biancalana, who is based in the Los Angeles area, performed Lennon’s “Working Class Hero” and his original song, “Samsara.”

“Behind every war there is a great big lie,” Biancalana said. He is supporting Barrett, he said, because of “his truth.”

“He’s actually doing something for truth. When we have truth, we can get the peace we want,” he said. “Everything today is about divide and conquer,” but Barrett stands for the unity of people, said Biancalana, who has appeared on one of Barrett’s radio programs.

Professor Graeme MacQueen, tax-strike proponent Karen Tostado on TJ radio

Truth Jihad Radio Sat. 2/20/10, 5-7 pm Central, (to be archived here.) Call-in number: 512-879-3805.


Second hour: Graeme MacQueen, Associate Professor of Religious Studies and founding Director, Centre for Peace Studies, McMaster University (ret).

  • Interview 11/19/06: “… there’s no way those 3 towers were brought down by planes, jet fuel and fire. One tower, maybe. A structural flaw in the tower, a set of coincidences. Two towers — we’re getting into a highly unlikely situation, even though their construction was similar, because the planes hit in different ways. Three towers (including WTC 7 now, which wasn’t hit by a plane), the odds against this are astronomical.”

Dr. MacQueen has done some of the best work on the question of why the left and the peace movement have been slow to understand and act on the reality of 9/11–a topic I discussed with media critic Barrie Zwicker on Tuesday’s show.

AE911truth “1000 signers” press conference in Madison

During his appearance on my radio show last week, Richard Gage of Architects and Engineeers for 9/11 Truth urged my listeners to hold local press conferences in support of today’s big AE911truth event in San Francisco. My response: “Okay, Richard, you talked me into it.”

Twelve of us met at 11 a.m. today in beautiful first-floor rotunda of the state capitol, where degreed architect and AE911truth board member Tom Spellman read the AE911truth prepared statement citing overwhelming evidence that the three WTC skyscrapers were demolished with explosives, and demanding an investigation of these events as well as a grand jury investigation of the NIST cover-up. Unfortunately no “professional” media showed up, even though two separate press releases had been sent to all local media outlets. The independent media was there, however, in the form of Mark and Josh of We Are Change Oshkosh among others.

Following the event in the capitol, we walked across the street to Senator Herb Kohl’s office and met with Senator Kohl’s assistant Ryan Knocke for almost half an hour. Knocke appeared intensely interested as we summarized the evidence for controlled demolition and explained why, under the Misprision of Treason statute, all of us (now including Mr. Knocke himself as well as Senator Kohl) were obliged to report evidence of treason to the relevant authorities. Knocke seemed especially moved when he heard from Josh, a veteran who still suffers from an injury he sustained while serving in Afghanistan in 2002. Knocke asked me for the contact information of architects and engineers in Wisconsin who had signed the petition, which I supplied in an email a few hours later, reading in part:

Dear Ryan Knocke,

Thank you for meeting with us and accepting the petition, on behalf of Senator Kohl, signed by more than 1,000 architects and engineers calling for a new investigation of the apparent controlled demolition of the three WTC skyscrapers on 9/11…

As a Ph.D. Arabist and expert on Islam and the Middle East who has spent the past five years researching 9/11 and related issues, I am convinced that the Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth petition offers Sen. Kohl the opportunity to do something truly heroic in service to his country. I hope he will look at this information with an open mind and consider taking that step, which would assure him a prominent and honorable place in future history books.

Thank you,

Dr. Kevin Barrett

After the meeting with Senator Kohl’s representative, we continued to the office of Rep. Tammy Baldwin, which unfortunately was closed this week, and slipped the petition under the door along with our contact information and a “we will contact you later” note.

Here are some photos:

Tom Spellman reads the prepared statement in the middle of the capitol rotunda.

Getting ready to head for Senator Kohl’s office.

Tom explains the situation to Ryan Knocke, Senator Kohl’s assistant.

Sen. Kohl’s assistant Ryan Knocke examines evidence of treason presented by Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth and signed by more than 1000 architects and engineers.

Tom, slipping the petition under Rep. Tammy Baldwin’s door.

Sander Hicks on Misprision of 9/11 Treason and the Meserlian Trial

Jonathan Mark and Richard Gage discussed the legal obligation to report knowledge of treason to specific authorities on last Saturday’s Truth Jihad Radio.  Jonathan mentioned that Don Meserlian deserves credit for the “misprision of 9/11 treason” concept. Meserlian managed to get himself put on trial for allegedly annoying authorities while reporting 9/11 treason.

Now Sander Hicks says the Meserlian trial “could begin a legal process to bring the 9/11 traitors to justice.”

USA officially declared insane

Almost half a million Americans die from tobacco each year. Roughly a quarter-million die from bad medical treatment, almost 200,000 of them from in-hospital medical errors. About 40,000 die from automobile crashes.

Plane crashes are few and far between, and terrorist-caused ones are fewer and far-betweener.

After adding up the numbers, Tom Engelhardt writes:

“And yet here’s the strange thing: thanks to what didn’t happen on Flight 253, the media essentially went mad, 24/7.”

And Americans went along with it.

The whole country has gone insane.

What explains the outbreak of madness? In a word: Islamophobia. The patsy had a Muslim name, which gave the Zionist-dominated media an excuse to whip up religious hatred.

More evidence of Islamophobic insanity: The war criminals who invaded Afghanistan are putting a brave child soldier who fought them on trial…for, get this, war crimes! Omar Khadr, a then-15-year-old Canadian citizen who was shot by the war criminal invaders, is being accused of…get this…fighting back! According to the war criminals, Khadr, after being shot, lobbed a grenade at his assailants.

I don’t know about you, but if my 15-year-old son were in a country being invaded by war criminals, got shot by the war criminals, and fought back, I would consider him a hero.

According to the Washington Post,  Khadr was in a building with other soldiers defending Afghanistan from the invading war criminals when:

Apache attack helicopters, A-10 Warthog fighter jets and, finally, two F-18 jets unleashed their arsenals, reducing the hideout to rubble.

When the dust settled, American [war criminal] forces approached the ruined compound, only to be blasted by a grenade thrown by someone inside. Delta Force 1st Sgt. Christopher Speer, a father of two, would die more than a week later at a military hospital in Germany. Another Special Forces soldier, Sgt. Layne Morris, was blinded in one eye by another grenade.

Inside the compound was one survivor, Khadr, who had been shot twice in the chest.

Imagine that the USA was being invaded by the Chinese, and that a 15-year-old Canadian, temporarily in the US and holed up with defenders of the USA, fought back against a massive Chinese assault in exactly the same way Khadr allegedly did. Such a brave kid would be given the Medal of Honor.

When your opponent does something that, had someone on your side done it, would deserve the Medal of Honor, only a nation of gutless lunatics and crybaby pussies would put him on trial for war crimes.

Today’s NWO-dominated war-criminal-controlled US military, a pathetic bunch of cowards who delight in killing people in complete safety via remote-control drones, but can’t handle it when a fifteen-year-old fights back, is the most contemptible excuse for a fighting force in the whole sorry history of warfare.

Author & media critic Barrie Zwicker, 9/11 truth candidate Craig Hill

Tuesday, February 16th, 9-10 a.m. Pacific (noon-1 pm Eastern) on, to be archived here a few hours later…

(Post-show note: Craig Hill couldn’t make it, so Barrie was on for the whole hour.)

Barrie Zwicker, author, Towers of Deception: The Media Cover-Up of 9/11. Barrie is one of the leading lights of 9/11 truth. His recent article “The Peace Movement Versus the 9/11 Truth Movement” is deservedly getting a lot of attention. Since I’m having a problem accessing it at 911blogger, here it is…

Report from Boston: The Peace Movement vs. the 9/11 Truth Movement

by Barrie Zwicker

What goes with the “split” between the anti-war movement and the 9/11Truth movement? Some light was shed on this regrettable reality in Boston the weekend of Jan. 30-31, 2010. On Saturday New England United (NEU), an umbrella group, held an anti-war strategy conference. The next day Northeast 9/11Truth held its strategy conference, in part an analysis of the previous day’s events.

As a lifelong member of the peace movement, and a committed 9/11Truther, I attended all of the Saturday conference where I was a workshop leader, and the first half of the Sunday conference (having to leave early because of travel arrangements). My main points:

1 There is a split but it has not been initiated, nor is it maintained, by members of the 9/11Truth movement. Truthers stand just as proudly and tall in their opposition to war as anyone in the peace movement. Truthers also are just as fully dedicated to the goals of justice, equality and environmentalism as are anti-war activists.

2 The split is unilateral from the anti-war movement’s side, especially from leaders and organizers. Those at the grassroots level trust and take their cues from the leaders. The result is a widespread attitude toward 9/11Truth that ranges from skepticism to outright hostility. This is why I choose the heading “The Peace Movement versus the 9/11Truth Movement.”

3 A leading cause of the unilateral split is the work of planted agents of the state – spooks — whose instructions are to do this splitting. The Chinese call such agents “splittists.” The peace movement has been around for decades, so there’s been loads of time for the national security state to install numerous agents within it. Added to their usual instructions to slyly foment divisiveness within peace groups and derail effective anti-war actions are new orders to combat the dynamic truth movement.

Point 3 is tough, I know. But it’s an issue that must be confronted. I am not alone in my assessment. At the Sunday Truthers conference the first topic was “How explain the resistance to 9/11Truth in the peace movement?” Paul Zarembka, Professor of Economics at the University of Buffalo and editor of The Hidden History of 9/11, offered four reasons. His first: “agents and gatekeepers among us.” Sander Hicks, author of The Big Wedding: 9/11, the Whistleblowers, and the Cover-Up, offered seven reasons. His first: “The state, COINTELPRO.”

Of course, activities by state infiltrators do not completely explain the split. Other reasons include fears of all kinds, ignorance of history, a powerful culture of militaristic nationalism in the USA and the largest reason everywhere, the treasonous complicity of corporate mainstream media and almost all so-called alternative media. They conspire in de facto censorship, deliberate avoidance of investigative reporting plus psychological warfare against the Truth movement.

These explanations for denial of or hostility to 9/11Truth also apply to the population at large and across issues. Peter Phillips is a professor of sociology at Sonoma State University in California, president of the Media Freedom Foundation/Project Censored and serves on the 9/11Truth steering committee. Phillips and Mickey Huff in a recent article state: “An international truth emergency, now in evidence, is the result of a lack of fact based, transparent, and truthful reporting on fraudulent elections, compromised 9/11 investigations, illegal preemptive wars, compounded by top down corporate media propaganda across the spectrum on public issues.” They add: “Consumers of corporate news media—especially those whose understandings are framed primarily from that medium alone—are embedded in a state of excited delirium of knowinglessness.”

In my estimation the black operations of government moles are a key reason for the malfeasance of the media as well as the main explanation for the peace movement’s antagonism against 9/11Truth. The undoubted existence of undercover operatives and agents provocateurs has not been discussed nearly to the extent justified. A major elevation of this topic is ‘way overdue.

Followers in the anti-war movement “do not realize,” as Paul Craig Roberts wrote Sept. 15th, 2009, in Information Clearing House, “that by accepting the [government’s] 9/11 explanation they have undermined their own opposition to the war. Once you accept that Muslim terrorists did it, it is difficult to oppose punishing them for the event. [Anti-war activists] do not understand that if you grant the government its premise for war, it is impossible to oppose the war.”

It’s tough to prove agentry. Agents do not “out” themselves. Covert activity is their game. Deception and betrayal are their tools. Other approaches, however, are available to spot spooks. “By their fruits ye shall know them” is helpful. When ostensible peaceniks committed to peace and democracy engage in name-calling, we are entitled to ask whether they are simply individuals lacking civility and self-control, or are individuals deliberately causing tensions. When those who “study peace” have had eight years to invest just an hour or two looking into the overwhelming evidence that the official conspiracy theory of 9/11 cannot possibly be true, and have failed to do so, we are entitled to theorize beyond the explanation that we are simply “puzzled.” When members of the peace movement avow that they are committed to truth, justice and peace but fail in their commitment to truth in connection with 9/11 — arguably the most pivotal war-triggering event of modern times – we’re entitled to question the authenticity of their commitment. It would be insulting to explain their shortcoming as due to stupidity. And if the explanation is ignorance, after eight years during which all persons interested in current affairs must have encountered evidence of 9/11Truth, it must be in most cases some variation of wilful ignorance.

Consider how easy it is for agents of the state to operate. First, the state has virtually unlimited resources for recruiting, training and deploying agents. Second, agents have no legal or moral restraints. They act with complete impunity. (It’s gratifying that there now is an International Coalition Against Impunity, Volunteer organizations are easy as pie to infiltrate. All it takes is a trained sneak with a believable “legend” to lie his or her way into the confidence of the group.

The world of “guerilla marketing” provides examples of the ease with which groups can be manipulated. A vodka company identifies heavy vodka drinkers — those who already drink their brand and others they entice to try it. The drinkers are all friends together. The heavy users are “opinion leaders.” By their drink orders at bars they are “role models” who trigger others to order the same brand they do. It’s called peer group pressure. Even more effective is a conscious agent following sophisticated instructions in swaying a peer group.

There was an illuminating lead-up to the conference of New England United. Only after months-long effective lobbying by an indefatiguable member of Northeast 9/11Truth did NEU organizers agree that a person identified with the 9/11Truth movement could be one of four panelists in the afternoon. This was Peter Dale Scott, former Canadian diplomat, an English professor at the University of California in Berkeley and author of The Road to 9/11, whose 9/11Truth credentials in fact are shaky. Nevertheless, his acceptance at an anti-war gathering in 2010 was generally agreed to be a “breakthrough” — a sorry observation.

It turned out that he had to cancel scant days before, as his wife took seriously ill. The Northeast Truthers proposed that, should an attempt to have Scott address the NEU conference by video-over-Skype fail, that I be the stand-in. The organizers rejected me (believe me, this account is not motivated by sour grapes) on the basis, after alleged “extensive research,” of my alleged “extreme rightwing” views and my alleged long and close association with historian and writer Webster Tarpley. He in turn was identified only as a LaRouchite. For anyone who knows me this description was bizarrely incorrect. If news of my “extreme rightwing views” reaches the Mounties it will puzzle the hell out of them.

As it turned out Scott’s addressing the audience in Boston from California via Skype worked. Interestingly, he made this comment: “This brings us to 9/11. […] before the last plane had crashed in Pennsylvania, the White House authorized the institution of so-called Continuity of Government [COG] changes. There is no doubt that COG was introduced – the 9/11 Report confirms it twice, on pages 38 and 326. And I have little doubt that the COG plans, still in force today under president Obama, are the justification for the surveillance agents who are with you in the room as I speak to you at this moment.”

The 300 or so attendees at the NEU conference studiously avoided the 9/11Truth literature table. Book sales are a key indicator of interest. I sold three of the 20 copies I had brought of my book Towers of Deception: The Media Cover-Up of 9/11 (fortunately the rest sold to Truthers the next day). Other Truther materials similarly were mainly passed by.

After the speakers of the Saturday morning panel had been heard, the floor was opened for questions. The first questioner was a young man in a green tee shirt. I’d say he was a plant. With reference to nothing any of the panelists had said, he claimed to be “disturbed” by “the logic” of the 9/11Truth movement, and asked the panelists what they thought. Glen Ford of the Glen Ford Black Agenda (radio) Report responded that “the inside job [theory] doesn’t fly” and that “we have all the dirt on what they [the oligarchy] [has] already done.” This garnered a great deal of enthusiastic applause, accompanied by a few boos. The next day Sander Hicks reported a conversation he had subsequently with Ford, who told him that he answered the question the way he did “out of deference to the organizers.”

Nevertheless, the workshop session entitled “Covert and False Flag Operations and 9/11: Pretext for the Continuing War on Terror” was standing room only with about 65 in attendance. My poll of those attending showed that only two believed the official 9/11 story. All the others raised their hands for “inside job.”

At the Sunday Northeast Truthers conference Hicks suggested that part of the reason for peace movement members’ antagonism to 9/11Truth is that they know they are the “fading sunset left” who have “lost the passion,” whereas the Truther movement is fresh and passionate. Along the same line of thought Frank Tolopko, producer of the bi-weekly radio program “The 9/11 Report” on WBCR in Great Barrington, Mass. suggested a fundamental reason that a left gatekeeper such as Amy Goodman would reject 9/11Truth is that she is promoting “a concept of bourgeois democracy that is over.” As I quoted Chris Hedges from his new book Empire of Illusion: the US form of governance has become “participatory fascism.” Goodman takes foundation money to promote democracy now on Democracy Now. Said Tolopko: “If the system can’t be reformed, if 9/11 is an inside job, then she’s out of a job. Goodman is terrified.”

Alphonse Olszewski of St. Louis, Missouri, founder of Veterans for 9/11Truth, knows the power of naming. One contribution he’s made to anti-splittism is renaming his group Veterans for 9/11 Truth, Peace and Justice. There cannot be peace without justice and there cannot be justice without truth. Anything that underscores the primacy of truth, in my view, is to the good. I was gratified to see somewhere over the weekend that the admonition “speak truth to power” is outdated, because “power never listens.” The suggested update: “Challenge Power With Truth.”

For those members of the peace movement who are sincere and think for themselves, I can’t recommend too highly a videotape of a short talk given by Graeme MacQueen at the “We Demand Transparency” conference organized by Sander Hicks in New York City Sept. 12 and 13 of 2009. MacQueen is an associate professor in the Religious Studies Department and in Hamilton and former director of McMaster’s Centre for Peace Studies.

In concluding his talk, addressed to “not just people in the peace movement but everybody,” he said: “This is the worst time in history to inflame societies with the spirit of war; it is the worst time to be taken in by fraudulent trigger incidents, the most important time to reject the war system, and to co-operate with the rest of humanity to solve the grave ecological problems we face, which collectively threaten our civilization.” He went on to quote the testimony of a New York fireman, Kenneth Rogers. Rogers testified he looked directly at the collapsing towers on 9/11, hearing explosions and seeing evidence of them. “The reasons he saw things the others didn’t see,” MacQueen said, “is because he didn’t leave the scene and he didn’t turn his head away. He stood there and he looked at it and that’s all I’m asking members of the peace movement to do. Stop turning your head away; don’t flee the scene. Look at it, please.” The video can be found at


2167 words

Truth jihadi hurls book at top ten Islamophobes!

An ever-loving Valentine’s Day gift to the Hate Brigade

My book Questioning the War on Terror: A Primer for Obama Voters has sold out its first print run…in a rather unusual way.

A generous philanthropist has purchased the last available copies, on the condition that I mail them to certain people who need or deserve one…beginning with America’s top ten Islamophobes.

Today, Valentine’s Day 2010, I am autographing and mailing books to David Horowitz, Robert Spencer, Daniel Pipes, Michael Savage, Sean Hannity, Bill O’Reilly, Mark Steyn, Steve Emerson, Glenn Beck, and Michelle Malkin.

 Along with the book, these individuals will be receiving a chocolate heart (NOT!) and a note reading:

Dear (name of Islamophobe)

You have been chosen to select this special gift as a reward for your unusually effective work smearing Muslims and the religion of Islam, and convincing Americans that they need to live in perpetual fear of “Islamic terrorists.”

But what if the threat from “Islamic terrorists” was so tiny it was statistically insignificant? What if the whole terror scare was pure hype? Guess what: It is. And I can prove it. As my recent letter, published in the Madison weekly Isthmus put it:

In reality, even counting the false-flag fluke of 9/11, you are three thousand times more likely to be killed by bad medical treatment, thirty times more likely to be hit by lightning, and ten times more likely to die in your bathtub, than to be killed by terrorists. In short, terrorism is not a statistically significant threat.

Given this reality, only a paranoid lunatic would fear terrorism, and only a pathological liar would try to convince others to fear terrorism. Tragically, we have been rendered a nation of paranoid lunatics by the pathological liars in government and the corporate mainstream media…

Please read my book and decide for yourself whether or not the “terrorist threat” is real. If you find any inaccuracies in the facts cited in my book, I look forward to debating you, whether on one of my radio shows or in some other suitable venue.


Kevin Barrett

Sent to Bill O’Reilly:

David Horowitz, C/O David Horowitz Freedom Center
P.O. Box 55089. Sherman Oaks, CA 91499

Robert Spencer, Director, Jihad Watch,
David Horowitz Freedom Center
P.O. Box 55089. Sherman Oaks, CA 91499

Daniel Pipes,
C/O Campus WatchCampus Watch
1500 Walnut Street
Suite 1050
Philadelphia, PA 19102

Michael Savage
Modesto, CA 95350
Sean Hannity
Fox News
1211 Avenue of the Americas
18th Floor
New York, NY 10036

Bill O’Reilly
Fox News
1211 Avenue of the Americas
18th Floor
New York, NY 10036

Mark Steyn
National Review
215 Lexington Avenue
New York, New York 10016

Steve Emerson
c/o Prometheus Books
Prometheus Books
59 John Glenn Drive
Amherst, New York

Michelle Malkin, a.k.a.
11750A OLD GEORGETOWN RD # 2512,
ROCKVILLE  MD 20852-2610

Glenn Beck
1270 Avenue of the Americas
New York, New York 10020