Wyatt Peterson, False Flag Weekly News co-host and author of Perfidy of Zion, discusses his latest article “Israel Did 9/11” and the previous one “Parallels: JFK RFK 9/11.” Laurent Guyénot, author of JFK-9/11 and From Yahweh to Zion, joins us halfway through the hour.
Rough transcript
Kevin Barrett: Let's get going on your article “Israel Did 9/11.” That's a concise title. It's a concise presentation of some of the strongest evidence. So if you were going to try to convince somebody who didn't know this, what would be the first thing you would point to indicating that Israel had a hand in 9/11?
Wyatt Peterson: I found one of the most successful things is Larry Silverstein, because if you can use evidence, physical evidence to prove that the official story can't possibly be true, that those towers defied the laws of physics and came down at near free fall speed, then the next obvious question is, well, who owned them?
And so that opens up a whole substratum of details and leads that people can follow. And one thing I've been pretty successful with in dealing with people who are totally oblivious to any sort of wrongdoing when it comes to 9/11 is sending them to Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth. And once they get an understanding of all the anomalies, physical anomalies, then you show them who owned the towers, how the towers were purchased.
Vornado Realty was the frontrunner to getting the lease for the Twin Towers right before 9/11. And then Larry Silverstein was kind of like this dark horse who emerged at the the 11th hour due to manipulations by Louis Eisenberg at the Port Authority. And of course,
Louis Eisenberg and Larry Silverstein were both board members of the United Jewish Appeal of New York, the UJA, the most prominent Israeli fundraising body in in this country. And then you understand that those towers were only privatized one year before. You start looking into Governor Pataki's privatization scheme, and you find out that it was Ronald Lauder, head of the World Jewish Congress, a guy who's connected to the Jeffrey Epstein network, who was the one who decided that they should be privatized, which made it possible for Silverstein to get them in the first place.
So it's a combination of pointing out the physical anomalies (and who privatized the WTC right before 9/11). I've noticed people really respond to that, because it's hard evidence.
And then that leads you to the next logical question, which is: Who was running security at the towers? The Israelis were trying to get the security contract as far back as 1987, and had actually secured it. Avraham Bendor and Zvi Malkin, two longtime Mossadniks who operated under Issa Harel, secured it on behalf of Shaul Eisenberg, who was Israel's Mr. Big in the Far East. He started Atwell Security of Tel Aviv, this ad hoc company, specifically to secure that security contract.
And it went through. Everything was set, all the I's were dotted, all the T's crossed, until the Port Authority found out that Avraham Ben-Dor was convicted of murder in Israel. He was the head of the Shin Bet when there was a Palestinian bus-jacking in 1984 and two Palestinian teenagers were detained. And he showed up on the scene and said, “just smash the heads with rocks.” And that's what his agents did. And he was actually tried for that and found guilty.
So that sort of scuppered their ability to secure the security contract in 1987.
He went to work for Jules Kroll and Maurice Greenberg's company, Kroll Associates. And after the 1993 FBI-instigated truck bombing of the World Trade Center, they secured the security contract.
So that's the network. You point these things out, these themes, these threads, and the conclusion becomes inescapable.
Kevin Barrett: Yeah, I agree. And I think the name of Larry Silverstein is kind of an obvious one that a lot of us have been calling attention to over the years. Silverstein not only was the key guy in privatizing the Trade Center just a month or two before 9/11, who then doubled the terror insurance contracts over what the Port Authority had had before that, but then after the destruction of the towers, he ended up demanding double indemnity insurance money, leading him to collect a vastly larger sum than he had ever invested. He also seemingly confessed on the America Rebuilds PBS show that he had been party to the demolition of Building 7. And Building 7, of course, is the most obvious of the demolitions.
Every building in the World Trade Center was taken out by explosives. But Building 7 was a classic obvious controlled demolition. Everybody can see that it's exactly like all of the classic controlled demolition footage that we've already seen. Whereas the towers were slightly unusual in that they were top-down demolitions, deceptive demolitions. The other buildings were destroyed, not so much in controlled demolitions, but just by huge bombs cratering them.
Anyway, the fact that Silverstein actually confessed to Building 7 makes this a really good lead-in. And then you mentioned Silverstein's connections, his close ties with Bibi Netanyahu. He's on the phone with Netanyahu every single weekend, according to Haaretz. And he privatized the center, the World Trade Center, with the help of the network you just named. That's all pretty, you know, unmistakable evidence, isn't it?
Wyatt Peterson: Yeah, it is. And the PBS America Rebuilds broadcast (featuring Silverstein’s “pull it” confession) was one year to the day. I think it came out on September 11th, 2002. And the chutzpah to admit openly that “we had them pull it and we stood back and watched the building come down.” That wasn't a slip of the tongue. He didn't misspeak. He's telling you, he's putting it out there. This goes into the Michael Hoffman thesis on revelation of the method. He's putting it right out there. And when we fail to act on that information, it has this…this paralyzing effect. And to them, it's a big joke.
I'm sure he toasted some champagne afterwards and said, ah, these dumb goys, I can say whatever I want. I can go on PBS and tell them that, pretty much while there's still subterranean molten steel running underneath. The molten steel wasn't even gone yet, and he's telling them how he did it, how they “pulled it.”
And he says, “I spoke to the FDNY chief.” But the FDNY chief, Daniel Nigro, says “I didn't speak to him, and I don't know of anyone else who did.” So to put that out there in such an ostentatious way, and then to have hundreds of millions of people—it just goes right over their heads.
And here we are years later, and it amazes me how people are still not even questioning the official story that they were sold. It's funny because when I wrote my book, I didn't deal with a lot of the Architects and Engineers information. I didn't do a lot of the David Ray Griffin stuff (proof the official story is false). I pretty much just picked it up as a whodunit. And my intention was just to get it out to people because I figured here we are two decades later. No one buys the official story anymore. This will be perfect. My book will come out and bingo. Everyone will be able to see who did it.
And now I'm going back and rewriting, writing a new book. And I'm actually including a lot of that information. Because one of the real eye openers was how few people actually question this stuff. It was like they'd never been introduced to this information.
You'll recall the information used to be all over YouTube. You'd go online and it was everywhere. And now it's not like that. And unfortunately, people don't really have access to it.
Kevin Barrett: Yeah, that is kind of disheartening. I didn't see this coming, I have to admit. I guess that Cass Sunstein did when he published his article, “Conspiracy Theories: Causes and Cures,” which later became his book, in which he said that someday it may be necessary to make conspiracy theories illegal. And I guess we're seeing that now with people being arrested for what they post online in the UK. And he said, “but for now, before they can be made illegal, we should be infiltrating conspiracy movements and spreading ‘beneficial cognitive diversity’ in order to, quote unquote, ‘disable the purveyors of conspiracy theories.’ So this was Sunstein's recipe for how to push back against 9/11 truth back in 2009.
When he said, “someday we'll have to make conspiracy theories illegal,” David Ray Griffin and myself and others in the truth movement thought, what's this guy smoking? How are you going to make them illegal? We have a First Amendment. And the internet is run on the assumption that it's absolutely illegal for any platform to be anything other than 100% viewpoint neutral. That is, on anything remotely like a political, philosophical, or religious question, they have to give every side exactly the same access, exactly the same boosting or whatever. You can't censor one side and promote or boost another side. That's completely against the Communications Decency Act, among other things. It's also against the whole basic founding principle of the Internet.
So none of us saw that coming. But then around 2015 suddenly it all flipped, and the think tanks came on with an orchestrated policy propaganda campaign saying that “conspiracy theories and misinformation are so dangerous that we have to limit speech now. The First Amendment is out of date and dangerous.” We just had another article from The New York Times about how dangerous the First Amendment is.
So we've seen a massive chilling effect of free speech. And so that change you mentioned has happened. So 15 years ago, google 9/11 and you get basically nothing but 9/11 truth information. Because that's all anybody was interested in around 9/11. Today it's all suppressed and hidden. You have to really know what you're looking for to find it. How do we fight that?
Wyatt Peterson: It's tough, because people don't want to do the work. In this new article I wrote which can be found on truthblitzkrieg.com, I loaded it with internal links that'll bring you right to articles from Haaretz, The New York Times, The Times of Israel, etc. And i sent it out to a few people. And a couple of the comments I got back were to the effect of, “where'd you get this information? Do you have access to secret government files”? This information doesn't make any sense.” And I’m like: “The whole article is loaded with links that'll take you to mainstream news articles about the five dancing Israelis for instance, the Mossad agents that were celebrating Flight 11 hitting the North Tower, then appeared on Yariel Lapid’s television show back in Israel and said “our purpose was to document the event.” I mean, there's no ambiguity here, but people just don't want to do the work, and they just refuse to engage with the information.
I notice they go through a series of stages. At first, they just deny. They're like, nope, nope, that's preposterous, that's crazy. And then when confronted with unimpeachable facts and evidence, they just sort of shut down and just refuse to engage with it. So it's really a tough situation because people have become so apathetic that they don't even really care about 9/11 insofar as really, really caring about it.
Like every year they might feel solemnity and they might, wave their flag or they might go to the 9/11 memorial that was created by the Israeli son of the ambassador, Michael Arad. But they don't actually take meaningful action on anything.
And when you try and bring this up and you try and get them to feel some sense of indignation, they just can't seem to bring themselves to do it. And it's really discouraging because 9/11 was what sent me hurtling through the looking glass. This was like the big event. I was in high school at the time and I'm still on the trail of the perps today.
I think it's very un-American for people to not want to engage with this information and get active in some capacity, in whatever way they can.
Kevin Barrett: I agree. And it's part of a larger picture. You start to notice that actually 9/11 wasn't just a one-off. Just like the Palestine crisis didn't start on October 7th. I’m currently translating Yusuf Hindi's book, Occident et Islam, which traces the Jewish messianic millenarian roots of Zionism back at least 500 years, arguably almost 1000 years, almost to Maimonides.
And it does seem that it's really hard to understand why forces in the United States would blow up the World Trade Center when it's full of people. What's the big advantage to that? The whole idea of an inside job seems kind of dubious. The first thing people think of is, why would anybody in the security apparatus of their own country do something like that?
But once you get that bigger picture and you see that the Zionists have been planning this type of thing, and specifically planning to greatly increase their power and (they hope) bring on their Messiah, meaning conquer the Holy Land and from the Holy Land rule the world. This has been their plan for 500 years. They've been planning to do this by creating an apocalyptic war between the Christian world and the Muslim world.
So this larger historical context actually goes a long way in explaining this, just as 9/11 goes a long way in explaining what we've seen since 9/11 and what we're seeing today in Palestine with this genocide.
Wyatt Peterson: Yeah, and I read your new article on the rape riots over in Israel, and I thought it was perfect. It dovetails nicely with what we're talking about because the magnitude of evil to carry out something like 9/11—this is unique in human history. It's not like all sorts of other people go around doing things like this. And that's where you get into the Talmud and some of the mindset, the ideology that motorizes this whole Zionist agenda. It really is satanic. It really is sick. And I think more and more people are really starting to see that as things get more egregious over in the Middle East.
And there's no doubt about who did it. It's funny because there's this misconception that people have when you start talking about 9/11 or the Kennedy assassination. You start talking about a possible conspiracy. They say, do you know how many people would have to be in on it? It would be this big sprawling network and there'd be all these leaks.
And that's not the case. It's actually a relatively small group of people placed at the key nodal points throughout all of these events. And they have a stronger code of omerta than the mafia. These aren't people like these dumb guys that couldn't organize a piss up in a brewery. These are people that will play in the long game, powered by this really virulent ethnocentrism.
And to your point, that's what they're trying to do. They're trying to disrupt things, make things so chaotic, because they believe they're paving the way for the coming of the Moshiach, the rise of the Jewish people, the world court seated in Jerusalem. I mean, this is insane stuff, but that's the facts of the case. And that's why an event like 9/11 is just a great mitzvah. It's another step along this twisted course, bringing us to that, the coming of the Moshiach, the reign of the Jewish kingdom.
Kevin Barrett: And one question that arises around the anniversary of 9/11 is, might they try something big like this again? I mean, if they can get away with 9/11 they can get away with pretty much anything. And it worked to their strategic advantage. It didn't help the United States empire. Tjhe US empire wasted $7 trillion on these useless counterproductive wars for Israel. And we destroyed most of Israel's enemies and problem states in the region. We weren't quite able to get to Iran, but they're still working on that. So the Israelis prospered massively from 9/11, and nobody else did. And since they got away with that…Could they try something else?
I was just discussing with Alan Sobrosky the possibility that the Zionists are going to try to accelerate their full ethnic cleansing of all of Palestine, not just eliminating all non-Jews from Gaza, but also from the West Bank. And that would entail eliminating the Islamic world's oldest and greatest architectural monument, the Al-Aqsa Mosque, the third major holy site in Islam.
So to do that, they would need fog of war. They would need some kind of huge excuse. If they just do it without any excuse, it'll just utterly destroy their legitimacy and any chance that Israel will exist into the indefinite future. But if they could find a way to make this happen where it looks like they can make a case, a plausible case, that they're the victims—which is what they did after October 7th, when in fact they had to grossly distort the reality of October 7th to do it. But they own the media so they can distort things.
So do you think that another big false flag, sort of like 9/11, could be used to trigger that final genocide of Palestine that Netanyahu and his partners want?
Wyatt Peterson: Absolutely. That's why we're seeing the Al-Aqsa Mosque being turned into such a powder keg with Ben-Gvir and all these people.
I think that's the next logical step. And you just said it. They own the media so they can get away with anything, no matter how over the top and ostentatious. When you look at 9/11 it wasn't very well done. I mean, it was, but you can easily follow these leads and discern who did it. It's not like they set up layer upon layer upon layer of front men, and it becomes this maze that you can't possibly have a way through. It's pretty self-explanatory once you confront the evidence.
Kevin Barrett: It was badly done way in that. These buildings falling down, they don't look like buildings falling down from fires. They look like buildings blowing up. These so-called radical Islamic hijackers didn't look remotely like radical Muslims. They were all drinking and carousing on Jack Abramoff's casino boats and snorting cocaine with pink haired stripper girlfriends. And they didn't look like hijackers or pilots. They didn't look like people that possibly could have flown even single-engine Cessnas. And they didn't look like people that could have hijacked an 80-year-old woman's Volkswagen Beetle. I mean, the whole thing—none of it looked real.
Wyatt Peterson: Right, exactly. And they didn't take any care to really attempt to make it look authentic when you look at the flight paths alone, that should be enough to refute the entire story. Or the fact that these buildings came down at freefall. If you were really trying to make it look authentic, you wouldn't have just defied the laws of physics and brought these massive engineering marvels down at the at the speed of freefall. But they don't care because they own the media, so it doesn't matter how sloppy these events are, they can get away with it.
It's the same thing with the Kennedy assassination. Their fingerprints are all over that. And then Oswald gets apprehended and here comes a Jewish gangster and he just shoots him at point blank and nobody makes that connection. And that's like, oh, well there's an investigation into it. And then a Jewish attorney for the Warren Commission (Arlen Specter) steps up and says “one bullet, seven wounds,” and people never piece that together because they own the media, they control the narrative so they can get away with pretty much whatever they want.
And people don't see the Jew. like if these were all Chinese peopl—if if there was a Chinese guy in Dealy Plaza filming the motorcade, and then he sold it for today's equivalent of 1.5 million dollars, that chinese guy worked in the Dal-Tex building which was owned by two Chinese guys, and then a Chinese guy jumped out and killed Oswald, and then a Chinese guy stood up and said, “one bullet, seven wounds”…then there's no problem. People would be like, whoa, this is insane.
And it's the same thing with 9/11. If this was any other group of people, it would be so obvious. But people don’t—Americans don't see the Jews.
Kevin Barrett: Well, we're trained not to. You're an evil, disgusting anti-Semite if you even say the J word. A lot of people try to say Zionist instead of Jew. And in a lot of cases, Zionist maybe is the right word if you want to include all the Christian Zionists. But let's face it, the Jewish Zionists are the heart of the Zionist project. The Zionist project is very deeply rooted in Jewish millenarian messianism and the Jewish community. So I think we should be allowed to talk about the truth, about the relationship between Judaism, Jewish identity politics, and Zionism, and these crimes that are being committed in Zionism's name, and in the name, indeed, of the Jewish community.
Wyatt Peterson: Yeah, absolutely. I listened to your first hour with Alan Sabrosky. I actually quote him in my new article. He sums it up really succinctly. The quote I used is, he said, “the evidential trail for 9/11 and the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq runs through PNAC, AIPAC, and their cohorts, through the mostly Jewish neocons and the Bush administration, and back to the Israeli government. None of the denials and political machinations can alter that essential fact.”
And that's true. That says it all right there. That is the belt of transmission. That is the network, this ethnic network that you can uncover, that you can track, and it leads right to the top of all these highly charged political crimes.
Kevin Barrett: Absolutely. Well, it's time to try to bring Laurent Guyenot in. Lauren Guyenot, is the author of JFK-9/11 and The Unspoken Kennedy Truth, which cover similar ground to what you've covered. And he, being a historian, puts it in a long-term historical context. And there he is. Welcome, Lauren Guyenot.
Laurent Guyenot: I'm doing fine.
Kevin Barrett: Wyatt Peterson here has been following a lot of the same paths that you have, and doing a really good job of it.
Laurent Guyenot: Nice to meet you, Wyatt.
Wyatt Peterson: I read your book, JFK-9/11: 50 Years of Deep State, about ten years ago. My father gave me a copy, and I thought it was great, so I've been following your work ever since. I also have a book From Yahweh to Zion that was translated by a rather notable scholar.
Kevin Barrett: I would think more people would be writing the kind of stuff you guys write, because it's so important. But it seems like they don't have the courage, I guess. What do you think, Laurent?
Laurent Guyenot: Well, there are a lot of books about Kennedy. There are a lot of books about 9/11 too. Just not so many books are willing to follow the Israeli trail. Actually, I haven't been working on 9/11. I'm not intensely into 9/11 research now. So I don't know exactly what's what's being published. I don't even know what happened to Christopher Bollyn.
Kevin Barrett: I just recently reconnected with him. I had a couple of people asking about what happened to him. He is okay. I found somebody who knows him. He's kind of in in retirement. I guess he just wanted to stop taking all the heat that he's taken for all these years.
Laurent Guyenot: Yeah he did what he could. He did he did a lot. I think he had a lot of influence. But it's true that there are not so many people working on that (Israeli responsibility for 9/11). And as time passes…For people of our generation, it's still the big turning point in history. But I imagine for people who are even 40 years old today, it hardly affected their life. They were 25 or 30 or 35 years old. So maybe it's history for them, I suppose.
Kevin Barrett: Wyatt, you're younger than us. What's your sense of the next generation down that was younger than you when 9/11 happened? In some cases, I guess they were too young to really even remember it. I know not so long ago, back when the internet was still free, the polls showed that the younger people were actually figuring out 9/11 and coming over to 9/11 truth more than the older people. But today, I don't know if that's still true. What's your sense?
Wyatt Peterson: There seem to be pockets of young people. You look at a guy like Nick Fuentes, who has a large following, and it seems like that generation doesn't buy into a lot of this. For instance, you see these news articles where it's like, “warning, caution, young people aren't believing the Holocaust story anymore.” So it does seem like there's a massive awakening. It (the propaganda) doesn't have the same effect anymore that it had on my generation and certainly you guys' generation.
It does seem hopeful at least. But again, you follow things online and you really think there's a lot of momentum and it's like, here we go, we're on top of things. Then you go into the real world and it's like, where are all these people? You follow these things and you think there's this big movement, there's this burgeoning groundswell, and you start talking to some people and you see it's still a small minority of people.
But I do think that there is hope because I don't think that the younger generations really are buying a lot of the Jewish nonsense anymore.
Kevin Barrett: Laurent, do you think that the just open, blatant, cartoonish evil of this genocide in Gaza is going to fundamentally change people's understandings of Jewish identity politics and its roots in Judaism, and open up a lot more minds to these kinds of issues?
Laurent Guyenot: Yeah, I hope so. I hope so. But I don't know. I’m living in France so in France, yeah, I think a lot of people are realizing what Israel really is. People who are really trying to get deep and solve the mystery of what Israel is are starting to raise a lot of questions I'm not sure so many people go to the point of trying to find the identity of Israel in the Hebrew Bible, as I did. Most people don't really have a clue why Israel is some kind of psychopathic country. But they do see it's a psychopathic nation.
I was actually listening to Nick Fuentes today. He is doing so much. He's quite impressive. I just discovered him a few weeks ago and I find him really impressive in the way he wants to really tell the whole story. But he's a Christian so of course he cannot see things from the same point of view as I do. Which is tragic in a sense. The tragic situation is that all those Christian people are really wonderful. They're religious. They're moral people. They're dedicated. They're ready to die for their country.
But from my perspective, there's something they cannot see. Although Nick Fuentes sounds sometimes, I haven't listened to him so much, but... When he says Christ is the foundation of our civilization and Christ means Christ on the cross who died for those who hated him, he's coming with a Christian outlook that is perhaps—he's probably a deep guy trying to find how to save Christianity from Judaism, or to go to the root of the Jewish problem, of the Israeli problem, without harming Christianity.
That's a dilemma. I cannot blame people who don't like that I deconstruct the Hebrew Bible. I cannot blame them, I understand.
So it's difficult. What do you think about that?
Kevin Barrett: Why it does seem that among Christians—Nick Fuentes being a really good example—I really admire him, everything I see of him. I’m impressed. There's him, and admirable but less utterly fearless people like Tucker Carlson, who's getting better, and Candace Owens, who's getting better. And then, of course, E. Michael Jones, who I think is barking up the right tree in so many ways. So do you think that there's a possibility that Christian movement could sort of retake Christianity from the so-called Judeo-Christians, meaning Christians who are basically owned and controlled by Jews?
The Quran directly warns us Muslims against the [Jews and Christians] bracketed together, that is, the Judeo-Christians, the Christians controlled by Jews. But it says that the real Christians will be the best friends of the Muslims. So is there any chance for a real Christianity to escape from jewish control?
Laurent Guyenot: I think we're starting to see that re-emergence now. But there are also multiple points of attack where you can launch this battle, one of them being Christianity. If you look at the history of Christianity and Catholicism, you have years of material with which you can prosecute this war against international Jewry or Zionism. You can appeal to Catholics based on their pre-Vatican II history.
And obviously there are racial fronts on which we can wage this war. So it's good to see a lot of people fighting within whatever capacity they can on all these different battlegrounds.
You mentioned Tucker Carlson. He's taken a different approach. He's obviously a mainstream figure, and he's starting to bring some of this in, in his limited capacity, which is encouraging. Candace Owens, she's starting to—I know Nick Fuentes has been pretty critical of her, but she's doing her part. I think she's been very solid fighting this thing within her capacity in her own way. Even David Icke, in his own way, is sort of fighting this thing.
So I do think there's multiple fronts that this battle can be waged on. I'm hopeful seeing all these people in all these different avenues, doing that part in whatever way they can to push back against this. Because it's getting so degenerate and so out of control.
Wyatt Peterson: Laurent, one thing I really commend you for, one thing you did brilliantly is your book on the Kennedy assassination (The Unspeakable Kennedy Truth). It’s the book that needed to be written. I've been giving that out to people. It's digestible. It's like you distilled all the pertinent facts from Piper's book. And Piper's book, good though it is, is a tough one just to drop in the lap of somebody who's not really going to look into these things or isn't really a prolific reader. So you went in and distilled the really critical facts and put it in a much more digestible, readable format. I hand out quite a bit to people as an introduction into a lot of these themes. So really, good on you. It's a very, very effective weapon in this, in this crusade.
Laurent Guyenot: Thanks. Yeah, I think that's my best book, probably. I mean, the most useful one. I'm quite happy with it. Thinking about this whole question…Maybe it's not necessary to get into the religious issue. After all, the main issue for Americans is how can America reclaim its own sovereignty and escape the control of Israel? And on that issue, there's no real need to get into “are the Jews the chosen people or not.” I mean, who cares?
So as you said, there are many ways to study this question. It can be tackled on a purely political level. And that's what people mostly need to realize, that America—and Europe too, by the way—is ruled by Israel. When people start to really understand that, whether they're Christian or Muslim, they don't have to to argue on religious ground.
Quite often I wonder: is it useful to raise the question, the notion of chosen people? At some point I decided, yes, it's important because Netanyahu is talking about the Gaza people are like Amalek. So then we do need to get into the religious roots of Israel. It's absolutely necessary, but maybe not for everybody.
Wyatt Peterson: You do a really good job on that. There are certainly a lot of problems with the Old Testament. I think Christians would be wise to adopt a more Marcionic perspective on things. Because I do think that Americans and Europeans need some parameters. They need moral parameters that they can find and historically have worked for them in Christianity. You look at how the gospel came out of the first century and changed Europe, and you look at the art and architecture, and these brilliant works of poetry and philosophy, everything really took off. So I do think there's something to elevating the consciousness level through Christianity. But you do a really good job exposing a lot of the problematic passages and problems with the Old Testament.
And I certainly do think it's problematic. I think Christians make a mistake trying to defend it by jumping through hoops and doing mental gymnastics…like when Benjamin Netanyahu goes out and says that the Palestinians are Amalek, which is a tacit acknowledgement that they're just going to genocide them off the face of the Earth. And then some Christian jumps in and tries defending that particular passage.
I think there is something very powerful to Christ and to the gospel of Christ. I think it does furnish us with a set of moral parameters that we need. I think there's something wired in the human being that resonates really profoundly with that. And so I don't just throw the whole thing out. But I read your work, I read E. Michael Jones's work, and I can appreciate them both. And I think you do a great job with it too.
Laurent Guyenot: Yeah. And what about Adam Green? Adam Green is really attacking Christianity as being part of the problem and not the solution.
Wyatt Peterso: I also sympathize with his approach, although I think it's a bit sometimes too much. Bhe's got a point.
Kevin Barrett: I think he's right about the downside of Judaism. He's brilliant at digging up all of these crazy things that rabbis say that nobody else seems to notice. But I think he's really wrong about both Christianity and Islam. That is, I just don't think there's really much evidence that Christianity or Islam has somehow made it so easy for Jews to just sort of take over using Muslims and Christians as their puppets.
Yes, Jews have been plotting to do that, they've been trying to do that, but it's been a sort of a messianic millenarian fever dream that hasn't really been applied in reality up until Zionism finally began to be implemented just a century and a half ago. And so I think that it's a real misinterpretation. Because I think that the revelation through Jesus is obviously not in the spirit of the Torah or the Old Testament at all. It’s quite the opposite. It's a reformism that's very, very opposed to the dominant older interpretation, the interpretation that then becomes Judaism.
So Christianity is an anti-Judaism, obviously. The whole spirit of it is the spirit of loving, compassionate universalism and submission to God, which is also, of course, islam (with a small i), the universal, true message of submission to God.
And likewise, so is Islam. They're both universalisms. And neither Christians nor Muslims really have a history of being slaves of Jews. The Jews have always been a privileged nation but perhaps a well-contained minority community in both civilizations. And they've had more trouble and more clashes and so on in the Christian civilization.
But the Jews weren't running things because they brainwashed Christians and Muslims into believing in their God. That's just not true. Nothing remotely like that happened until pretty recently with the Zionist movement and the takeover by the bankers who created the Zionist movement.
Wyatt Peterson: Yeah. And they've really worked hard to erode the Catholic Church from within with Vatican II and the American Jewish Committee. And so if Adam Green says Christianity's been this weapon wielded by the Jews to sort of disrupt or pacify tough, macho, pagan society, I don't agree with that. Because if that was the case…I mean, the Talmud has Christ burning in hell and boiling excrement. They hate Christianity. They hate Jesus. You look at Hollywood or pop culture and everything they do is almost this inversion of Christianity, and they can't really stop themselves or prevent themselves from just dragging it through the mud. And I think that speaks of the fact that they know the power that it has when it's given pride of place in our society, in our civilization.
And you can hearken back to pre-Vatican II, and you have years of teaching contra the Jews and hashing out a workable society to live, if necessary, side by side with this irascible race. So that's why I think they've worked so hard to really turn it into this
this simulacra of itself because, otherwise it just, it doesn't make any sense. And I think the proof is in the pudding. When you look at European civilization and what the gospel did to it—these were people that transcended the limitations of their fallen human form and were able to create things that still stagger the modern imagination. I think there is a divine inspiration that we've lost, that's been plucked out of our hearts, that's been plucked out of our minds, by these scheming Jews, and much to our own detriment. And I think that bringing that back and giving it pride of place in our civilization could only serve to better us as people, to better us as men and families, and as builders even, as poets and philosophers and dreamers.
You can reverse Darwin. I think we started out as angels and we're devolving into apes. I think Michael Hoffman said that one time. That's kind of where I stand with the whole thing. I don't think that Christianity is a weapon of the Jews. I think that they've infiltrated it, watered it down, turned it into a sort of inverted form of itself, like they've done with everything else.
Laurent Guyenot: Yeah. For me, it's still a question. How early, for example, did the Jews infiltrate Christianity? If you go back to historically, you cannot really solve that question. But anyway, it was created by Jewish people. It's a complex question. And another way to look at it is that even though jews hate Christ, they also need Christ. And there is a kind of dialectic that has kept Judaism alive, or even that has created Judaism. Some scholars would say because the Talmudic Judaism grew after Christianity appeared. There is an argument that Judaism or Israel would have disappeared from the face of the Earth without Christianity. So even though Jews hate Christ, they need to hate Christ. It's a kind of dialectical process that makes Christianity, to some extent, a necessary element for the strength of Judaism as an anti-Christian force. The anti-Christian spirit so deep in Judaism would not exist without Christianity. So it's a complex question.
Anyway, different people need to work on different aspects. Some people are interested in one aspect or the other. Personally, my personal evolution in terms of my religious outlook is that I just don't like anymore this God who speaks and gives revelation. I think it was a catastrophe for humankind in the long run, or maybe it was a necessity, a historical necessity, in Arabia, but maybe Islam, in the long term today, is a really big,nlike a fossil reality that prevents history from moving forward. But history will move forward anyway.
Recently I came to be interested in stoicism and to realize that within Roman culture or Greco-Roman culture, there was really a lot of deep philosophy and spirituality. They didn't need revelation. They didn't need God to speak and and give a bunch of dogmas or laws. They don't need Satan, certainly.
I got interested after I heard you, Kevin, talk about Emerson. I didn't read much. I found it a little bit difficult to read. But anyway, I get interested into this kind of people who are trying to find the roots of European culture apart from Christianity. And I think actually we tend to exaggerate. That's something I thought quite a lot about it since I did a PhD on the Middle Ages. I realized we tend to see European history through the Latin clerical writing because almost nobody else wrote. So we have this picture of Europe as being a Christian civilization. And we have this idea that everything came out of Christianity. Architecture was Christian. Music started as Christian. Painting, all the arts, all the thinking.
But that's actually not true. Artists were Christian just because they were living in a Christian society. But I don't think, I'm not sure that the Christian element in Western civilization is so essential. I'm suspecting that there is a false perspective we have on that.
Kevin Barrett: Look at the buildings around you in France, look at the cathedrals and compare them to the today's skyscrapers. Can't you see that there was something a lot better when culture was Christian?
Laurent Guyenot: Well, I can look also at the Roman architecture. It was great too. It was not monks and priests who build the cathedrals. The church was financing all this but…I’m not sure that the Christian spirit…I have different different issues with that notion that everything great in Europe came from Christianity and without Christianity, it would never have happened. I'm not even sure that people were so Christian in the Middle Ages or in the 12th century, 13th century. This is, to some extent, a false perspective we have because we look at this period through clerical writings. Almost no one who was not a church man could write. So I have a doubt about this.
Kevin Barrett: Right. But that's because the knowledge at that time, the serious knowledge, was all tied into religion. And so if you wanted to be a person of knowledge, you had to go through that institution. So that tells you something about the culture, doesn't it?
Laurent Guyenot: Yeah. But if you compare Roman Catholicism and Eastern Christianity…One thing I realized through reading the books by a young Byzantinist…He showed that actually Constantinople, Byzantine civilization, had two pillars of their culture. They had the Christian culture and they had all the Greek treasures of philosophy, which they cherished very much. So they cared actually more for Athens than for Jerusalem. So their culture…and without the Byzantines, we would not know about Plato, we would not know about Aristotle. They preserved it. The Arabs did too, but the Arabs played a role because they found all this in the Byzantine libraries.
So there's a big difference in the Byzantine civilization. They preserved the Greco-Roman culture: philosophy, history, and so on. And then that came to Rome.
Kevin Barrett: And then there's Persian culture, too. And then there are ideas coming from China and India. So there's a lot of hybrid knowledge going around.
And it isn't all just one particular religion. That's undoubtedly true.
But we hit the end of the hour, so we can't get into the details about that, unfortunately. But it's great to see you still working on all kinds of really interesting aspects of looking into history and trying to figure out what people haven't fully understood yet, which is a noble undertaking. And it's also fantastic to keep the 9/11-JFK issue alive with Wyatt Peterson picking up the torch. Thank you, Wyatt. Thank you, Laurent.
Share this post