Wed. 10/24/12, 3-5 pm Central, American Freedom Radio (archived here.)
 |
| Daniel Ellsberg “busted” the Vietnam perps by leaking the Pentagon Papers |
First hour guest: The wold’s most famous whistleblower, Daniel Ellsberg! I interviewed him a few years ago… (He’s a 9/11 truth-seeker from way back…)
His latest article, Defeat Romney without illusions about Obama, is getting wide circulation.
2nd hour, I’ll be talking about Islam with Isa Hodge, who has been doing dawa (Muslim outreach to non-Muslims) for two decades.
I think it is great that you got Ellsberg. I've heard him many times and I dont have time to listen at this time. I do not know Ellsberg's position on 911. Here's what I want to know. Did there come the point, the Keven Barrett famous "come to Jesus" moment, when the interviewee has to proclaim his position on 911 truth and then defend it if he/she is pro "cover up". If there was such a moment, then I will give it a listen. Thanks.
Not sure if there was a "come to Jesus" moment, Jesus, but we did have a lively and informative exchange about 9/11 in the third segment (about 40 minutes in to the show). He's in the "WTC-7 sure is suspicious, we need an investigation with subpoena power)" camp. Which sure beats the garbage Juan Cole was trying to feed me.
Excellent. Kudos and Ellsberg and keep up the good work
Riddle me this Kevin, why come (as we said as kids) is it that I, with my state school education, can "get" 9/11 and Ellsberg with a Harvard PhD and Cambridge education can't. You have a background in academia; do we need to re-work the Peterson's Guides?
A lot of what passes for education is really just inculcating mythology. Anything that cuts radically against the dominant mythology will be harder for "educated" than "uneducated" people to get.
I was somewhat disappointed to hear that Ellsberg is still … well, let's say unsure, ambivalent, or sitting on the fence, when it comes to his view of what really happened on 9/11.
Acknowledging the need for a proper investigation (I think Bush and Cheney are the only ones ever said it shouldn't be investigated) and admitting that WTC 7 is "suspicious", don't seem particularly bold positions, in my estimation.
And unfortunately, he seemed reluctant to go very far down that rabbit hole. I'm always a bit bemused by individuals like Ellsberg, who seem perfectly well equipped, in terms of intellect and world view, to grasp the significance and implications of 9/11 and therefore the need to research and study the events sufficiently to understand the basics.
In the case of 9/11, the basics are relatively easy to understand. Newtonian physics irrefutably disproves the government's "gravitational collapse" canard. Ergo, the government is lying and covering up the truth. That alone should be sufficient evidence to dispel the sort of reservations Ellsberg seems to hold.
The temporal proximity of the plane crashes and the controlled demolitions is neither curious, nor coincidental, it was obviously planned that way. It is difficult to see how that conclusion could elude any critical thought on the matter.
My guess is that Ellsberg hasn't actually given it any serious thought. Perhaps he has an emotional or psychological barrier that prevents his otherwise perfectly competent intellect from perceiving the obvious, when it comes to the issue that cuts to the core of our corrupt polity.