(September 26, 2013)
Guest: Professor James Tracy of [censored] University and MemoryHoleBlog, who has been plagued by the mainstream media and by his own university administration for raising questions about the recent Navy Yard shooting, the Sandy Hook massacre, and other questionable events.
An early 9/11 skeptic and able analyst of 9/11’s effect on public consciousness, James Tracy is at the forefront of truth-in-academia.
During this show we discuss Dr. Tracy’s Kafka-esque battle with his university administration, the Navy Yard shooting, the Sandy Hook massacre (including the bizarre-but-true fact that alleged perp Adam Lanza’s very existence is in question), the failure of the al-Ghouta false flag to ignite a US attack on Syria, and the rapid-fire spread of the false-flag meme.
19 thought on “James Tracy on The Kevin Barrett Show”
Keepin’ it out there – great work!
Thank you Dr. Tracy for the truth you have boldly presented. What could be the next false flag? A drill with the northeast cordraint loosing power?
Is this a practice drill were 125,000 people no longer have transportation to the big city?
I thank God every day that you’re tenured + have the backbone to fight the system ! This 70 yo had a hs history teacher who was much the same: inspired his students to question everything. KUDOS to you for fighting the good fight & still maintaining your composure !
Great interview. Thanks. I am reminded of one of my heroes, Norman G. Finkelstein who challenged the establishment before he was tenured.
You can read what happened to him when he came up for tenure here: http://normanfinkelstein.com/2012/depaul-alumni-stephanie-willding-told-finkelstein-what-they-cant-rob-you-of-is-the-impact-that-you-had-on-all-of-us
Here is Finkelstein in action in 2003: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sws0V_pVhG4
The Sandy Hook Controversy – James Tracy on GRTV
Guns and Butter, for January 9, 2013
“Sandy Hook: Unanswered Questions” with Professor James F. Tracy. Discrepancies in media coverage; coroner’s press conference; political fallout.
Sandy Hook was he event that opened my eyes, the general public are not taking MSM word as true now as so many question were not asked. . or answered.. they may think that news on TV.. ‘ does the job’.. but actually it works in the opposite direction.. I hope they realise that people are not the sheep they think they are. Keep up the good work.
Professor Matthew D Green
of Johns Hopkins University
thank you very much James
Perhaps it’s just me, but maybe someone can help dispel what may only be confusion on my part:
Prof. Tracy’s blog professes its purpose to be: “…a forum for criticism and commentary on sociopolitical issues and phenomena overlooked or misreported by mainstream media. Such neglected concerns are likewise often omitted from or distorted in popular consciousness and memory.”
Whenever events occur that could very well be ‘false flags,’ the default position of many who post on this blog is that ‘incontrovertibly,’ these events are ‘false flags.’ I may be wrong, and Prof. Tracy will surely correct me if I am, but the point of examining how the MSM always approach events like “the navy yard shooting” or “the Sandy Hook massacre” is to show that without doing “any” digging at all, these ‘journalistic’ institutions also jump to a default conclusion, namely, that its “gun control,” “terrorists,” or a combination thereof and someone’s having gone crazy on all their own.
Conclusions should be based on ‘evidence,’ and yes indeed, all possibilities ought to be considered, because the ‘establishment’ is literally capable of anything and it is hoped that ‘fact based scrutiny’ might help to restrain it in its criminal endeavours.
Having said that, posters do not further Prof. Tracy’s purpose by ‘asserting’ all and every suspicion that they entertain as to the what the significance of the ‘events’ at hand might be as “fact.” Assertions should remain qualified as “speculation,” because that is in fact what they are. Do not fall into the trap of the very institutions being called to account in this blog, namely, to make what are obviously in the instances at hand groundless “assertions.”
Otherwise, I think you discredit both yourselves and Dr. Tracy and what I take to be a legitimate effort to unmask what needs to be unmasked: the constant, baseless ‘reporting’ of the MSM.
Can’t rightly say no one really knows anything. We can only draw circumstantial conclusions based on the obfuscation of hard evidence.
Norm…if it was truly “reporting” that they did, there wouldn’t be a need for venues such as this.
You and I both know that our “watchdogs” have turned into “lapdogs”.
The reason I put the word ‘reporting’ in quotes is that like you, I well know that they do not serve their ostensible purpose and that indeed they are lapdogs. What I’m saying is if you are going to call them out on their ‘shoddiness,’ don’t lower yourself to what is obviously their standards and claim something to be ‘incontrovertible’ when it has yet to be demonstrated eve if their is ample historical evidence justifying a suspicion. While your suspicions are very well grounded, indeed, to declare, for example, “the navy yard shooting” to be a false flag only days and weeks after the fact is rushing to a conclusion. You may very well be right. But as a known established ‘fact’ right now, at this moment in time? Only the perpetrators would know that for sure, at least for the time being. By all means, seek out evidence on the basis of your suspicions, as you well should, because the MSM are not, as they should be. But don’t declare that you know because the truth of the matter is that you do not. What you do know, and as Dr. Tracy demonstrates, is that the presstitutes are obviously shilling for establishment interests.
’nuff said. And I like you guys.
Thanks for your reasoned response, Norm – I like you, too!
I have never professed to think that I know everything; I will state that we haven’t been told the truth on a number of things; the recent number of shootings and attacks are just the icing on a very badly baked cake.
There are a lot of things that require our attention. One of those things is Dianne Feinstein’s attempts to decide who can and who can’t be a “journalist”.
That’s not something she should ever get to decide.
You’re right – as of now, the only people who know “what really happened” are the perpetrators. Of course, no one’s expecting them to give up the goods; but we have the right to make a determination as to the truth.
My example for the events of September 11th, 2001 – Jane Standley of the BBC, as well as Aaron Brown of CNN, were reading from a teleprompter in regards to the “collapse” of the Salomon Brothers building, also known as WTC 7. The BBC satellite feed “failed”, just in time to not have to explain the fact that WTC 7 was still standing during their broadcast.
Who was responsible for the feed on the teleprompter?
Find the answer to that question, and we are on our way to determine WHO was truly responsible for the events of September 11th, 2001.
Bernard Kerik purported to have found one of the “magic” passports. He’s a weak link.
Todashev was murdered execution-style – what did he know that had to be silenced?
I stated earlier “if it was truly “reporting” that they did, there wouldn’t be a need for venues such as this.”
In retrospect, that statement was incorrect – forums like Professor James Tracy’s blog are not just needed; they need to be replicated in all respects.
There are too many people serving as gatekeepers, keeping progress to an absolute minimum. Preaching to the choir is nice for affirming theories, but that where its usefulness ends. To get anywhere, we need to connect the dots. When that picture is formed, we must follow through.
Let’s continue on our quest for the truth, no matter the paths we must take – because to do otherwise is to allow the bastards to think that they can wantonly deprive us all of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
Have a good day, everyone.
Actually, several things have been proven on this blog.
You cite the “navy yard shooting.” I think it’s perfectly acceptable to assume this media event was a false flag. Why would it be more acceptable to assume it isn’t, given your own views?
The first task should be to question the veracity of the media event. Did it happen? Could it have happened? If something appears to have happened, one should ask what happened. Remember—Anderson Cooper is not your friend telling you “what’s up”. He’s a known liar/agent provocateur/disinformation agent. The same goes for the rest of the tv faces. I don’t think anyone honest would dare to try and prove otherwise.
I will be forever the optimist, and believe we all make a difference! While the MSM is tripping over itselve declaring the republicans will have hell to pay in the next election because of our current ‘shutdown’ of government, outlets have determined it is better to eliminate comments as they distract from their intended brainwashing! http://www.infowars.com/desperate-msm-moves-to-kill-off-article-comments/ Will not go there no if my voice is not heard! Thank you again Dr. Tracy, for letting the comments flow, although it is probably true you save us from alot of the garbage spilling trolls!
Interesting, Kathy. I often read comments at The Guardian now. Increasingly, there seem to be – trolls, shills- whatever expressing some really – I’ll just say awful – sentiments. One commenter even suggested that a paper be stormed and journalists even arrested over such leaks as Snowden’s. The anti-Gladwell comments responding to the interview article about his forthcoming book —- well, they made my blood curdle.
It’s a hard thing. I value Freedom of Speech very highly. How can I argue they don’t have a right to post? Of course I can’t. However, it has made following comments an increasingly unpleasant experience.
Anyway, thanks for the ‘alert’. I hope that there are ways found to keep our voices heard.
Very enjoyable listen. Unfortunately, you reminded me about the White Rose case. I may get into more trouble because I am tempted to debunk the dead “saints.”
How amazing we are witnessing full blown propaganda blatantly before us. The WH determined public sidewalks and important monuments should be off limits to the public. The WWII monument, paid for by private charities, and previously announced private charities were bringing our WWII 90 year old Veterans and heroes for a first and probably last visit was closed with barrycades and seven security guards! That is five more guards that was provided to our ambassador and other Americans in Benghazi! http://dailycaller.com/2013/10/01/obama-admin-knew-about-wwii-veterans-request-and-rejected-it/