Tuesday, January 10, 2017
Sunday, January 8, 2017
Who are the real terrorists? Palestinian resistance targets soldiers, while Israelis massacre women and children
|My book Questioning the War on Terror explores the question of what "terrorism" means, whether it's really a threat to Americans, and who's really behind it|
Was the Palestinian who drove a truck into a crowd of Israeli soldiers a "terrorist"?
Of course not.
The word "terrorism" means "attacking civilians to incite fear." The Palestinian truck driver did not attack civilians. He attacked soldiers. So call him a "resistance fighter" or "freedom fighter" or "anti-occupation combatant" or whatever else you want. But the one thing he obviously is NOT is a terrorist.
The Israel government and its IDF, however, are terrorists. They systematically target civilians to induce fear. Every few years they massacre another few thousand Gaza civilians, bombing hospitals and ambulances, strafing kids playing soccer on the beach, and drenching families with white phosphorous.
Maybe that Palestinian truck driver should be called an "anti-terrorism commando."
If Obama thinks "counterterrorism" means cowards at video-game consoles drone-massacring people at wedding parties because one or two of the people at the wedding belong to a group fighting to liberate their homeland from foreign occupation...well, in that case, taking out a bunch of IDF occupation terrorists in an operation that requires the anti-terrorism fighter to give up his life is downright HEROIC as counter-terror ops go.
But what about the similarities between this truck attack and the previous ones in Berlin and (last summer) in Nice?
The two truck attacks in Europe were indeed terrorist attacks. They targeted civilians, and incited fear.
And were carried out by the State of Israel, probably with help from its Gladio/NATO assets.
As I reported in the book Orlando False Flag: The Clash of Histories:
|Buy on Amazon|
Meanwhile in Europe, the other principle bastion of what passes for Western civilization, back-to-back anti-Islam false flags in Nice, France and Munich, Germany were both recorded and propagandized by the same Israeli-Mossad-linked photographer. Richard Gutjahr, a cameraman whose wife Einat Wilf is a leading Israeli operator, was pre-positioned on a balcony in Nice to film the beginning of the July 14, 2016 truck attack. Gutjahr’s iconic footage was heavily promoted in the global media; no mainstream journalists bothered to ask why Gutjahr happened to be on that balcony and for no discernable reason began to film what must have appeared to be an ordinary truck before it had begun to mow people down.
Then on July 22, Gutjahr was apparently once again in the right place at the right time, photographing the Munich, Germany shopping mall shooting and posting the images to his Twitter account—then taking down the images, which simultaneously disappeared from a Russia Today report, just minutes after being exposed in a Veterans Today article by this author.[i]
Gutjahr’s wife Einat Wilf is a former Israeli Intelligence Officer in Unit 8200 who served as foreign policy advisor to Shimon Peres. She is a strategic consultant to MacKenzie and Co. in New York, and a general partner in Core Venture Capital in Israel. In 2007 she ran for the presidency of the World Jewish Congress.[ii] The claim that such a person’s spouse’s apparent foreknowledge of two back-to-back terror attacks can be accounted for by coincidence would boggle the mind of the craziest coincidence theorist.
[i] Kevin Barrrett, “BREAKING! Same Israeli photo-propagandist pre-positioned in Nice AND NOW MUNICH.” (http://www.veteranstoday.com/2016/07/22/nice-munich/).
Thursday, January 5, 2017
Unlike Iran, which has forbidden the use of weapons of mass destruction from a religious stance, the US lacks religious elements that would prevent the proliferation and use of nuclear weapons, said Kevin Barrett, an author and political commentator in Madison, Wisconsin.
“Unfortunately, here in the United States, we don’t have that Godly element in our government,” Barrett told Press TV on Tuesday.
“So essentially, we’re run purely by psychopaths without any of that kind of wisdom that would say we’ve got to stop building these things before they get used,” he added.
“The nuclear industry is also dependent on the very worst and craziest strategists to keep itself in business building these horrific weapons…and unfortunately Donald Trump is currently surrounded by these neoconservatives and organized crime,” the scholar argued.
The New York Times reported on Monday that 37 top US scientists, including some of the world’s leading experts in the fields of nuclear science and arms control, have written to Trump, calling on him to abide by the nuclear agreement with Iran when he takes office on January 20.
“We urge you to preserve this critical US strategic asset,” reads the letter.
The signatories included Nobel laureates, original designers of nuclear weapons, former White House science advisers, and the chief executive of the world’s largest general society of scientists.
The three-page letter was organized by Richard L. Garwin, a physicist who helped design the world’s fist hydrogen bomb and has long advised US governments on arms control.
Iran and the P5+1 group – the US, Britain, France, China, Russia and Germany – reached a nuclear agreement, known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), in July 2015.
During his campaign prior to the November 8 presidential election, Trump promised to annul the deal. He called the pact a "disaster" and "the worst deal ever negotiated." He also said that the agreement could lead to a "nuclear holocaust."
Iran has all along highlighted the peaceful nature of its nuclear program, saying it has never had any intention to use it for military purposes. Also, Iran says it is forbidden to use weapons of mass destruction from a religious standpoint.
Tuesday, December 27, 2016
On election night, before we even knew who would be annointed, we predicted the next US president would be a slave of Israel.
Trump has already proven us right – and he hasn't even taken office yet.
Sunday, December 25, 2016
According to Aldous Huxley, the brain’s main function is not to create consciousness, but to reduce it.
That would explain why primates with very big brains start wars, excrete in drinking water, vote for major party candidates in national elections, and otherwise exhibit a level of consciousness far below that of your average self-respecting rock.
Here is the Huxley quote in full:
To make biological survival possible, Mind at Large has to be funnelled through the reducing valve of the brain and nervous system.
Huxley’s point, a good one, is that our conception of mind, consciousness, or whatever-you-want-to-call-it just isn’t big enough.
The same is true for our conception of God.
In a few days, Christians all over the world will be celebrating a certain conception of God. Here in the USA, they have been preparing for the big event by chopping down small trees and sticking them in living room corners; frantically fighting traffic jams while rushing from store to store buying stuff; blasting a certain canon of music from every audio apparatus in the land, drowning all eardrums beneath a warm-and-syrupy tidal wave of simple melodies you hardly ever have to touch any black keys to play; imbibing large quantities of sugar (and sugar’s even more pernicious cousin, alcohol) in vain hopes that the ensuing rush will overwhelm seasonal affective disorder and other symptoms of vitamin D deficiency; and in other small ways demonstrating their awed gratitude to the Lord of the Worlds, the All-Merciful All-Compassionate Source of All Being.
Theoretically, all of these activities are supposed to be celebrating the birth of Jesus. According to majoritarian Christian dogma, Yeshua was the “son of God,” whatever that may mean. So what do small coniferous trees in living room corners, frantic shopping and gift-exchanging, mythical big fat white-bearded guys in silly red suits, boozy egg nog and kisses under the mistletoe, etcetera etcetera have to do with the birth of God’s alleged son? The long answer comes from folklorists and historians. The short answer is: “Not a whole lot.”
Our reducing valve of consciousness has reduced the whole “birth of the son of God” concept into something (or a whole lot of little somethings) much, much smaller. But that’s OK, because celebrating the “birth” was already a reduction of the “son of God” concept, which was itself a reduction of the “God” concept, which was itself a reduction of supreme ineffable Reality to which the G-word refers, which…well, let me back up and start at the beginning.
As every “primitive” society on earth knows, everything is conscious. Among pretentious, educated folk, the philosophical name for that position is panpsychism, also known as panexperientialism. In his recent book God Exists But Gawd Does Not, David Ray Griffin argues that the evidence for a conscious universe, in which everything all the way down to sub-atomic quanta has its own “experience” or “consciousness” or “point of view,” refutes claims that only an omnipotent creator God (pejoratively termed “Gawd” by Griffin) could have created the miracle of consciousness.
Quantum physics clearly shows that physical reality cannot be separated from consciousness. The observed and observer are two sides of the same reality-coin; remove one, and you’ve removed the whole thing. In other words, science has definitively answered the question “Does a tree fall in the forest if there’s nobody there to hear it?” with a resounding “no.” There is no tree without someone being aware of it. But that “someone” doesn’t necessarily have to be human. The universe (including the illusion of linear unidirectional time) is created by the perceptive acts of conscious biological organisms of all kinds according to Robert Lanza’s Biocentrism. Panexperientialists say these biological universe-creators are actually agglomerations of much smaller conscious entities, all the way down to quarks and quanta.
So what does that have to do with our conception of God not being big enough?
Well, for one thing, God has to be big enough to embrace an outrageous number of perspectives on reality: Not just the reality-perspectives of every one of the world’s more than seven billion people, but also all the animals and plants and their component cells and the building blocks of those cells down to the tiniest sub-atomic building blocks, plus all non-organic matter as well, and the space and time and energy in and in between it.
We might say that God is the very real unity underlying all of that apparent diversity. (Physicists have indeed found traces of a primordial connection linking everything to everything else – faint footprints of the Unity from which multiplicity emerges.)
That is a very big God for small-minded people to constrict.
If there were a last word on God, which there isn’t, it might be:
Which means, “God is greater!” Greater than what? Greater than everything, including all words and conceptions we might try to apply to Him/Her/It.
The natural and correct human response to such Greatness is awed humility and absolute submission: in a word, islam.
People can be in that state – the state of awed submission to the divine – without being nominal Muslims. Christians, Hindus, Buddhists, Jews, Taoists, Native Americans, gnostics, maybe even agnostics can theoretically be muslims with a small m.
But without a traditional scaffolding of wisdom teachings, symbols, rituals, sacred utterances, and a grounding in daily practice, it’s hard to get very deep into that state and stay there. Without that scaffolding, the petty false gods of ones own ego and selfish interests tend to take over.
The history of monotheism is an endless cycle of discoveries of how big God really is, followed by panicked retreats into egotisms and bureaucracies designed to keep Him small. The Hebrew prophets caught glimpses of the divine greatness; then Yahwist priests and scribes conspired to reduce Him to manageable size, and used the resulting misconception to grab wealth and power. Today, the already-massively-reduced figure of Yahweh has been shrunken to almost microscopic size by “modern, liberal, humanist” Jews, who have replaced the whole notion of God with an idolatrous vision of the deified “Jewish people,” whose suffering in the Holocaust amounts to a kind of neo-crucifixion.
Christians, for their part, shrunk Yahweh down by imagining Him as a “father” (and a “son” and a “holy ghost”) while simultaneously enlarging Him from tribal shibboleth to universal creator and caretaker.
The Christian confusion of Jesus the human being, prophet and teacher with God – the koan at the heart of Christianity “how can a man be God?” – was cleared up by Islam. As were many other things.
Yet ironically, Muslims today, despite the clear teachings that have come down to them, suffer from small-minded views of God right alongside the Christians and Jews. Those who are termed “fundamentalists” (who might be better termed obscurantists) imagine that God’s main concern is that they follow a long list of very detailed rules governing trivial activities of daily life. Some of these folks are fanatical sectarians who think that everyone who doesn’t agree with them is a lesser being at best, deserving of capital punishment at worst. These boneheaded takfiris seem blind to the almost infinitely varied perspectives that the real God must be able to embrace!
So this Christmas, or at Friday salaat al-jumuah, or wherever and whenever you have an opportunity to pray, please consider making the following supplication:
Ya Allah, o God, please save us from people whose conception of You is too small; and help our own conceptions grow ever-larger, even though we know they will never fully embrace your Reality.
Monday, December 19, 2016
Dr. Kevin Barrett, a Ph.D. is one of America’s best-known critics of the War on Terror. Here he discusses his latest work questioning recent terror attacks including the Paris attacks, the Pulse nightclub attack and others.
Wednesday, December 14, 2016
Press TV Debate: Veterans Today Editor Kevin Barrett vs. Brent Budowski
Russia says Moscow and Washington are close to reaching an understanding over the crisis in Aleppo. The Western side is pushing for a ceasefire in eastern Aleppo just as Syrian troops are coming close to liberating the city.
Kevin Barrett, author and Middle East expert from Madison, told Press TV on Thursday night that the US-led front and media are waging a propaganda campaign to force Syria to stop retaking eastern Aleppo.
Barrett said since the United States needs to continue its proxy war in Syria, Washington resorts to any kind of tactics to impede the annihilation of the foreign-backed terrorists who are besieged in eastern Aleppo.
“These folks (the US and allies) who are dedicated to keeping this war going as long as possible and destroying Syria as long as possible find that very convenient to call for a ceasefire right at the moment that the [Syrian] government is taking the city,” he said.
Barrett said Syria’s “legitimate government has been targeted for overthrowing and regime change by a group of countries that created this horrific extremist ISIS-style mercenaries.”
“The US empire with its Zionist controllers are destroying Syria in an act of aggression,” he said, adding “the biggest winner of all of this destabilization of course is the expansionist [regime] in Tel Aviv.”
“This is an intentional destruction and destabilization of Syria along a kind of US imperial and Zionist doctrine that calls for the actual destruction and Balkanization of the Middle Eastern countries to make them more penetrable by the empire and to make them less of a potential long- and medium-term threat to Israel,” Barrett added.
The analyst said the Syrian government is justified in its war on terrorists despite the “horrific destruction in Aleppo and all over Syria,” while it has also offered an amnesty for all Syrians.
“Any country in the world is going to use counter-insurgency warfare to preserve its territorial integrity if there is this kind of foreign-sponsored rebellion going on.”
According to Barrett, “a lot of people in the region and a few people outside the region like Russian President Vladimir Putin” have got in the way of the US-led coalition which tried to turn Syria into a failed state.
Brent Budowsky, a columnist with US newspaper The Hill from Washington, called on Syria and Russia to halt military operations in the eastern Aleppo.
“We need a ceasefire today. We should have had it a year ago or two years ago,” he said.
The Syrian army troops and their allied forces are now in control of about 85 percent of militant-held eastern part of Aleppo as they press ahead with an all-out offensive to fully dislodge foreign-backed terrorists from the northwestern city.