Broadcast Wednesday, March 26th, 10-11:30 a.m. Central (1500 GMT) on NoLiesRadio.org, archived here. Note: TruthJihad.com subscribers can listen to shows on-demand before they are broadcast – and also get free downloads! If you are a subscriber, just log in to the members area of TruthJihad.com and go to the “Private Blog” to get early access to the shows.
I wrote to Cass Sunstein a few days ago inviting him to cognitively infiltrate my radio show. Unfortunately Cass is too busy being grilled by 9/11 truth-seekers at book signings. So we’ll just have to make do with an equally dubious anti-9/11-truth author, Jonathan Kay.
This interview, dating from July 2011, was my second with Jonathan Kay. (You can listen to the first, somewhat friendlier interview, conducted before his horrible book came out, here.)
Kay’s book is a rambling ad-hominem attack against the 9/11 truth movement in general, and selected 9/11 truth luminaries in particular. I have the pleasure of reporting that I am tied with Ken Jenkins, only slightly behind Mike Ruppert, and just barely ahead of David Ray Griffin and Richard Gage, as the most-discussed 9/11 truth leader in Kay’s book.*** I think I am safe in calling myself the most intensively vilified (indeed the most egregiously libeled) of the book’s cast of characters.
I am tempted to say that Kay deserves consideration for the Larry Silverstein Chutzpah Award — for telling so many stinking lies about me, and then having the unmitigated audacity to come on my radio show ; – )
* * * According to the index, Kay devotes fourteen pages to Ruppert, twelve pages to me, twelve to Ken Jenkins, eleven to Richard Gage, ten to David Ray Griffin.
http://therebel.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=755537:murder-by-plane-crash&catid=138:kaminski&Itemid=2264
• The murder of two former U.S. CIA agents who were guarding a suspicious cargo that allegedly made its way onto the ill-fated Malaysian Airlines Flight 370, which was scheduled to fly to Beijing but was suddenly diverted to Hainan Island shortly before the plane went missing. What did the Chinese suspect was on that plane?
Above is first mention of this that I've heard.
FEMA drill tomorrow involves a 777 Plane?
Have a good day Doc.
I just listened to much of your interview with Jonathan Kay and could not help but feel you were wasting your time and throwing your valuable airtime like pearls before swine because it is simply not credible that someone who has actually looked into to the matters of the JFK assassination or the 9-11 false flag attack could conclude other than that a major conspiracy was involved in either/both cases. If one only listened/read mainstream media, it is credible that one might believe the official stories and be satisfied that surely such major events could not be conspiracies without the public learning about it ere long as too many people would have to have had some involvement and at least somebody would blab. But to examine the evidence is to remove blind acceptance of the official truth as a plausible position. And so it is with the deceiver Jonathan Kay, Israel operative. He is not the first to publish claptrap warning against the trend to embrace conspiracy explanations for important events in history. Daniel Pipes published such a book also I presume as an agent of Israel/zionism. http://www.danielpipes.org/books/conspiracychap.php And the recent article you allude to in the title of your broadcast by the US government official Sunstein. When I first heard of Jonathan Kay it was in an interview of hi on KPFA-Pacifica radio in which the Judaic interviewer was devoid of skepticism. I looked for information about him on the internet as I saw he was a suspicious person seeking to counter truth seekers who were inevitably drifting toward the hidden truth that Zionist Jewry is the power behind political shenanigans and conspiracies and it is they who have the power over the mass media and the government necessary to get away with their crimes. It is also they most at risk and threatened by discovery of the truth. Israel had launched, in Canada, a scheme to counter growing awareness of Jewish conspiracies on college campuses in North America by organizing Jewry to seek to make it unacceptable to talk or think about conspiracies instead of trusting official government versions [supported by mass media] of important events. The launching event was held somewhere in Canada, and big whigs flew in from Israel for the festivities. Jonathan Kay played a notable role as moderator in the event. He had not yet produced the book. The following article about the event lists him as managing editor of a Canadian newspaper. Suppose some insider contacted that newspaper eager to expose vital information, and evidence, which would reveal the true culprits in the 9-11 false flag attack? It would not make it past the editor. see: http://www.frontpagemag.com/2011/fern-sidman/fighting-the-campus-jihad/ His intention seems clearly to argue a lie for the sole purpose of obscuring the truth to keep the public in the dark; and to try to make it taboo, "antisemitic" to seek the truth. He is not worthy of being treated as if he is just someone with a different opinion; he is an intellectual fraud, and a moral imbecile. Just my humble opinion. On another note, I really enjoyed your interview with Kevin MacDonald; it was a good interview. He is perhaps the very opposite of Jonathan Kay; a more honorable and truthful man would be difficult to find. I dimly recall hearing a previous interview of yours with Kevin MacDonald from perhaps a couple of years ago in which it seemed to me there was a strained discomfort. My memory may be inaccurate. But at the time I remember thinking that perhaps you were uneasy that perhaps he might say something politically incorrect about Jews. For myself, reading his book THE CULTURE OF CRITIQUE was an astonishing eye opener for me and one for which I remain deeply grateful to him. I never tire of his interviews and wish I could find more of them.
…hi kevin…i'm back in the states…enjoyed the interview with kay…
…the main thing that stands out about him is that he speaks with this repressed tone…
…maybe it's just in order to seem serious…or careful…but it was striking…
…he was funny, only once, when he said the alleged hijackers died after the attacks were "killed by the mossad"…
…you were right to hammer home that he has the analogies of the fact patterns of the protocols and 9/11 all wrong…
…a fake narrative to denigrate a religious group…respectively jews and muslims…
…he did not have a response for this…as he, like so many others, uses the protocols in the conventional way…
…namely that people believe that the protocols represent a real rather than contrived document…
…i did some reading in french on the origins of the protocols…henri rollin writing about maurice joly…
…might be interesting to look deeper into the analogy that you sketched…
…the "similarities and dissimilarities" structure might be useful with something like that…
I wanted to contact you again to commend you on your thoughtful interview with Jonathan Kay. I read his book last semester because I thought he might have a compelling argument against 9/11 investigations of the sort you and I are interested in. Of course this is not what the book was, instead it was him storytelling about his meetings with 9/11 activists and humanizing them, albeit in the most revoltingly patronizing manner imaginable. The cognitive dissonance in his thinking is pretty striking because he plainly ascribes to the modernist delusion, which is that he can approach everything objectively and rationally. This is why he can say things like 'well Kevin you just don't trust the government, but I trust NIST' and he refuses to acknowledge that NIST is far from infallible and there are organizations like A&E that are equally reputable and arguably more independent. His profiles of people like you and Griffin and Ruppert and Jenkins are also the most hackneyed journalistic technique of making an argument…its called ad hominem Jon, c'mon man. There's plenty to critique about him but I don't need to tell you.
Anyhow, one point that he made that I think is important is how you approach the question of Israel. The diction involved in the term 'sacred myth' is indeed problematic. Of course, if anybody asks you to explain this concept it is clear that you are making a statement about how Zionism dominates the discourse of Israeli foreign policy. However, when you don't have an opportunity to clarify, you can easily be taken out of context, much in the way that Jonathan did in his book. I would urge you to choose another word that conveys the same meaning and is equally rigorous intellectually. Sacred Discourse or Sacred Narrative work just as well as Sacred Myth, and really are probably more reflective of what you mean anyway.
Again, I was really pleased by how much restraint you showed in the interview because I was concerned that you wouldn't be able to control your frustration with his ad hominem attacks and broken (yet self-assured) logic. Well done, you're doing a great job.
Thought you did a very, very good job with that IVY LEAGUE TOOL in two ways: 1. You held your composure BEYOND what I woud ever expect you to be able to manage…and you SMOKED HIM! 2. And…YOU SMOKED HIM!…and allowed his "Ivy-Jew-Boy" training to become fully exposed. This is very, very important…beyind what you emotionally might think! Anyway, "The Chosen People" "used to be "masters at flipping the debate" manipulating their opponents into becoming "defensive"…and you SAW this…and you CONTROLLED your emotions…and you CAME BACK with strong [NON-YELLED] evidence [that sorta stuff]… Stuff that Jews try their best to AVOID! Evidence does not serve their programming, history or future goals very well at all!