Wednesday, July 18, 2012

John Friend

9/11 Truth: Where are we headed?


  1. SD 9/11 "truth" cancelled my scheduled presentation right after I did this interview. I explain everything in some detail here:

  2. John, I am very sorry that San Diegans for 9/11 "Truth" is such a cowardly untruthful organization and that your event was cancelled.

    I knew it was too good to be true, that is, that any group that had "9/11 Truth" in its name would be or could be anything other than what they all have proven to be from the beginning (beginning with nontruth tellers and nontruth seekers about 9-11. Dr. Fetzer has always said there has been an effort to "channel" activists into narrowly defined corrals. I personally think the main controllers of the 9/11 truth groups is the same entity that staged and promoted Dr. Steven Jones, Richard Gage, and all of their spawn groups and groupies.

    Just a note: Robert Sungenis will be a guest for the second time on the show of Mark Glenn tomorrow at 3: p.m. Central Time.

    The show can be listened to live here...

    Dr. Sungenis did a show last week on 9-11 also. Can download show here


    Dr. Sungenis, as has Dr. E. Michael Jones of, have been very careful in the way they expose the deeds of darkness of those of the Jewish revolutionary spirit. They in no wise "tar the entire group." They explain that there is true "anti-semitism" , that it does exist, and define it plainly and they condemn it. When one is on fire for exposing the evil deeds of those of the Jewish revolutionary spirit, it is easy to slip and fall into tarring the entire group. The whole evil subversion of the culture that has been perpetrated for millennia by those of the Jewish revolutionary spirit is characterized by the brilliance of the Evil One, and that is why it is so difficult to name them, to identify them, and to follow their actions and where they place their money. But if we say we are truly seeking 9-11 truth, and if we personally want to seek Truth in our lives, then we MUST make good efforts, like yours John Friend, to expose the primary planning and participation of those variously referred to as the Israelis, the Zionists and the Mossad operating at the top levels of the U.S. government for at least the last half century.

    Google temporarily blocked my posting here but think I am OK again today.

  3. I think by labeling large groups as bad or guilty, ie. Jews, Muslims, blacks, you immediately lose your audience when one who identifies even slightly with that group is categorized in that group. Extremists or ultra-nationalists are dangerous from any direction. The trick is to get the greater mass of good people to speak out against their own extreme elements as loudly as possible. This is difficult when someone from outside the group is labeling them bad or evil.

  4. "The trick is to get the greater mass of good people to speak out against their own extreme elements as loudly as possible."

    I do not think this is a correct assessment. First of all, no one has broad-brushed any group as good or bad.

    Also this is not about "extreme elements" within a group. This is about consistent and dominant values and behavior patterns and common belief systems. We should be able to objectively make our observations about them in relation to 9-11 but there are strong negative consequences for this "verboten" endeavor because "they" control all major societal institutions including finance and credit. It is fine to refer to them in the collective such as the term "the Zionists," though I think that term includes all the people who are too cowardly and sold out to stand up and speak out against their controllers.

    I personally applaud John Friend's work and all of those who want to examine who might be the most likely suspects. I advise extreme caution, however, because I know what masters of manipulation we are dealing with and how things can be manipulated or twisted so as to destroy all the good work that has been done regarding 9-11 truth, most importantly proving "no plane theory" as correctly defined. In fact, we have been battling that reality since the day of the event itself, and that is why it has taken so long for this topic to begin to be addressed at all. If mistakes are made in broaching this important topic, those mistakes will be capitalized upon. Keep in mind that their definition of truth and our definition of truth are not the same.

  5. Ab Irato, "I think by labeling large groups as bad or guilty, ie. Jews, Muslims, blacks, you immediately lose your audience when one who identifies even slightly with that group is categorized in that group."

    Yes, because it offends against their self-interest as a group member, right? But if their group is hostile to mine, then criticism is the only appropriate reaction -- my group has interests too.

    In fact when it comes to dealing with a person's religious or philosophical beliefs, rational criticism is the only appropriate reaction.

    And when it comes to group relations the most vital and basic necessity for all concerned is to properly make the appropriate self/non-self distinctions that we might all be in a position to defend ourselves. That's why Jews have promoted memes like racism, antisemitism, inclusivity, tolerance etc., right alongside their promotion of Israel's right to exist as a Jewish state.

    -- We are all paralyzed where we ought to be distinguishing ourselves from others particularly aggressive Jews, even as we jump through hoops to recognise the Jews special character and our duties to them.

  6. William D. Hamilton in NARROW ROADS OF GENE LAND, VOLUME 2:

    it seems to me one of the most paradoxical of all the many impacts Judaism has had on the present world that it is the cousins (at least in a broad ethnic sense) of the very people who claim, on the authority of ancient writings, a right to deprive other Middle Easterners of their land and freedom, who generate from among their intellectuals the arguments that convince the rest of us that panhumanism is a worthy ideal and that the course that follows from it is Homo's best hope for the future. A long list of examples could easily be given: I could start, for example, with Karl Popper and his book The Open Society and Its Enemies and I could end with books of Richard Lewontin and Stephen Jay Gould. It seems to be particularly these men of Jewish origin (not, however, orthodox followers of the faith as a rule) who seek to persuade us that race differences are non-existent and everyone can mate with everyone in confidence of equally capable children. If Zionism is to escape the thought 'They mean panhumanism only for some', then these writers must include severe criticism of Israel on the same grounds that they applied criticism to South African apartheid and to racial and class separations in the USA. Demographic competition and overt racism of which religionism is just one kind have to end in Israel and the country has to become a true democracy, shaking off the present theocratic restrictions in its constitution. If this doesn't happen, genuine panhumanists and genuinely democratic states are justified to treat Zionism and Israel with the same reserve, sanctions, and suspicion as we treat all the similar inward-turned '-isms' and personality cults of other antidemocratic states. Meanwhile, in the works of those who pretend to a belief in panhumanism while financially or otherwise supporting Israel on its present course, we are justified to say that we detect the taint of hypocrisy.

  7. Professor Kevin MacDonald was mentioned in the interview and his research specifically into the construction of American public and political culture by self-interested Jews is relevant to my two comments, especially his book CULTURE OF CRITIQUE which can be downloaded in PDF format at this link:

    This book, not conspindustry fayre such as TRAGEDY AND HOPE or NONE DARE CALL IT CONSPIRACY really explains the strange development of American life in the 20thC.

  8. Great job, John! Jim is right to say you take on the tough issues very well!