Friday, September 4, 2009

Kevin Barrett & 9/11

Kevin Barrett is one of the most colorful and controversial of the 'mainstream' 9/11 activists. He's also one of the few who goes into the zionist aspect of the crimes of 9/11.

The question that often comes up is whether Barrett is a help or hindrance to the movement and sometimes whether he is a plant. That's up to the reader or listener to decide.

Five Quick Questions with Kevin Barrett

Introduction by Sander Hicks

I remember a 9/11 truth gig I did at the Rainbow Cooperative bookstore in Madison, WI, in 2005. It was a great night, with a lively and packed little room. There was this guy there who just seemed to bubble up with enthusiasim and zeal for 9/11 truth. I got to know him later that night, as he smiled and locked horns with the doctrinaire Marxist, and anti-9/11 Truth, bookstore manager. The clinching argument was that 9/11 Truth did NOT distract from "real anti-war organizing." In fact, this energetic guy claimed, he knew from experience that he could convert military families to 9/11 Truth in 20 minutes. He had just done it that week.

The guy was Kevin Barrett. At the time, he had not written a book on 9/11 and still had a university job. Four years later, he's got a couple of books out, good ones, he's been blackballed by the local U. of W. Madison. The man has suffered outrageous torts and humiliation for standing up for truth, for freedom of religion, for faith. He is seeking a good lawyer to persue a religious discrimination suit.

Barrett appeared on Hannity and Colmes, but repeatedly refused to appear on The O'Reilly Factor until his teaching semester was over. O'Reilly got so upset he sputtered an unprofessional death threat on air (see sidebar on the right for a bit more on that).

Barrett's words are provocative. His religion and worldview run counter to much of mainstream American culture. In just this brief interview, I got a sense of how twisted, how out of step with 1/5th of the world, how anti-Islamic, much of America's basic reality is. There's plenty of controversey about this guy, and a lot of loose talk. I jumped in and got him to answer a few questions:

1. Do you believe that the holocaust happened?

Which holocaust? I think it is utterly bizarre that only one of the many holocausts, the killing of a large number of Jews by the Nazis during World War II, has become THE Holocaust, an object of worship and sacred narrative (myth). It is even more bizarre that this sacred narrative's main purpose is to justify the ongoing holocaust in Palestine.

So yes, I do believe that the holocaust in Palestine that your tax dollars are paying for happened, and continues to happen, and will continue to happen until we decide to stop this holocaust that WE are perpetrating, rather than making a fetish out of one perpetrated by our enemies more than sixty years ago. And I believe that the Palestinian holocaust has been made possible by the creation of a sacred narrative about Nazis killing Jews during World War II. While I do believe that Nazis killed a large numbers of Jews during World War II -- I have not studied the issue enough to know how many were killed under what circumstances -- I do not understand why this story has become sacred, nor do I understand why it is used to justify the ongoing holocaust in Palestine. After all, it was Germans, not Palestinians, who killed Jews during World War II.

What about the allegations going around about you saying that Germany's invasion of Poland was "worse?" Did you say that, and if so, why.

This story was invented by Brian Good, who stalked and sexually harassed a prominent 9/11 activist by inflicting his sick fantasies on her until she was forced to beg for help from other activists, including me, to get him to leave her alone. According to her, some of Good's sick sexual fantasies that he inflicted on her against her will, despite her repeated pleas that he stop, involved me. This twisted sexual obsession with me is apparently the reason he continues to cyber-stalk me, tirelessly trolling the internet for anything I post, or anything involving me, and responding with venomous attacks. He has done the same thing to William Rodriguez, whom he also apparently has a crush on. Which is somewhat more understandable -- Willie IS a lot better looking than I am.

Good's allegation here isn't even close to what I actually said. What I said, and continue to say, is that under international law, aggression is the supreme war crime. As the supreme war crime, aggression is by definition a greater crime than torture, genocide, or any other war crime. This is not my opinion. It is a fact attested to by international law experts, including those I have interviewed on my radio show such as William Pepper and Francis Boyle. See:

By launching World War II (technically via the invasion of Poland) the Nazis instigated the killing of more than 50 million people. Those complicit in the aggression were hanged at Nuremburg for aggression, the supreme war crime. Others were prosecuted for lesser crimes, including genocide. The fact that genocide is a lesser crime than aggression under international law may not please everyone, especially apologists for U.S. aggression in Iraq and Afghanistan and Zionist aggression in Palestine, but it is a fact nonetheless.

"To initiate a war of not only an international crime; it is the supreme international crime, differing only from other war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole."
-Nuremburg tribunal

2. What is your take on the work of Jim Fetzer these days. Some associate you two, since you did a radio show together, but I heard you distance yourself from him on air a bit recently.

Jim and I became friends in the summer of 2006, before the Scholars split that made Jim controversial in the 9/11 truth community. When we did a radio show together, each of us produced our own portions of the show independently, and were solely responsible for our own broadcasts, not the other guy's. I have always agreed with Jim about many things, and disagreed with him about other things. One thing we disagreed about was the work of Steven Jones--Jim often attacked Steve, unfairly I thought, while I consistently defended Steve, even when it pissed Jim off. (I have often had Steve as a radio guest.) As it turned out, I was right. Steve's work has provided us with some of our best evidence for the controlled demolition of the World Trade Center, while the work of rival researcher Judy Wood, which Jim championed in 2007, has not. Today, Jim admits the value of Steve's discovery of evidence for nanothermate, and he's gotten over his infatuation with Judy -- who, by the way, has done some good work as well as some (to me) baffling work.

I didn't like the way Jim handled the Scholars for 9/11 Truth split. I think he was manipulated and egged on by the deplorable Rick Siegal, just as Steve and his friends were manipulated and egged on by the only somewhat less deplorable Victoria Ashley. It was a real tragedy for the 9/11 truth movement, and Jim's ego bears a lot of the responsibility.

I am still friends with Jim. But I don't approve of his methods of propagating his ideas about the possibility that the videos of planes hitting the World Trade Center were altered, that one or both of the alleged crashes may have been faked, and so on. (I also disagree with his opinions -- I think real planes were used, most obviously with the South Tower hit -- but that isn't important, what's important is the methodology, not the conclusion.) Because this issue has been very divisive in the 9/11 truth movement, I wish Jim would stop getting into internet flame wars about it, and instead write a detailed, balanced, exhaustively-documented scholarly article making his case. In early 2008 I resigned from his Scholars group pending his publication of such an article, which has not been forthcoming.

Despite his lack of politesse, PR savvy, and sound scholarship on the "no planes" issue, Jim has done a lot of good work for 9/11 truth that has been under-appreciated due to the firestorm over his championing of controversial theories. His introduction to 9/11 truth Powerpoint talk is one of the best, and I've seen him convince many good-sized audiences here in the Midwest that 9/11 was an inside job. Jim is single-handedly responsible for getting Jesse Ventura on board with JFK truth, which is what led to Jesse supporting 9/11 truth. As a friend of Jesse, Jim was able to get Jesse and me on Richard Greene's national Air America show. I understand Jim will be doing an appearance with Korey Rowe of Loose Change in Argentina on 9/11/09, and it's slated to get nationwide media coverage there. In this one event, he'll probably do more to spread the message to the unconverted than all his critics combined have done in three years. (Disputes between the already-converted are relatively unimportant, what counts is reaching new people.) I think it's time for the anti-Fetzer brigade to call off the witch-hunt and return to responsible critique.

3. Have you pursued all legal recourse to get your university job back? Tell us about this process, and what are you doing for work these days?

I have no money to pursue any legal avenues. I did find a lawyer who looked into the possibilities for free, and he reported that it's impossible to sue universities here under local anti-political discrimination ordinances because they're state institutions and don't answer to local law. (There is no state law here in Wisconsin against political discrimination.) I could try a religious discrimination suit, arguing that since 80% of Muslims think 9/11 was an inside job refusing to hire "conspiracy theorists" rules out most Muslim applicants and is therefore discriminatory. But the odds of winning a juicy settlement aren't good enough to attract any pro bono lawyers. If any wealthy philanthropists out there want to fund a religious discrimination lawsuit, they may contact me at kbarrett(at)

Meanwhile I'm writing books (most recently Questioning the War on Terror: A Primer for Obama Voters), hosting radio shows (see, working with a nonprofit that sponsors a local mosque and various educational projects, raising a ton of vegetables (well, maybe half a ton), and home-schooling my two sons. My wife has been the main family breadwinner since I was de facto blacklisted from teaching in 2007.

4. Discuss Obama's relationship with AIPAC. He gave a campaign speech there that seemed pro-Zionist, and the incluence of Rahm Emanuel is a factor. But with the Presidential Medal of Freedom awarded to Israel critic Mary Robinson, some say that Obama is beginning to "buck" their influence, are those allegations true?
[see LA Times for more on former Irish President Mary Robinson, etc.]

I don't think Obama has much power, so it isn't a question of his relationship with AIPAC. The real government is behind the scenes, and elections don't change it. The real question is the relationship between Zionists, both the radical and moderate varieties, and the U.S. power elite. The fact is, the Zionists, taken as a whole, pretty much run U.S. foreign policy, especially regarding the Middle East and Central Asia. That's because a disproportionate share of big banking and finance is in the hands of (Jewish) Zionists (surveys of the 100 richest Americans show that about half are Jews, despite Jews being only 2% of the population, and you can bet that these plutocrats are all pro-Zionist); a wildly disproportionate amount of the money given to national political candidates comes from (Jewish) Zionists (some estimates put it at around 50% of the total); and an even more wildly disproportionate percentage of media decision makers are (Jewish) Zionists (some estimates put it well over 50% -- see . (Since Zionism by definition is Jewish nationalism, and since the vast majority of the Jews in these positions are pro-Zionist, I think it's okay to use terms like the "Jewish lobby" and to talk about the disproportionate presence of Jewish Zionists in the power elite and especially the mainstream media.)

As I see it, 9/11 was basically a Mossad-assisted coup d'etat by hardline Zionists (see The work of James Petras, which deals with the post-9/11 agenda rather than 9/11 per se, makes a very strong case for this interpretation. And there is plenty of evidence, much of it ignored or downplayed by many in the 9/11 truth movement, implicating the Mossad and American Zionists (such as Netanyahu buddy Larry Silverstein, PNAC, etc.) in 9/11 itself.

I don't think the forces behind Obama (the "liberal" wing of the CIA-CFR-Bildeberger-NSC-Trilateralist plutocracy) have fully undone the 9/11 Zio-extremist coup d'etat. But they've certainly tempered it. These forces prevented the theft of nuclear weapons from Minot Air Force Base--nuclear weapons that might have been used against an American city--in August 2007, then put the kibosh on the Zio-extremists' plans for nuking Iran. They even sent Admiral Mullen to read the riot act to the Israelis, telling them "no more Liberty incidents" (code for "no more 9/11s").

This of course was before the election of Obama--which shows that the real government changed in summer-fall 2007, not when Obama was elected. Presidents, as my friend Faiz Khan says, barely qualify as middle management.

In any case, the Zio-extremists may be temporarily out of power, but they're waiting in the wings. To stop them, I think the 9/11 truth movement, and everybody else who cares about truth and justice, should educate themselves about the history of Zionist false-flag terror, Zionist control of U.S. media and finance, the horrors of the Palestinian holocaust, and so on, and then build a popular movement to de-Zionize the USA. James Petras said on my radio show that we U.S. Americans need to wage a national liberation struggle against Israeli occupation of our country, and I think he has a point.

Lest I be misunderstood, I am attacking a certain Jewish-Zionist elite, not ordinary American Jews, who would be as horrified as anyone else if they came face to face with the crimes of Zionism head-on. I have lots of Jewish guests on my radio shows, regularly stress that Jews opposed the 9/11 wars more than any other U.S. ethnic group, and worked overtime to promote the work of 9/11 truth novelist Steve Alten, who happens to be a pro-Zionist Jew, but who also happens to be a great guy and a huge asset to the 9/11 truth movement. I worked with a Jewish co-editor and contributors to 9/11 and American Empire v.2: Christians, Jews and Muslims Speak Out. I am anti-Zionist, not anti-Semitic. And though I am anti-Zionist, I don't let that get in the way of my personal relationships with pro-Zionist people, who are simply mistaken on one issue--hardly a capital offense! (I'm sure I disagree with everybody on earth about at least one important issue!)

5. Finally, what can attendees of the We Demand Transparency expect to get from your talk? What is new, what may be 'controversial?'

Unlike almost everybody else in this movement, and outside it, I try very hard to never give the same talk twice. So the whole thing will be new.

My talk will examine the mainstream Muslim point of view on 9/11, Zionism, imperialism, and related issues. I expect it to be highly controversial, because Americans have been programmed to find many elements of that point of view unacceptable. For example, the mainstream Muslim point of view rejects the existence of a Jewish state in Palestine and regards Israel as an illegitimate settler colony; doubts some elements of the standard Western version of the holocaust; views such demonized figures as Ahmadinejad and Bin Laden (who by the way deplored 9/11 and strongly denied involvement) in a relatively favorable light; and wonders when ordinary Americans are going to rise up and free themselves from Zionist occupation. I think Americans need to hear the reasons why so many Muslims hold these views.{Source - WTC Demolition}
thanks to kate of the kiosk

From Barrett's blog - Sept. 1, 2009

In May 2008 I announced I was running for Congress on a 9/11 truth and "end aid to Israel" platform, and that I was calling for the prosecution of DHS chief Michael Chertoff and the whole Israeli lobby as unregistered agents of a foreign power. And all hell broke loose.

Upon announcing my candidacy, I was banned from my main internet outlet,, ostensibly because the owner of that website did not like ONE of the hundreds of people I had talked to on the radio. All of my posts at 911blogger were removed, and other users at 911blogger were forbidden to mention me or post news of my candidacy upon pain of expulsion. In eliminating my base of communications, fundraising, and support, Alan Giles, the owner of 911blogger, crippled my candidacy on the day it was announced. Though I had more google news hits than anyone else in the 911 truth movement except David Ray Griffin, and regularly brought 9/11 truth into the mainstream media in rhetorically effective ways, my congressional campaign and I had suddenly been erased from the biggest 9/11 truth news site.

In the weeks following the announcement of my congressional run, a tidal wave of slanderous sewage washed over me and my family, much of it facilitated by Alan Giles and a cabal of operatives at 911blogger: the anonymous attack entities "Arabesque" and "Col. Jenny Sparks," the 9/11 truth sex stalker Brian Good, pugnacious Zionist LIHOPper Jon Gold, Jim Hoffman's wife or CIA/Mossad handler or whatever she is Victoria Ashley, and a half-bright jealous rival radio host named Michael Woolsey...more or less the same clique Webster Tarpley had outed as cointelpro operatives or dupes back in mid-2007.

The 9/11 truth infiltrator-wreckers were joined by professional opinion-managers. Zio-Christian Republican party operative James Wigderston (who once garnered the biggest fine ever levied for illegal campaign activities in Wisconsin) contacted the Libertarian national party and fed them a false story, concocted by Zionist propagandist and stalker Mark Rabinowitz, that I supported "Holocaust deniers" whose names I did not even recognize. (Rabinowitz, whose oeuvre is a single-minded attempt to distance Israel and Zionists from 9/11, began cyber-stalking me immediately after I brought 9/11 truth to national TV by producing David Ray Griffin's C-Span talk at the University of Wisconsin in 2005, then fabricated the "Holocaust denier" libel that is still on my Wikipedia entry.) Then-Libertarian Party national coordinator Sean Haugh, who has since been disgraced and fired, bought the false story without any fact-checking and informed the party and the world that I supported "Holocaust deniers" who were in reality unknown to me.

It got worse from there. Stalked, harassed, threatened, libeled, blacked out by 911blogger, my family subjected to psychological attacks, I began wondering what had hit me. Robin Hordon, the wise veteran activist and major source for David Ray Griffin's analysis of the 9/11 air defense stand-down, provided the explanation:

"Kevin, you are supporting BOTH 911 Truth AND operating outside of AIPAC's-Zionism's controls of US politics. You are a colossal pain in the ass and MAJOR threat to them...because you speak the truth on BOTH counts...9/11 Truth and Zionism's hold on this country.

"So, make no mistake about are being hacked by our embedded Zionists...both in politics...and now it should come as being even MORE obvious to 911blogger.

"Also, just as there are Zionists emasculating the peace movements all across this country, along with many, many other allegedly 'progressive' groups like, they too are deeply entwined in most 9/11 Truth groups.

"The issues of 9/11 truth-seeking are harder for them to stop because its a 'fact thing'...but guys like you who DARE to step into national politics without being under their control, well now, that's REALLY serious stuff to deal with...and they will hammer you as hard as possible and they do not need the facts...they work with public perceptions. They have the ability to knock folks out of politics if they had too many pimples on their face when they were teenagers...and THAT's the truth here."

* * *

Okay, Robin. I'm starting to understand. And I'm going to keep on telling the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help me God.

Kevin Barrett


Noam Chomsky Barrett wrote: "If he convinces even one person to do something other than work for 9/11 truth, he may as well have personally murdered all 6 billion people on earth."

Of Amy Goodman, Barrett wrote: "Amy, you will one day find yourself on the scaffold, condemned to hang alongside the other Goebbels-style traitors and mass-murder-coverup-conspirators from the corporate media you pretend to criticize...."

Amy Goodman watches WTC-7 Implode, in person!
Kevin Barrett Questions Amy Goodman On Building 7

"My talk will examine the mainstream Muslim point of view on 9/11, Zionism, imperialism, and related issues. I expect it to be highly controversial, because Americans have been programmed to find many elements of that point of view unacceptable."

Barrett on O'Reilly 12/19/2006

Bill O'Reilly also said this about Barrett:
This guy would have been gone at Boston University, my alma mater, in a heartbeat. The Chancellor there, John Silber, this guy would be, you know, in the Charles River floating down towards the harbor.
Which caused Scholars for 9/11 Truth to state:
When public threats can be made to a citizen's life for expressing his opinions on a controversial topic and neither the government nor the media respond," he observed, "that is a sure sign we are living in a fascist state."

Barrett's sites:


  1. Barrett has been enormously destructive to the credibility of the truth movement. He has
    1: repeatedly called for journalists to be hanged, even Amy Goodman
    2: repeatedly engaged in Jew-baiting
    3: Advocated threats of violence
    4: Attempted to organize masked mobs of truthers in the charged atmosphere before Jan Harman's "thought crimes" bill when Fox News was pushing the "truthers=terrorists" meme
    5. lied to Noam Chomsky about Barrett's academic credentials
    6. Published Chomsky's confidential emails after promising he would not
    7. Characterized the holocaust as "toasting six million jews"
    8. Displayed negligent and stupidly erroneous scholarship on mainstream media such as KDKA radio and Russia Today
    9. Endorsed the lunatic predictions of phony terrorist attacks by Captain Eric May
    10. Endorsed the phony hero tales of the 9/11 con man William Rodriguez
    11. Endorsed the ludicrous Pentagon flyover theories of the Citizen Investigation Team

  2. snugbug is who yoju should watch out for...he also managed to alienate Carol Brouillet.
    You can learn more about him, by googling 'screwloosechange brian good'.

    Kevin is one of the few indeed who is prepared to consider israeli involvement. A mossad team waas there to 'document the event' plane sight of the burning towers. Zionists have a long history of commmitting acts of terroroism disguised as arabs: eg Lavon Affair.

    another Brian

  3. Why wouldn't the Israelis document the event? They had warned the US government that 19 terrorists were inside the USA planning something big. They even named names. Only four of the names have been released but these included two alleged 9/11 pilots and two alleged 9/11 hijackers who had (according to Bob Woodward) bought ten airline tickets dated 9/11/01 under their own real names.

    Al Qaeda's "Project Bojinka" plot to fly hijacked airliners into the WTC and other landmark buildings had been known to the US since the capture of Abdul Hakim Murad in 1995.