Friday, June 8, 2012

Kevin Barrett, Joshua Blakeney, Webster Tarpley

Roundtable discussion


  1. It is a shame that the recording appears to abort just as Webster Tarpley is making some of his strongest arguments.

    He was making a lot of sense.

  2. "Virtually every single top level 9/11 war criminal is a Jew with ties directly to Israel."

    Dr. Tarpley uses slightly different terms that Alex Jones to refer to the moneyed elites who rule the world. But both avoid the obvious conclusion that those entities are primarily made up of people who claim to be Jews and who are strongly supportive of the nation state of Israel.

    It is important to not avoid this obvious reality but it is equally important to expose this in the right way. I do not think the 9-11 truth seekers have exposed this in the right way yet.

    If it is exposed in the wrong way, it is just something that "they" can use against us. In fact, "they" are sophisticated enough to make us expose this in the wrong way.

    As for the white checrolet van full of explosives apprehended on or near George Washington bridge and the incident of the "dancing Israelis", both associated with Mossad front "Urban Moving Systems", those look like little vignettes deliberately engineered in to the day of 9-11 New York events. They look like events where the actors were just begging to be reported and arrested. They went out of their way to be obvious and make sure they were reported to the police. I see no reason to focus on those two incidents and see no reason to take them at face value. Again, I believe they were meant to channel our exposure of the Mossad and their operatives in a certain controlled direction.

  3. This is one of the best airings of an extremely contentious aspect of 9/11, namely "who done it", that I've heard anywhere.

    I found myself agreeing with both sides of the argument on most points, though I think Tarpley is probably closer to the mark with his conception of the "rogue network".

    Kevin Barrett offered the best comment of all when he noted that there was less between the two sides than either side appeared to recognise.

    I agree and I think there could be a wonderful synergy of ideas here if the protaganists could each be a little more flexible with their conception of power structures and power plays.

    Joshua Blakeney was perhaps the most flexible and tenacious in arguing his case and he is most persuasive. However, I still think Tarpley is closer to the mark, but not by much.

    Really superb debate, great stuff, thank y'all very much :-)

  4. Tarpley's "angel is next" thesis is ludicrous. The idea that the Bush dynasty had nothing to do with this is absurd. Jeb is a charter member of PNAC.

  5. "Tarpley's "angel is next" thesis is ludicrous. The idea that the Bush dynasty had nothing to do with this is absurd."

    I think if you ask Webster Tarpley if his "angel is next" thesis means or implies that the Bush dynasty had nothing to do with this, he would say that is not at all what he is saying.

    Of course I could be wrong, but G W Bush certainly did a splendid acting performance if he really did know what was coming down on 9-11. He had the most absolutely dumbfounded look on his face when Andrew Card came in and made an announcement to him in that classroom. I think W always knew he was in with the PNAC gang but I think he was largely left out of 9-11. As far as the "angel is next" story, there are many many little sub-stories within 9-11 that some 9-11 researchers say we must accept at face value and other 9-11 researchers who say certain sub-stories were deliberately implanted in the overall scenario for various reasons and are not to be taken at face value.

    Maybe the "angel is next" is one of those implanted sub-stories that can serve to mislead certain 9-11 researchers.

    For example, I think that the Mossad often enacts plots that appear on the service to indict the Mossad, and the Mossad wants this and can use it for their ultimate goals.

    I think Dr. Fetzer's "peeling the onion" writing touches on this idea.

    One thing I know, there is a very high degree of sophistication in the manipulations and deceptions within the 9-11 plan and I am reluctant to take any part of it at face value.

  6. alex jones has done more to expose false flag operations and government tyranny than the whole round table conbined.
    It saddens me when he is attacked because he is not a democrat. James Fetzers blind spot is party politics. There is no left right anymore. Even if there is please stop bashing people because they vote differently.

  7. It has been a while since I listened to this Round Table discussion, but I do not recall bashing of Alex Jones.

    Yes, Alex has exposed many good truths about our history and our government. Dr. Stan Monteith has too. Unfortunately on the subject of 9-11 truth, they both seem not to be really pursuing truth.

    We are at the brink of the end of our republic so it is best to expose the errors and deceptions of our government no matter what.

    Exposing our situation and restoring our republic are two completely different animals.

    The one world death and slavery system is the name of the game. Both "left" and "right" have been working toward that common goal for centuries. It is a synthesis of communism and fascism.

  8. Tarpley's apparent under-emphasizing the role of Zionist influences on 9/11 aside, his most important contribution to this discussion is getting people to think about what to do about it.
    As an accountant, I've come to appreciate the abiltiy to find the closest thing to truth by following the money. Differences aside, most people want some type of assurance or guarantee, which in the business world promotes monopolistic behavior, while a handful of very cunning psychopaths(1%) take this to extremes well beyond what everyone else(99%) take as normal human behavior.

    Instead of asking questions like "what would Jesus do?", how about asking the question "what would the preditor class not do?".
    Sadly, history favors the "if you can't beat em, join em" response.

  9. Tarpley has lost his mind. Has he neglected to notice that since 2000, Iraq, Afghanistan and now Libya all have Rothschild-owned Central Banks? I can appreciate him wanting his "rogue theory" to remain relevant, but it can't hold a cup of coffee.

    His rogue theory could not accomplish the pre-911 executive order shoot down rule which was applied and after 9/11 reversed.

    It could not account for securing control of the WTC into private hands (Silverstein & Frank Lowy. Both *mysteriously* absent from WTC on 9/11/01 by Lewis Eisenberg, head of the Port Authority who authorized the lease. He is a Goldman Sachs partner and Bush/Cheney contributor.

    It does not account for a change in SECURITY at the WTC into the hands of Zionist Jews Jules & Jeremy Kroll enabling the power-downs at the WTC weeks before 9/11 and the wiring/planting of mini-nukes and other explosives or incidiaries.

    I could go on for 10 pages.

    Tarpley has been cantankerous and belicose as hell in weeks past, and he needs to go to the damned doctor and get a check up.

  10. I think we are indebted to Dr. Tarpley for doggedly tracking down all of 46 (current count) military training exercises executed to make 9-11 happen. Some of the exercises took place more than a year before 9-11-01 and some took place after 9-11-01. Tarpley refers to "patsies, dupes, and moles". Some of these people were at very high levels in our government and could do just about anything.

    I do object to Dr. Tarpley characterizing people who want to point out the involvement of the Mossad are full of "hate" and that these 9-11 truth seekers ought to know that "hate" never pays off in exposing these kinds of operations. (That is a close paraphrase of a recent interview he did.)

    However, I do understand that 99 percent of people who purport to be reporting truth or seeking truth, especially 9-11 truth, do not understand that exposing the Mossad must be done in the right way, and if you do it in an amateurish way, you just heap more difficulties on truth seeking efforts.

    It is extremely difficult to establish and cocument direct links between the Mossad and 9-11, though reason tells us they had to be involved, as was probably also MI6.

    9-11 was an inside and outside job.

  11. "All evidence points to 9/11 being a false flag PYSOP done by Israeli intelligence"

    Please explain how Israel got Norad to stand down. Fly a missile into the Pentagon. Fake the evidence at Swanksville.

    Surely, Israel had knowledge and might have taken part. But to claim that 9/11 was a complete Mossad operation is taking the extrapolation to far.

  12. Excellent exchange. I would like to know how those who think Webster has it right respond to the evidence presented in Christopher Bollyn's book, Alan Sabrosky's articles, web sites like, and especially "Israel did 9/11 -- All the proof in the world!", which I find quite convincing. I would welcome further discussion of the evidence.

  13. I find the terms Dr. Tarpley uses (I think it is something like "reactionary oligarchs") and that many radio show hosts and writers and commentators who say they are seeking 9-11 truth use ("the global elite", the banksters, the globalists, the "neocons"), and even the terms used here like "the Mossad", "Israel", "the neocon Zionists" etc., are terms that do not properly identify the Who of who did 9-11. I think it is not possible to truly identify the Who unless the word “Jew” is part of the discussion, but somehow that word cannot be used in an objective discussion.

    Dr. Tarpley is wrong in categorizing those who say the Mossad did it, etc., as practically speaking unwise and full of hate.

    I thought we all were supposed to be about searching for the whole truth. 9-11 truth seeking is not about hate or being strategically stupid.

    Naming names of people and specifically following the money is has to happen, especially in establishing how closely intertwined and established and powerful are the Mossad and related entities in the top levels of the U S government. Look at and name what these people have promoted and achieved in U S government and what, so far, all of this has wrought upon the USA and the people of the whole world. ( Some of their “successes” are torture, unjust wars, use of DU and nuclear weapons, and genocides of various kinds.)

    (Look at the list of names and photos in the video "Israel did 9/11 -- All the proof in the world!" Those names should have been verbally stated in the video too.)

    The money controllers of the world are "the banksters", "the Mossad", the "Zionists" the "power elite" and the "global elite." Look at major world revolutions over the centuries and note their similarities to the coup that was 9-11 (and the assassination of JFK and other "sea change" events in U S history). Note how the end result always seems to bring us closer to the “broad spectrum dominance” of world government. The "war on Terror" is just one of their plays along the way toward this same goal. I do not think it is primarily to do with preserving and protecting "Zion", that is, the modern nation state of Israel or its people. That seems to be some kind of a “cover.” Killing of their own ethnic peoples is not off limits in their actions. Motivations go much deeper and are far beyond the concepts of zealous religionists, Israel nationalists, or ethnic supremacists. It goes toward the spirit realm of Pure Evil with a hate (desire to control and kill and destroy) toward humans, human life, and a hate toward righteousness and justice and order in this world (Logos).

    (One might think that Dr. Alan Sabrosky, in not showing up for the Vancouver conference, did not want to provide his important and needed input for the who-did-it discussions there and one could wonder why.)

    1. Well, I dealt with Alan several times about this, right up to the day before, when he was scheduled to fly to Vancouver. His shoulder has been a problem, which he thought that he could overcome. But he was unable to do so. He wanted to be there.

  14. For Sandra:

    Well, after listening to Tarpley at that roundtable discussion, I'm completely convinced that he's a disinfo agent placed in the so-called truth movement to keep people from focusing on the Israeli/zionist role in 911, as well as israeli/zionist infiltration and control over the US govt.

    In order to make his supposed argument that 911 was "made in the USA," Tarpley ignores all of the information compiled here:

    And this information was compiled by someone who was only 10-years-old when 911 happened!! (In other words, this isn't rocket science and you don't need a PhD in history to figure out what happened)

    There's no need to believe in Tarpley's "invisible rogue network" when there is a VISIBLE ZIONIST NETWORK involved in all aspects of the 911 event (as outlined at the link above).

    It was absolutely shocking to hear him depict Israel as a "tiny little state the size of a postage stamp" without much power, when our govt has been completely hijacked by organized zionist interests. We have absolutely NO control over our govt or ability to elect officials who represent our needs/interests because anyone who runs for office must first get approval of AIPAC or the zionist controlled media will either ignore them or destroy them.

    Though I've actually listened to Tarpley for awhile (and just tolerated his lack of attention to the zionist issue), his presentation at the roundtable was really the final straw for me. The hour is late and we have almost completely lost our nation. I personally don't have time for people who are going to continue ignoring the zionist elephant in the room. And I also did not appreciate his attempt to throw around the term "hater" at those who were addressing a serious issue (zionist infiltration and control) that has destroyed this nation.

    Also, on a positive note, I greatly appreciated Greg Felton's comments (I've read his book, The Host and the Parasite) and would appreciate hearing more from him. I think he has an impressive understanding of our current predicament as a nation that has been hijacked by foreign interests. And, in my opinion, if we are ever going to get this nation back, then that is what we must talk about and focus on.

    Thank you for all you are doing for the truth movement. And I greatly appreciate your willingness to address israeli involvement in 911.

    1. Jim, if I am reading this right I am very disappointed in your response to Sandra. I guess we should ignore the almost 200 year American empire from the Monroe Doctrine forward. Perhaps once a Marine, always a spOOk.

  15. You forgot this part of my statement: "and dual citizen American Jews that largely control the US government, media, banking industry, and private sector."

    Of course there were "American" elements involved in staging and covering up 9/11 - criminal elements in the military, media, government, ect. But, we have to understand that "America" is actually a Jewish-run Israeli puppet.

    That's how they got Norad to stand down. That's how they flew a missile into the Pentagon. That's how they faked the evidence at Shanksville. Israeli partisans and agents completely control the government and media. They ran the entire show on 9/11, and continue to.

    Is this not clear to you at this point? How much more obvious does it have to get before you and others understand these simple facts? And the million dollar question: when are we going to start saying these things out loud and do something about it?

  16. I find this "piling up" on Tarpley-- particularly when the recorded program cuts him off, and disallows him from finishing his arguments-- distasteful.

    I am beginning to suspect everyone here could ALL be disinfo agents (particularly ones who do not use their real names).

    What is more likely is everyone here is being duped by real dissension-sowing agents, who are as likely to come from Veteran's Today as from Tel Aviv or London.

    Whatever fog descended upon you-- it seems opportunities for more expansive dialogs and debates will be a smidgeon less likely in the future.


  17. Why not a blend of the 2 elements?

    The undo influence of Israeli/Zionist interests in our gov. is clear, but so isn’t the obvious involvement of the Intel/military in 9/11.

    When you think about it, in order to pull it off both forces kind of needed each other.

    in NH

  18. 10:30 - Kevin Barrett … ‘worst wave of hatred, bigotry and xenophobia that’s ever been generated … or at least is comparable with the sorts of things the Nazis were doing’ (to inflame similar hatred against Jews, supposedly).

    With state-control of the film studios National-Socialist Germany produced precisely two feature films wherein Jews were portrayed in an negative light. Hollywood, under Jewish control, must produce ten times that number of anti-National-socialist German films per annum even today, and one-hundred times that number of films portraying White people generally in a negative light. And during the war Hollywood and British film studios produced dozens and dozens of anti-German and anti-Japanese films with crude ethnic stereotyping and scapegoating.

    A correct understanding of the events of WWII - such as you might find at - would show that Germans and not Jews were, and remain, the true victims of the most hateful and dishonest of the propaganda. Barrett has his analogy all wrong.


    12:40 - Barrett … supports 9/11 truth not for its own sake but because ‘when the public realises Muslims were not behind 9/11 … Muslims will likely enjoy something like the privilege that Jews have enjoyed since WWII.’

    Yea, this is the problem with Kevin Barrett as public spokesman for 9/11 truth. He doesn’t want a world where every people is equal and free to pursue its own destiny peacefully. He wants a world that gives advantages to Muslims because they’re Muslims and denies those advantages to peoples which happen not to be. I think it’s pretty much the conventional expression of Islamic teachings to pursue this end in the political realm and it’s why otherwise decent guys like Barrett can’t separate themselves from the more aggressive elements within the Islamic world. The more aggressive Muslims who actually do hope to dominate and subjugate all other cultures are the more authentic and doctrinally-sanctioned Muslims. Muhammad wasn’t shy about just militarily conquering anyone who wouldn’t accept his version of truth, after all.

    Example: On his AFR show recently Barrett talked about an Arab friend in North Africa, it might have been Morocco, and described him and his family as refugees from Spain, out of which the Spanish had booted them 500 years ago. Even though I’m accustomed to Barrett’s biases this made me laugh out loud. The Moors invade, conquer and subjugate Spain for centuries before eventually and rightly being driven out by the natives. Five centuries later a European convert to Islam describes those Arabs’ descendants as ‘refugees,’ as if their expulsion was somehow unwarranted or unjust, and implying that they might reasonably expect to one day return and rule over Spain again. (I believe it’s Islamic doctrine to see any territory that’s once been ruled by Muslims as properly the domain of Muslims for all time, and so Muslims see Spain as a place they should and must re-conquer somehow. I might be wrong?)

    Suppose the Iraqis are able to succeed in kicking American, British and other colonists out of Iraq - as I hope they will be. Would Kevin Barrett think it absurd and offensive if 500 years later their descendants talk about being refugees from Iraq? Of course he would, because Kevin Barrett’s operating system, his morality, is characterised by very clear pro-Islamic/anti-non-Islamic double standards appropriate to a good Muslim.

    At one time Old Testament inspired Christians had a similar attitude and of course Jews always have this attitude. It’s not specifically a problem with Muslims so much as a problem of Jewish self-conception and how they relate to God and how people who’ve inherited the same God then might see themselves.

  19. 14:35 - Greg Felton … ‘US slipping into Fascism since Reagan’ … ‘Christian Zionists’

    The mainstream and the alternative media share a common perception of Fascism but it’s quite different from more sober scholarly definitions or the Fascists’ own meaning.

    Fascism is a political philosophy concerned with bringing the people of the country together in awareness of their common interests, including bringing together the various factions involved in economic affairs - bankers, industrialists, farmers, unions, employees - and ensuring that no one class dominates or exploits the others. That does not describe Reagan and post-Reagan America where social divisions have been deliberately exaggerated and where the financial elite especially have been given ever more scope to exploit and attack the rest of society.

    And whereas the contemporary American politician must subordinate American sovereignty to transnational organisations and protocols such as the IMF, NATO, NAFTA, GATT, the War on Terror, the Mexican immivasion, Israel and a hundred other instruments of Jewish power, Fascist politicians were highly nationalistic, concerned with their own people and with taking back powers to the national level that Big Jews - international financiers they were usually called - had already subverted to themselves and were using against the peoples of the world except their own, naturally.

    When we say Fascist and mean police-state, can’t we just say police-state? When we say Fascist and mean imperialistic, can’t we just say imperialistic? When we say Fascist and mean big business, can’t we just say big business?

    There are good reasons the mainstream media constantly puts out hit pieces on Fascists and Nazis, and these are good reasons for the well-intentioned people within the ‘alternative media’ not to attack those schools of thought that clearly terrify tptb more than any other. See for example the chapter on the Third Reich in Ellen Brown’s WEB OF DEBT.

    Finally, Christian Zionists have no power. On every issue that matters to them - abortion, Church/State division, race-replacement immigration, the coarsening of the media, myriad other social issues, they get what they don’t want and get what Jews do want. On one issue - Israel - their desires coincide with Jews and then only they get what they want. Bitching about Christian Zionists is a way to show you’re not just picking on the Jews by picking on the guy that’s already been beaten to a pulp by the Jews.

  20. 15:19 - Felton … ‘Israel, primary director of the attack’ ... ‘nobody knows who specifically carried it out, but the interplay and cross-pollination between Israel and the US govt is so complete to be called a single machine, US not independent, all agencies of government Zionised’ ... ‘Host and Parasite.’

    Yea, good. It has been quite normal down the centuries to discuss Jewish colonies in the West and their relations with host peoples in these terms, host and parasite etc. I take it Felton generally uses these biological terms to describe what he observes operating in cultural and political spheres but he might get some useful stuff from the bloggers associated with the Occidental Quarterly and Majority Rights who have written a lot about how Dawkins’s concept of the extended phenotype helps explain some of the bizarre behaviours we see from Western (and Arab) elites and about the evolution of virulence as a Jewish characteristic.

    Jim Fetzer is particularly well-placed to bring some of these analyses into his research about 9/11 and other issues. Interviews by him of James Bowery or Ted Sallis or Richard Fausette would be fascinating.


    38:00 - Webster Tarpley … ‘over-emphasis on the Israeli role, a distortion not supported by the facts’ … ‘Bernard Lewis… British’

    I think Tarpley’s correct. The problem is that people are assuming Israeli and US mutual independence from Jewry. The focus should be on Jews and where Israelis or Americans are involved in 9/11 you will see that they are acting in pursuit ultimately of Jewish interests.

    The British proposition-nation no less than today’s America is wide-open to subversion by self-interested Jews like Bernard Lewis (whose son has been involved in AIPAC incidentally, not in any British-American solidarity initiatives).

  21. 42:40 - Tarpley … ‘the idea that Israel dominates every feature of US life’ is, as Blakeney rightly points out, a straw-man argument. But I think we can say more than that. Where Tarpley defends Israel and by implication Jews from charges that no-one has even made, it’s quite clear that he must do so as a result of Jewish or Israeli pressure in some form.

    “As a general rule, a modern biologist seeing an animal doing something to benefit another assumes either that it is being manipulated by the other individual or that it is being subtly selfish…” ~ George C. Williams.

    Were Tarpley to run around defending himself from charges that no-one makes we’d call him paranoid, where he runs around defending Jews from charges that no-one has made, just like the most paranoid Jews who are always on the lookout for ever-present anti-Semitism, we can say that like many contemporary Westerners he has come to identify so strongly with the biases and passions of Jews - through cultural indoctrination via education and the mainstream media principally - that Tarpley can’t be expected to report accurately on those elements of 9/11 that involve group relations between Westerners, Jews and Muslims including the ultimate question of responsibility.


    44:00-48:00 - Felton … Nice to hear an American talk like this. Tarpley’s responses are not to his credit.

  22. 54:30 - Tarpley … ‘the Nazi continuum … Prescott Bush the Wall St. banker who financed Hitler … Nazis in Wall St with tremendous power in the US government’ connected to 9/11 and the War on Terror and the modern American police state.

    Jeesh! I’m sure Conspindustry Kontrol have noted your attempt to get the debate back off track here, Dr Tarpley, and you will be rewarded! Call your next book FOURTH REICH FULFILLED! and like they did for Jim Marrs maybe they’ll make yours a New York Times bestseller (which ratings have nothing to do with sales, and everything to do with the messages tptb want to put out).


    63:20 - Tarpley … ‘known today that the Nazis burned the Reichstag’

    This is another example, like Kevin Barrett’s imagined overabundance of Third Reich anti-Semitic propaganda, of the Conspindustry going beyond mainline history to attack tptb’s enemies for them. It’s bizarre and tragic. The balance of evidence according to most historians is that Van der Lubbe was responsible. Even the editors of Wikipedia, perfectly happy to see the Third Reich painted in the worst possible light, accept this. Ironically, the Conspindustry’s relentless campaign to paint that event as a Nazi false-flag is a form of false-flag event itself. It’s one of the more obvious examples of Jewish concerns dictating the culture and talking-points of the ‘alternative’ media every bit as much as the mainstream media -- who else but Jews are so hysterical about the Nazi threat in 2012 as to exaggerate the threat they posed in 1933?

  23. 119:00 - Various with views on Ron Paul

    Tarpley is right about Paul being ‘controlled opposition.’ The Austrian model of economics is designed to ensure that after any ‘revolution’ we’ll all respect the property rights of the bankers who’ve robbed us and let them keep their loot, and then will let the same people retake control of the country through their control of precious metals. On War and Peace it was once possible to believe that Paul was sincere about his commitment to respecting borders and sovereignty but after he wrote regarding the immivasion of America that kicking out those invaders “isn't going to happen and shouldn't happen,” how can anyone believe he won’t find similar expedient justifications for disregarding other countries’ right to control who comes into their country?

    On the general question of Paul’s honesty and consistency we can look to the controversy over his newsletters that told some un-PC truths about race. Paul was raking in over a million dollars a year from sales of those newsletters sold to his most committed supporters who believed they were as advertised the published views of Paul himself. Now it turns out Paul didn’t write those articles and disagrees fundamentally with the views expressed therein. This was a colossal fraud carried out over several years and if anyone but an establishment politician had been guilty of such a fraud he’d probably have faced criminal charges. Paul’s a phoney.

  24. Joshua Blakeney’s idea that we might make Americans more sympathetic to the Palestinian cause if we confront them with evidence of Israeli responsibility for attacking Americans is a good one, but the fundamental injustice of the Zionist project and its consequences for the Palestinians arises from the fact that their right as a native people to control their own homeland was denied. And Joshua Blakeney doesn’t believe that native peoples should enjoy freedom from colonisation to the extent they desire, and when he observes people rising up and demanding freedom from colonisation he calls them “far-right neo-Nazi fascists.”

    Or is that just when they happen to be White, Joshua?

    See for example wherein I comment as ‘fellist’

    A point I make there that I still consider important and crucial to this whole discussion - the anti-‘War on Terror,’ pro-Palestinian. pro-Tibetan, anti-globalisation and other related movements are fundamentally compromised, morally and politically, as long as their leadership positions are occupied by people vehemently hostile to European and Euro-offshoot peoples’ ethno-nationalist claims.

    It’s not just that this position is objectively racist, denying to all peoples that happen to be White what is defended and promoted for all peoples that happen not to be, and that this undermines the claim that e.g. Palestinians or Iraqis have a ‘right’ to live free and unmolested in their homelands. But by insisting that our former ethno states be transformed, against our known wishes, into ‘proposition nations’ defined by expressly universal moral standards, they lend moral support to the ideological justifications of their more mainstream counterparts to intervene in other countries when these standards are apparently challenged.

    Where loyalty to a people is replaced with loyalty to an idea that’s said to have universal truth and desirable applicability, it becomes a moral necessity that we take action to oppose alternative social and political models wherever that alternative model crops up.

    How the hell does Joshua expect to bring the Western peoples on side to support the idea that Palestinians or Iraqis or Syrians shouldn’t be subjugated by the Empire when he cheers on that same Empire when it subjugates us? It’s just not gonna fly -- and that’s why you always find these morally and politically compromised people, open-borders libertarians, Marxists, culturally marxised liberals, minority-racists, atop the Empire’s perennially ineffective ‘opposition’ movements. It guarantees their failure and the Empire's security.

  25. On Tarpley etc. being disinfo agents …

    I would be reluctant to make that kind of charge. People are subject to all kinds of pressures that bias their approach to history and politics, their investigations and conclusions. Prof. Fetzer might recall that it took years of badgering by Morgan Reynolds before he would take seriously the claims about no planes.

    And there is no social pressure so strong as that White people in particular never identify Jews as such or Jewish particularism or Jewish conduct as a problem. In general in our societies where there are conflicts of interests between Jews and others, between the Jewish group and other groups, then the non-Jews are expected to forget their own interests and act in what they believe is the best interest of Jews - or be called anti-Semitic.

    The label ‘anti-Semite’ nowadays tends to attach to those brave souls who merely think that in conflicts of interest between Jews and others it might sometimes be reasonable to find in favour of the non-Jewish group. (And a ‘racist’ is any White person who takes his own side or his own people’s side in an argument with any non-White).

    Furthermore, someone like Tarpley, with a long history providing Conspindustry literature for sale primarily through the Larouche and Alex Jones operations, will correctly perceive that he can bitch all he likes about Wall St., the State Department, the City of London, Nazis, White Racism, the Anglo-American elite, the CIA and so on, but that if he talks about Jews, Jewish racism, Jewish financiers and so on, then his current sources of funding and audience will quickly dry up. Jim Fetzer mentions zioncrimefactory above, but that tiny site and its sister sites are currently under attack even as Tarpley and Jones and the Birchers and Larouches publish ever more warnings about the ‘real’ culprits and escape any such censure.

  26. On US/Israeli Dual Citizens relating to 9/11. I hear this a lot about Chertoff and others, but I have never seen any evidence for it or understood why any Jew would bother with US/Israel or for that matter British/Israel dual citizenship (I’m a Brit).

    Has evidence been published that Chertoff, Perle, Wolfowitz, Feith etc. are dual-citizens? Frankly, I don’t see why they’d bother; being Jews they can flee to Israel anytime things get hot for them anywhere else (which I take as the more or less express reason for Israel’s establishment in the first place). All Jews basically ARE Israelis, citizens or no.

  27. John Scrivener said ... "Really superb debate, great stuff, thank y'all very much :-) "

    Yea, I agree. And it reinforces the need to thrash out the contentious issues not retreat into camps that just ignore each others' research except when they lie about it.