You are here

Paul Fitzerald and Elizabeth Gould on “History of Neocon Takeover of the USA”

This show broadcasts LIVE 8 to 10 pm Eastern Friday, May 12th at – click on Studio B – then gets archived about 24 hours later.  For only $4 a month you can listen to shows on-demand before they are broadcast – and also get free downloads. Help Kevin keep these shows on the air – Click HERE! Or if you prefer, PAYPAL a one time donation, or a regular payment, to truthjihad(at)gmail[dot]com.

First hour: Elizabeth Gould and Paul Fitzgerald discuss their terrific new three-part article “The History of the Neocon Takeover of the USA.”
     What precisely is neoconservatism, and how did it come to power? Most of the scholarship (Shadia Drury being a leading example) focuses on Leo Strauss and his cult followers – the hardline Zionists who seized power in the wake of the 9/11 coup d’état.
     But Gould and Fitzgerald have sketched an alternate history. Instead of Strauss, they focus on Machievellian “ex-Trotskyite” James Burnham – whose real-life example inspired the dystopian vision of George Orwell. They also name Zbigniew Brezezinski as a key neocon, arguing that this hardline Machievellian philosophy took over during the Jimmy Carter era, long before the arrival of George W. Bush.
   This is historical revisionism at its finest! (Good thing this kind of revisionism is still legal.)

Second hour: Rolf Lindgren – Republican / Libertarian activist and regular guest on mainstream talk radio here in Madison, Wisconsin – joins us to argue about history, current events, and Donald Trump. (We do get around to the firing of FBI chief James Comey, so be patient!)
     Have false flags and political assassinations falsely blamed on “lone nuts” been happening with accelerating frequency during the past two centuries – and if so, is this a sign of the decline of the West due to the corruption of its moral fabric in general, and the loss of religion in particular? And is Donald Trump going to put a stop to the madness and save Western civilization?
     Rolf and I don’t always agree, but we have a good time arguing.

Will Trump end false flags and save Western civilization? Rolf thinks so. I’m not so sure.

8 Thoughts to “Paul Fitzerald and Elizabeth Gould on “History of Neocon Takeover of the USA””

  1. Anonymous

    Re: Lindgren's claim that there will be no false flags under Trump:

    Recently there was yet another "shooting" that allegedly occurred in San Diego/La Jolla. Here is a short clip (38 seconds) that has emerged which certainly appears to show the participating police officers staging the scene by tossing chairs into the pool:

    In the MSM coverage of the police closing in on the suspect there were no chairs in the pool. Others have pointed out even more anomalies.

  2. It would be interesting to have Robbie Martin (Director, A Very Heavy Agenda) on your show and then do a comparison of his take on neocons versus Fitzgerald and Gould's.

  3. Alexander and Gould kept stressing how it was the British that were the roots behind the whole neocon philosophy. I didn't really get how they saw Leo Strauss fitting in.

    In any event, isn't British power really based in the City of London, which is "owned" by the Rothchilds so that Britain's empire agenda is really Rothchild-commandeered?

    Another example of a zionist-driven
    seemingly British agenda was Churchill. Wasn't The Focus, a key wealthy zionist group in London, financing him to do their bidding?

  4. I'm concerned about the concept of "empire," be it Islamic, NWO, Chinese or whatever. I don't trust any empire type of government could be good for all its people (e.g., ask the Greeks how beneficent they found the Ottoman empire.)

    I also am not enthused about a society based on "one god." As a practitioner of shamanism, a spiritual practice thought to be about 20,000 year old, the fairly new development of worshiping a single godhead figure does not appeal to me.

  5. I don't find Mr. Lindgren to be that well informed. I appreciate hearing different viewpoints, but I prefer to hear them from more educated sources.

  6. Please try to talk him into it! He has tweeted attacks on me a couple of times during the past few years, so obviously he doesn't like me. Let's see if he's open to civil discourse.

  7. no thanks, and actually Kevin I never attacked you until you brought someone on your show to assess the 9/11 truth credentials of my sister and I. You could have asked me to come on your show originally, but instead you brought on somebody who has a multitude of personal reasons for continuing a 4-year long obsession with us. In short, you attacked me & my family first, did you expect me to be nice to you after that?

  8. re: Robbie, I met Greg M. through Jeremy Rothe-Kuishel in KC, and Greg suggested a show on Max Blumenthal's absurd "defense" of your sister. (Her occasionally wishy-washy approach to 9/11 truth was not the main issue.) I gave Greg a fair hearing, just like I would give you or any guest a fair hearing. I had no idea there were "personal issues" involved. If you disagree with Greg's critique (or my views) come on my show and let's discuss it!

Leave a Comment