Truth Jihad Radio Fri. 3/4/11, 1-3 pm Central, American Freedom Radio (archived here.) Call-in number: (402) 237-2525 or post your questions to my Facebook page.
First hour: Leading US Empir
e critic William Blum, “the thinking man’s Chomsky.” William Blum is the author of Killing Hope: US Military and CIA Interventions Since World War II, which documents an “American holocaust” of millions of people killed and tens of millions who have had their lives ruined by US military and CIA aggression against dozens of nations who never attacked or threatened us. We will discuss topics covered in Blum’s latest Anti-Empire Report: the myth of the “benevolent Marshall Plan”; the demonization of Qaddafi (who was innocent of the Lockerbie bombing); James “f*** the Jews” Baker; and much, much more!
Second hour: Libertarian presidential candidate Jim Duensing, founder of the Libertarian 9/11 truth group Libertarians for Justice. In 2009 Jim was tazed and then shot in the back by a rogue cop. He ran for Senate against the Senator from La Casa Nostra, Harry Reid in 2010.
Jim Duensing
This is really good, Kevin, how you keep featuring the same old same old guests, and you can't get any new ones of the stature of a Falk or a Margulis. It's working out like it should.
Always Good to hear from Brian Good! It's telling that Brian is happy that the truth movement hasn't found any new voices "of the stature of a Falk or a Margulis" for a few years (Richard Falk and Lynn Margulis being the two highest-statured scholars who have ever endorsed the truth movement.) The problem is, there aren't many people on the planet whose "stature" is higher than these two! If that's your criterion for radio guests, you're pretty much stuck looking for Nobel Prize winners – and frankly most of THEM are less interesting, articulate, and indeed important, than Falk and Margulis. So while we're waiting for the top 1% of Nobel Prize winners to endorse 9/11 truth, I've just set up five shows in a row, each featuring a geopolitical analyst whose "stature" (level of current work) is higher than Noam Chumpsky's! Namely: Petras-Chang-Walberg-Blum-Snow. None of them have been on a whole lot, and Chang and Snow are first-time guests. For truthful talk about world affairs, it doesn't get any better than this.
listening to you now > its bigger than the american empire > intervention in Libya doesn't benefit America > it benefits the international financial empire which resides above nation states.
understand where you're coming from though > americans should stop this nonsense > pisses me off
in a bad mood today > Ken O'Keefe is reporting rocket attacks in Gaza
peace brother
ed
yes, "american" empire is a less-than-accurate label
its a semantic thing…the roman empire's wars benefited some roman people, perhaps not the majority, but it's still called that
and it is our tax dollars, and nobody else's, that mainly pay for it
"bankster empire" might be better though
Thank you for your excellent coverage of the untouchable news item,
Demetri Khaselov and Victor Blount and the 9/11 theory of using mini
or micro nukes to take down the towers and of course the Russian
Granitt missle that may have been used against the Pentagon. Thank
you, thank you.
With regard to your interview with William Blum, I wish that it could
have been mentioned the reason for the French and Italian Communist
rise to power after WWII. From what I have learned, the French and
Italian Resistance fighters wer largely composed of communist
partisans, likely Stalinsts at that. The liberating forces often found
the communists had taken over the local city governments because the
mayor and town councils had been collaborators with the Nazis. It was
the same at the national level, too many of the more conservative
politicians had been collaborators and they could easily be denounced
by the veterans of the resistance. DeGaulle was an exception. I well
remember Reagan comparing the Nicarauguan Contras to the "Brave men
and women in the French Resistance." Most were Stalinists, which takes
away from the feel-good aspects of the Maquis, however, who can blame
them for fighting the Germans and Vichey French? The Marshall Plan was
part of the US plan to help get more reactionairy politicians back in
power in France and the rest of Europe.
You have a great show. Many thanks,
JS
Great interview. Kevin, I think you were right to point out that Islam as an ideology and identity is at extreme odds with the Zionist, materialist, Brave New World being forced down the throats of humanity, and represents a serious challenge to their agenda. I think if you take a look at American and Western culture and notice the obvious decadence and corruption facilitated by a media infrastructure that is completely Zionist run, and compare that to what the Islamic world is offering (at least the decent Muslims out there), you can recognize the threat Islam poses as an ideology and identity. Sort of like how Christianity used to be.
Blum needs absolute proof that 9/11 was an inside job? WTF?
This is where I don't get these types of guys. I mean give me a break. We know the operation was run primarily by the Israelis and their Zionist backers in the US government. If he can't recognize that, he is simply not seeing things clearly. And he is smarter than that.
Here is an article I just put together that may help Professor Blum connect the dots:
http://mrfriendsblog.blogspot.com/2011/03/mike-harari-mossad-and-911.html
Great interview with William Blum, I always enjoy listening to his considered views, but I can't help but feel exasperated by his comment that the "truth movement" still needs to prove (to his satisfaction) who did 9/11, before he can accept it was not the way the govt says it was, or words to that effect, it seemed to me.
I agree with Kevin, it has already been proved beyond a reasonable doubt, the demolition of Building 7 is but one element of proof and there are so many more elements of proof that corroborate the obvious conclusion, Bill just needs to inform himself with the relevant information. It's no good blaming the "truth movement" for his not knowing, the knowledge is out there but he is the only one who can acquire for himself, the knowledge he needs to know … you can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink.
I see this problem a lot, especially with left-leaning intellectuals of that generation, contemporaries of Chomsky, they just don't want to inform themselves about 9/11 … Griffin and Scott being two obvious exceptions.
John-
I hear you my friend. It's pretty amazing some of these guys can make statements like that. Or how they could downplay the event, like 9/11 was just one crime, so who cares, we don't need to get to the bottom of it, we can move on and focus on the other atrocities taking place, ect. It's absolutely ridiculous. Glenn Greenwald and Amy Goodman are 2 other perfect examples of this type of thinking on the left. Virtually everything Glenn writes so eloquently about is related to 9/11, yet he cannot bring himself to come out for 9/11 Truth. It's simply cowardly in my opinion.