You are here

Ex-CIA officer Philip Giraldi on “Why I Dislike Israel,” Ken Jenkins on “why I dislike carniverous martian plesiosaurs”

Wed.  10/10/12, 3-5 pm Central, American Freedom Radio  (archived here.)

First hour: Philip Giraldi‘s new article “Why I Dislike Israel” has gone viral. It begins:

Philip Giraldi

“Even those pundits who seem to want to distance U.S. foreign policy from Tel Aviv’s demands and begin treating Israel like any other country sometimes feel compelled to make excuses and apologies before getting down to the nitty-gritty. The self-lacerating prologues generally describe how much the writer really has a lot of Jewish friends and how he or she thinks Israelis are great people and that Israel is a wonderful country before launching into what is usually a fairly mild critique.

“Well, I don’t feel that way. I don’t like Israel very much. Whether or not I have Jewish friends does not define how I see Israel and is irrelevant to the argument. And as for the Israelis, when I was a CIA officer overseas, I certainly encountered many of them. Some were fine people and some were not so fine, just like the general run of people everywhere else in the world. But even the existence of good upstanding Israelis doesn’t alter the fact that the governments that they have elected are essentially part of a long-running criminal enterprise…”

Ken Jenkins

Second hour: Video producer and electrical engineer Ken Jenkins, a 9/11 truth pioneer, has developed a reputation as one of our leading experts on the psychology and communications of 9/11 truth. We will discuss cognitive infiltration and disinformation in general, and the strange case of “9/11 truth judge” Alfred Webre sabotaging the Vancouver 9/11 Hearings by introducing tales of time travel and Obama teleporting to mars to be chased by carniverous martian plesiosaurs.

4 Thoughts to “Ex-CIA officer Philip Giraldi on “Why I Dislike Israel,” Ken Jenkins on “why I dislike carniverous martian plesiosaurs””

  1. Anonymous

    What a fabulous name for a Heavy Metal Band!

    Carnivorous Martian Plesiosaurs

  2. Anonymous

    On the "Whites" cruel to Black slaves bit, guess who were the principal traffickers & owners of Black slaves? Not who Hollywood&Co would have us believe!

    Two David Duke vids, <10 mins each, spare the Duke ad-homs & consider the facts & sources:
    "The Shocking Jewish Role in Slavery Part I: What Jewish Historians Say"

    "The Shocking Jewish Role in Slavery Part II: The Media Coverup"

    Without watching again ^, I recall near the end of Pt. 1, Duke cited a Jewish source indicating 40-some % of Jewish households in the US owned slaves, while ~5% of White/Gentile households owned them.

    Nation of Islam: "The Secret Relationship Between Blacks and Jews"

    Walter White Jr. essay from 1968: "Who Brought the Slaves to America?"

    "When General Ulysses Grant 'expelled the Jews' "

    Duke's "ISRAEL – The Promised Land of Organized Crime", 29 mins:

  3. Anonymous

    President John F. Kennedy encountered problems with the Israeli government regarding the production of nuclear weapons in Dimona. Although the existence of a nuclear plant was initially denied by the Israeli government, David Ben-Gurion, in a speech to the Israeli Knesset on December 21, 1960, stated that the purpose of the nuclear plant established at Beersheba was for "research in problems of arid zones and desert flora and fauna". When Ben-Gurion met with Kennedy in New York, he claimed that Dimona was being developed to provide nuclear power for desalinization and that "for the time being the only purposes (of the nuclear plant) are for peace".

    Kennedy did not believe this, and in May 1963 sent a letter to Ben-Gurion stating, "this commitment and this support would seriously be jeopardized in the public opinion in this country and the West as a whole if it should be thought that this Government was unable to obtain reliable information on a subject as vital to peace as Israel's efforts in the nuclear field."

    Ben-Gurion repeated previous reassurances that Dimona was being developed for peaceful purposes, and Israel firmly resisted American pressure to open its nuclear facilities to International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) inspections. According to Seymour Hersh, the Israelis set up false control rooms to show American inspectors. Abe Feinberg stated, "It was part of my job to tip them off that Kennedy was insisting on (an inspection)."

    The State Department argued that if Israel wanted U.S. tanks, it should be prepared in return to accept international supervision of its nuclear program. Kennedy had tried to control the arms being sold and given to Israel because the Israelis would not sign the IAEA compacts for the Dimona nuclear site, would not fully admit its purpose and continued to insist it was for peaceful energy purposes.

    (And we all know what happened in Dallas, in 1963.)

    In early March 1965, the director of the State Department's Office of Near Eastern Affairs, Rodger P. Davies, had come to the conclusion that Israel was developing nuclear weapons. He reported that the target date for acquisition of a nuclear capability by Israel was 1968-69. A science attache at the embassy in Tel Aviv concluded that parts of the Dimona facility had been "purposely mothballed" to mislead American scientists during their visit.

    Dimona was never placed under IAEA safeguards despite efforts made by various U.S. administrators and presidents. On May 1, 1968, Undersecretary of State Katzenbach told President Johnson that Dimona was producing enough plutonium to produce two bombs a year. Attempts to write Israeli adherence to the NPT into contracts for the supply of U.S. weapons continued throughout 1968.

    From that time until the present, Israel has amassed hundreds of illegal nuclear weapons of mass destruction, and not only continues to defy and ignore IAEA, NPT, and UN regulations, but also routinely threatens all other nations of the world with nuclear annihilation if anyone dares to interfere with their plans for world domination (Google: "Sampson Option", and "Israel’s Nuclear Submarines").

    Now . . . who do you think is the REAL rogue threat to world peace? Here's a clue: It certainly isn't Iran (or Mel Gibson, even).

  4. Anonymous

    I just finished playing your archived show with Ken Jenkins. I have had email exchanges with him that followed pretty much the same trajectory. My firm conviction about the Pentagon tracks with yours, as I understand it, and is, I believe consistent with the evidence you cited. I come at it as one who is very familiar with the work of Citizens Investigation Team, since they developed most of it while active with Pilots for 9/11 Truth and their evidence, delineated in "National Security Alert" is to me among the most persuasive in the field.

    My take on Frank Legge and his allies is also consistent with yours. I was a reviewer of a couple of generations of his "scholarly" paper on the Pentagon in which he aired a number of his laughable confabulations which seemed not at all at home there, but more an attempt to cloak speculation in an academic robe and damage the CIT case, which mostly speaks for itself.

    The attempt to fake an aircraft crash in order to create the "New Pearl Harbor", which is how the Pentagon must be characterized if you subscribe to the CIT hypothesis, indicts the military and DoD as nothing else does. It also implicates the media and other branches of government, which is why, I contend, a very serious effort was mounted to discredit CIT and to label as controversial the entire Pentagon conversation. With the North Side approach, the light poles, damage path, lack of wreckage is explained and the bizarre behavior of some of the Pentagon high command comes into focus not as rational acts to defend the country but as attempts to not be seen as having their fingerprints on the events. There is considerable effort being spent in the cause of maintaining as much ambiguity as possible relative to 9/11 evidence, but only in the case of the Pentagon have they "burned" this amount of 9/11 credibility in the attempt to derail and dissuade people from even looking at the arguments. If they are successful, and can preserve the image of a 757 inbound to the Pentagon with Hani Hanjour at the controls, they are clear to adopt a fall-back position of accounting for 9/11 as a result of blowback with a pinch of LIHOP, throw a few patsies to the wolves, and avoid the possibility that the high perps wind up with their heads on the battlements while the U. S. Government comes apart at the seams.

    I enjoyed the show.
    Best regards,

Leave a Comment