803 – Weathering the political climate change | Matthew Wielicki

 No Responses »
Mar 232023
 


With the credentials and experience to challenge official narratives about fighting “climate change,” our guest Dr Matthew Wielicki offers us his insights into many of the emerging climate-related debates.

From the controversial “greenhouse gas” status of carbon dioxide to competing theories (biotic versus abiotic) regarding the origin of so-called fossil fuels, Dr Wielicki bridges apparent contradictions and misunderstandings with his own informed narrative. And, in explaining earth’s known climate history revealing that ice at the poles is not typical, he describes the Milankovitch cycles in a way that makes it easy to understand the presence of today’s polar ice caps.

It seems almost incomprehensible that politicians keep forcing us to fight “climate change” – a bizarre concept suggesting that climate should never change. Recall that “climate change” was the replacement term for “global warming” after it was observed that the ever-expected warming never seemed to materialize, and indeed, cooling trends were being observed.

Ironically, carbon dioxide still remains the official culprit behind all temperature “changes” – even though CO2 was exclusively linked to warming as a “greenhouse gas” and never with stability or cooling. In the face of such a glaring contradiction continuing to be used to “drive policy decisions” regarding climate, it is clear that our politicians have an agenda unrelated to climate.

It is only when one realizes that the real “climate change” at issue is our political climate, that one can appreciate official “climate change” narratives in a way that is Just Right.

If you found this presentation valuable please consider supporting us:
🧡 PayPal

802 – Gestapo Canada | Artur Pawlowski

 1 Response »
Mar 162023
 


When our guest Pastor Artur Pawlowski says that Canada’s police forces have been acting like the “Gestapo,” this is no overstatement or exaggeration. As he reminds us, the word “Gestapo” simply means “political police.”

That people associate this word with crimes against humanity and with totalitarianism and tyranny is reasonable and perfectly consistent with both the theory and practice behind political policing. Once a nation reaches the point where its politics requires policing, then you know without a doubt that the government in question does not have the consent of the governed. And that is the Canada of today.

Indeed, a brief description of the story behind the word “Gestapo,” as described in the Universal World Reference Encyclopedia (1955), reveals a great deal about political conditions in Canada today:

“Gestapo: the Nazi secret police during the Hitler regime, 1933-1945. Gestapo is an abbreviation of “Geheime Staats-Polizei” or Secret State Police.

“Formed by Hermann Goering in 1933, it was later headed by Heinrich Himmler, who assumed control of all police organizations in 1936. Organized on military lines, the Gestapo had two military branches and one political. It was noted for its terrorism, brutality, and extra-judicial activities. Its members constituted a much-feared elite. The Allies declared it a criminal organization at the Nuremberg Trials in 1946.”

As we can see, while attributable to the Hitler regime, the word “Gestapo” has a very generic definition, aptly describing the function of its existence. It’s history also describes what Canada’s “much feared elite” did to Pastor Pawlowski. From engaging in “extra-judicial activities” to the employment of “terrorism and brutality,” Canadian politicians have turned Canada’s police forces into their own private Gestapo.

So when Artur Pawlowski uses the word “Gestapo” to describe his own personal experience and the state of tyranny in Canada today, he’s Just Right.

If you found this presentation valuable please consider supporting us:
🧡 PayPal

801 – Conservatively speaking | Maxime Bernier

 No Responses »
Mar 092023
 


In the wake of his unconscionable and unfounded public statement alleging that European Parliamentarian Christine Anderson‘s views are racist and hateful, Conservative Party of Canada (CPC) leader Pierre Poilievre effectively demonstrated that his is a party of the Left.

The mere fact of resorting to name calling and brandishing the collectivist label of “racist” against a principled politician visiting Canada from abroad – without having a shred of evidence or grounds to make such a statement – is a hallmark tactic of the Left. As was the public rebuke of his three CPC members of parliament who dared to associate with Anderson.

In stark contrast to the actions of Poilievre, our guest Maxime Bernier has openly welcomed hearing what Christine Anderson has to say. As an advocate of freedom and an enemy of tyranny, Anderson’s philosophy is the opposite of the CPC’s, a sad reality openly hidden from view thanks to the word “conservative” appearing in the party’s name.

Indeed, as leader of the People’s Party of Canada (PPC) Maxime is reconsidering his past use of the term “conservative” as one of the adjectives describing the PPC. Thanks to the likes of Pierre Poilievre and his unprincipled CPC, the term “conservative” can no longer be associated with the Right nor with the freedom and individualism that the Right represents.

And thanks to the latest actions of Pierre Poilievre, yet another nail in the coffin of conservatism has been hammered into the minds of Canadians everywhere. More significantly, we now know that when Maxime Bernier first judged the CPC to be “morally and intellectually corrupt” he was Just Right from the very beginning.

If you found this presentation valuable please consider supporting us:
🧡 PayPal

800 – Sounding the alarm—on globalism’s agenda of death | Dr Jessica Rose

 1 Response »
Mar 022023
 


As the world drowns in a sea of mounting evidence demonstrating the destructive harm wrought by the so-called Covid19 “vaccines,” officialdom remains engaged in an act of willful blindness so extreme that it can only be seen to be part of globalism’s agenda to “depopulate” the planet.

Our guest Dr. Jessica Rose is a Canadian researcher whose expertise in immunology and computational biology served as the grounds for her decision to raise the alarm about COVID-19 “vaccines.” Having reviewed the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) database in conjunction with other sources of information, she arrived at the conclusion “that VAERS is flawed and antiquated.”

The under-reported adverse event factor has been estimated by different studies to be between 20 to 41 times higher than what is being officially reported. No matter which of the estimates are most accurate, even without the under-reported numbers the “vaccines” have been directly associated with millions of deaths globally.

The continuing promotion of the deadly injections in the wake of indisputable evidence of their toxicity has led Dr Rose to conclude that the whole pandemic narrative is a political one, not about viruses or health care. Consequently she is now considering entering the field of politics, “not something I would ever want to engage in” given the nature of those currently in office. But since this is the source of the real pandemic – the political one – it must also be seen to be the solution to end the pandemic.

Dr Rose has already expressed a number of political observations that transcend the official narratives. Joe Biden, she notes, is not competent to serve as America’s president, while Trump was a godsend to America in comparison. Meanwhile, Canada’s Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is not only “unlikable and not relatable” but also “just gross!” And in recognizing that today’s presidents and prime ministers are globalist puppets, Dr Rose is already off to a solid start on the political front.

In advising others to “run for politics, she has identified the most effective means of ending the pandemic in a way that is Just Right.

If you found this presentation valuable please consider supporting us:
🧡 PayPal

Poilievre exposed as “fraud” after Christine Anderson’s Canadian visit | Maxime Bernier

 Audio  No Responses »
Mar 012023
 

The recent visit of European Parliamentarian Christine Anderson to Canada has highlighted the contrasting ideologies of the Conservative Party’s Pierre Poilievre and Maxime Bernier of the People’s Party.

Ms. Anderson gained popularity among many Canadians when she rebuked Justin Trudeau during his visit to the European Parliament in March 2022. She condemned him for admiring the Chinese dictatorship, violating citizens’ fundamental rights, and criminalizing dissenting voices.

During her visit to Canada, Ms. Anderson met with hundreds of supporters including Maxime Bernier and three Conservative MPs. Mr. Bernier hailed her as the “Queen of Freedom” and made her an honorary member of the PPC, while Mr. Poilievre reprimanded his MPs for associating with her, branding her opinions as vile and racist.

However, Mr. Poilievre and the reporting of his statement failed to mention which of Ms. Anderson’s opinions he considered racist and vile—a glaring omission.

In this conversation, Maxime Bernier calls out Mr. Poilievre for being a fraud and an opportunist who uses photo-ops with Freedom Convoy truckers to appease protestors during a Conservative Party leadership contest. However, when it comes to issues such as immigration limits, Mr. Poilievre unfairly stigmatizes his opponents by calling them “racist,” and in doing so aligns himself with Justin Trudeau and other critics of responsible economics and individual freedom.

Also available on the following platforms:

Rumble
BitChute:
Odysee
Robert Vaughan’s Substack

Your support is always appreciated and is what makes our programming possible.
🧡 PayPal

799 – Brave new normal | John C. A. Manley

 No Responses »
Feb 232023
 


“We have art that we do not die of reality” – Friedrich Nietzsche

Facing one’s fears in a dystopian world requires a kind of courage and bravery that most Canadians have rarely been forced to call upon. In his fiction novel, “Much Ado About Corona – a dystopian love story” our guest John C.A. Manley tells a tale about the emergence of such courage in the midst of an emerging Canadian police state.

Significantly, John’s novel is evidence of the powerful role that art and literature can have in reflecting the “Covid” reality of the world in which we live. Though its plot and characters are fictional, the novel reflects a deep truth about the reality in which Canadians today find themselves, in part thanks to incorporating the narratives and insights of shows like Just Right, which is included among the dozens of references cited in the book.

In helping him expose the “Covidian Lie,” John’s son Jonah has composed and performed a musical commentary of the same name, thereby adding an additional weapon to their arsenal of artistic persuasion.

Cultures are built and identified around the stories, songs, and philosophies that define them, and most such stories tend to blend fact with fiction. The experiences of the fictional characters are representations of real life experiences, while the factual and historical backdrop of the story provides the reality and truth that make the story itself real and true.

When it is said that “life imitates art,” this is a reflection of the powerful role that art plays in shaping our reality. And of course, art similarly imitates life. In times of tyranny, fictional narratives can reveal truths and facts in a way that often escapes the notice of the tyrannical.

“Once you accept (the truth) then you’re able to do something about it,” observes John. “Until you’ve accepted it, you can’t.”

The truth is what breaks through the lies which is why all tyrannies fear truth most of all. The power of fiction lies in the fact that, through fictional narratives, truth can be discovered in a way that is Just Right for those still struggling to see it.

If you found this presentation valuable please consider supporting us:
🧡 PayPal

798 – Some inconvenient truths—about freedom

 No Responses »
Feb 162023
 


For most people in the Western world, “freedom” has been taken as a given. Their ability to do so depended upon a fundamental moral principle held in common, one that Professor of Moral Philosophy John Macmurray (1891-1976) described as the “law of freedom.”

“No man can compass his own freedom for himself,” warned Macmurray in his 1949 book Conditions of Freedom. “He must accept it as a free gift from others; and if they will not give it to him he cannot have it. This is the law of freedom.”

The palpable loss of freedom now experienced on a global scale makes visible an inconvenient truth about freedom that few wish to address, but upon which Macmurray conveniently elaborated:

“We flatter ourselves too much when we imagine that we love freedom and strive wholeheartedly towards freedom. On the contrary; there are few things that we fear so much. No doubt we find the ‘idea’ of freedom most attractive; but the reality is another matter. For to act freely is to take a decision and accept the consequences.

“I see history, in its concrete reality, not as Man’s struggle to win his freedom in a world that frustrates his efforts; but as a record of the twists and evasions by which men seek to escape from freedom in a world which thrusts it remorselessly upon them. The determination which oppresses us is not the opposite of freedom; for what is determined is that Man shall be free.”

In other words, the inconvenient truth about freedom is that most people don’t want it. This leaves those who do want freedom obligated to take the initiative by getting involved in politics, both on principle and as guardians committed to the eternal vigilance required in a free society.

In light of the understanding that freedom must be given freely by each individual to other individuals, it turns out that the phrase “Give me liberty or give me death,” apparently describes the nature of freedom in a way that’s Just Right.

If you found this presentation valuable please consider supporting us:
🧡 PayPal

 Older Entries