Got to listen to this show from a couple days ago just this afternoon, very disappointing. Corsi is generally more disciplined that this, but he had so many "facts" either flat out out wrong or so twisted to support his theories it seriously weakend his overall treatise. Some examples:
1) Corsi claimed Eisenhower supported the Bay of Pigs invasion to further US commercial interests and as an "October surprise" to get Nixon elected in 1960. Now we know Ike was not a real Nixon supporter, in fact he never really liked or trusted Nixon. But that aside, this is Dwight David Eisenhower we're talking about here, the poster boy for the NWO conspiracy types, the guy who warned us about the "military/industrial complex" in his farewell address. And the same guy who threatened the Brits and French for resorting to military action to further commercial interests at Suez in 1956.
Bottom line, if George bought this part of Corsi's story, I expect him to lambast the next guest/caller who cites Ike's farewell address as proof/warning about the NWO.
2) Corsi said the CIA knew the Bay of Pigs invasion was doomed to failure. This is patently untrue. The invasion was planned based on active US naval and air support. Had Kennedy not decided to withold this support at the last minute it would have been a walk-over. The rebel air force of obsolete A-26 Invaders, as well as their two primary supply ships carrying the bulk of their weapons and equipment, were destroyed by Castro's small, WWII era equipped air force. A single squadron of modern US fighters would have given the rebels complete freedom of action without fear of air attack. Naval gunfire and air support would have also destroyed Castro's armor. Again, the invasion would have been a walk-over.
3) Corsi claimed the US knew the "domino theory" was a flawed concept because Indonesia's communist government fell without taking over other nations. In fact, Indonesia was not a communist nation. There were communists in Sukarno's government, just as there were nationalists and Islamists, but Sukarno was not a communist. Sukarno juggled the support of all political parties, as well as the military, in Indonesia to stay in power. And while the CIA, but more likely MI6, might have had a hand in his overthrow by the military, his government fell primarily because his senior military leaders grew tired of their undeclared and ineffective war with the UK/Commonwealth in Malaysia. Corsi also conveniently overlooks the fact Sukarno's government fell in 1966, by which point the US was heavily involved in Vietnam.
4) To further support his "domino theory was flawed" argument, Corsi claims the various communist nations/movements in SEA hated the Chinese and wanted nothing to do with them. While in principle this might have been true, it doesn't mean these governments/movements did not accept military aid from the PRC with the aim of establishing communist nation-states. For example, the Chinese provided huge amounts of military aid to North Vietnam/Viet Cong, the Pathet Lao, and Khmer Rouge. This "enemy of my enemy is my friend" mentality is nothing new, it's been in force throughout history. Other examples include the rabidly anti-communist Churchill supplying weapons to the USSR in WWII and the US arming of the Mujaheddin in Afghanistan in the 1980s.
5) On a number of occasions, Corsi brought up the fact the CIA was behind bringing in German rocket scientists and intelligence operatives into the US post-WWII, inferring it was some clandestine or illegal action. Overlooking the fact the CIA wasn't even stood-up until almost 2.5 years after the VE Day, the fact these Germans were brought to the US to work for the US was hardly a secret. There were news reel shown throughout the country showing these men coming to the US, and by the mid 50s men like Von Braun were household names.
Now if Corsi wants to argue the morality of bringing these men, many of whom were Nazis, to the US, that's another story. There is no doubt the personal history of some of these men was even doctored to hide their Nazi connections. Still, he neglects to point out if we hadn't taken them, the Soviets certainly would have. Nobody ever claimed these guys were boy scouts, but you damn well want them on your side rather than working for the Soviets.
6) I'll give Corsi something of a pass on my final point since he apparently didn't write about it in his book, but rather responded off the top of his head to a question from a caller about the death of JFK Jr, in a the crash of a small plane he was piloting in 1999. Yes, Corsi allowed, he did find the death of Jr suspicious and possibly connected to the still on-going cover-up of the Kennedy assassination.
As I've mentioned here in previous posts, I spent better than 30 years as an aircraft mishap investigator for the USAF. Back in the day I read the NTSB report on the Kennedy crash, and it was one of the most telling civilian mishap reports I ever read. To put it bluntly, Jr. was foolish to have made that flight. He was far too inexperienced to have undertaken the flight over open water in then existing weather conditions at night. Even if we overlook other contributing factors in his personal/professional life at the time, there is no way he was qualified to make that flight. I'm not saying he wasn't licenced to make the flight, but he wasn't qualified.
I grant I've not read Corsi's book, but his three hours on the air with Noory was chocked full of inaccuracies, flawed analysis, and unsupportable conclusions. Based on what I heard, I'd not spend the money to buy his book. Maybe I'll wait for the movie.