Category: Audio | Page 17 | Just Right Media

824 – The anonymous Q—behind the ‘Qanon’ psyop

Comments Off

Aug 172023

Donald Trump’s recent social media posting featuring Dr Jan Halper-Hayes’ comments on a GBnews interview raised a few eyebrows, while most observers tried to look the other way.

As someone who sat on a task force at the department of defense during Trump’s presidency, Halper-Hayes asserted “If you think that they don’t have the actual real results from the (2020) election, then you’re fooling yourself.” And in referring to the US military and the Trump-created Space Force as being the means by which such evidence was collected, those raising their eyebrows at such a claim understood that this has been the narrative of the so-called “Qanon conspiracy theory” since its beginnings.

Skepticism abounds. The deep state’s appointed poster boy for its January 6 “insurrection” narrative, Jake Angeli-Chansley (falsely labeled as the “Qanon Shaman”) has recently been released from his unconscionable imprisonment in solitary confinement and is now being heard on many of the top social media platforms.

In addressing his purported (and non-existent) role as the “Qanon Shaman,” the articulate, intelligent, and well-spoken Shaman nevertheless offered an eye-opening description and insight into the “Q” that completes the narrative of Dr Jan Halper-Hayes, and which resolves some of our own unanswered questions regarding the phenomenon.

“Qanon is a myth” he says, “a psyop” (psychological operation) manufactured to discredit the “Q” – another psyop consisting of a group of high level military operatives who support Trump and the constitutional integrity of the United States.

It appears to be a developing conflict of biblical proportions, all currently focused on the electoral validity of the 2020 election and on the 2024 electability of Donald Trump. For the “Q” psyop, the first agenda is to set the record straight on each count, thus opening the door for Trump to do what is Just Right.

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

823 – Representative misrepresentation—the language and rhetoric of politics

Comments Off

Aug 102023

The latest round of indictments against Donald Trump is so absurd, and the accusations so demonstrably false, that one must wonder about the state of mind that that could be driving them.

Why Trump’s insistence that the last federal election was stolen should even be a concern to his accusers is a question that can only be understood in light of their terror. So desperate are they to make some kind of case against Trump, that their argument has now boiled down to an absurd assertion that their “case could hinge on whether he believed his lies.”

With political rhetoric like “You can put all kinds of whipped cream on manure, and it’s still manure” used to justify their charges against Trump, you can smell the crap on which such arguments are piled. The “manure” in question, of course, is the fact of the stolen election – called “lies” by Trump’s accusers.

Fascinatingly, the case has once again forced the spotlight on the violent nature of the Left in contrast to the peaceful nature of the Right. “Violence is only the domain of the Left,” Stew Peters correctly observed in his assessment of the January 6 “uprising” for which Trump is being blamed. Along with the violence, Leftist politicians rely on misrepresenting their legitimacy as democratic representatives, which is essentially what their whole case against Trump is all about.

In projecting all of their electoral evils and crimes on to Trump, the Left has found itself resorting to the manipulation of language and rhetoric calculated to justify unprecedented and outrageous assertions. They, not Trump, have forced the long existing polarization of America’s politics to surface, and that is a good thing because now more are able to see the true nature of the binary choice before them.

Those on the Left who condemn Trump for being a “polarizing” figure are mistaken in their condemnation, but Just Right about the fact that Trump represents their polar opposite.

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

822 – UFO disclosures—alien threat or earthly distraction?

Comments Off

Aug 032023

In light of the recent UFO disclosure hearings before the US congress, it is interesting to observe that debate over the UFO phenomenon is as divisive as any of the current political conflicts have been.

More alarmingly, the controversies surrounding UFO disclosures possess many parallels to the controversies regarding everything from the war in Ukraine to fighting climate change.

If ever there was an issue that exposes the willingness or unwillingness of people to accept a narrative purported to be true, it is the alienated issue of UFOs (unidentified flying objects) and the implications of extraterrestrial intelligent life capable of advanced technology.

It’s a polarizing prospect. The nature of the issue forces a binary choice upon those hearing such narratives. Believe. Disbelieve.

Those who claim to maintain an “open mind” on the subject are often permanent skeptics rarely open about what evidence or testimony would sway them one way or the other. By default, this puts them in the “disbelieve” camp since in this context there are no third options. Alien agnosticism still means that the alien proposition has not been accepted.

For most earth-bound human beings any serious discussion about aliens and UFOs is a discussion also alien to the daily concerns of their lives. On the other hand, for those fascinated with the topic and convinced that its implications are profound, the broader lack of interest in so grand a revelation can be both frustrating and infuriating.

When it comes to UFO disclosures, many appear to be anticipating some kind of public reaction that’s Just Right, when in fact there may be no such thing.

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

821 – Democracy reconsidered—in the light of freedom

Comments Off

Jul 272023

The manipulation of language and definitions is the primary tool of state control and tyranny. Arbitrarily replacing established definitions with anti-concepts makes for effective propaganda. The words “democracy” and “freedom” are perhaps two of the most manipulated concepts in this regard.

For example, witness Joe Biden’s obsessive compulsion with “democracy,” by which he means tyranny and censorship. Then contrast Biden’s “democracy” with that of Tucker Carlson’s “democracy” – a society synonymous with freedom and in which freedom of speech is paramount.

Paradoxically, each view is valid depending on the context and specific application. The paradox lies in the fact that, like freedom, democracy is more a political “condition” than an established system of governance.

Just as freedom arises when governments protect their citizens’ right to life, liberty and property, so too democracy arises to the extent that “the people” become involved in the process of governance. However, unrestricted by the principles underlying freedom, democracy permits “the people” to violate each other’s rights to life, liberty and property – subject only to a “majority” vote.

Thus the debate over defining a nation’s political “condition” (freedom, democracy) and “form” (republics, constitutionally limited monarchies, etc) carries on without any firm resolution regarding the true nature of a democracy.

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

820 – Nuclear considerations—about war and peace | Salim Mansur

Comments Off

Jul 202023

In his assessment of what has caused the West to morally degrade into a self-inflicted state of nihilism, our guest Salim Mansur cites two different “nuclear” developments, one concerning nuclear weapons, the other concerning the nuclear family.

“Developments” occur over time, and require both hindsight and foresight to be seen. This demands an understanding of history combined with philosophy, two disciplines that have been abandoned in the vacuum of today’s WOKE culture.

Disinterest in history is a symptom of a nihilistic society, explains Salim. As the West sits on the precipice of nuclear war, the question arises which of the two “nuclear” concerns is the greater – the explosion of a nuclear bomb, or the implosion of the nuclear family. As we learn, these two themes are very intertwined, representing both a consequence and a cause behind our culture of narcissism – a “death culture.”

Most significantly, unlike America’s opposition to the Vietnam war during a time when America imposed conscription, opposition to war in 2023 in relative terms does not exist (thanks to the fact that Richard Nixon ended the draft during his presidency). This would suggest that the so-called “protesters against war” were less against war itself than they were against being forced to participate in war.

As the popular 60s-era war protest song “Where have all the flowers gone?” lamented, it sadly appears that it may yet be some time off before the answer to that question is understood in a way that is Just Right.

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

819 – JFK’s war for peace | Salim Mansur

Comments Off

Jul 132023

The desire for peace is a bit like the desire to become rich and famous; both are ends, not means.

When President John F Kennedy delivered his June 10 1963 “Peace speech” at American University in Washington DC, he was promoting a means for peace that was in direct conflict with the ends of America’s military industrial complex. And this, suggests our guest Professor emeritus Salim Mansur, is what led to Kennedy’s eventual assassination: “The murder of Kennedy was a victory for the deep state.”

Kennedy’s speech was delivered sixty years ago, when America narrowly avoided a nuclear confrontation with Russia (the Soviet Union). Today in 2023 the same threat between the same two super-powers is being played out on the world stage for all to see.

However In retrospect, we now understand that in both cases America was the provocateur, given its earlier placement of nuclear missiles in Turkey and its current threat of doing the same in Ukraine. Small wonder that Salim believes “America has morphed into the leading rogue state in the world today,” and that John F Kennedy was a man “ahead of his time.”

With Kennedy’s assertion that “Peace and freedom walk together,” it was clear he understood the relationship between means and ends in a way that is Just Right.

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

818 – DemocraZy—the politics of the Left

Comments Off

Jul 062023

Democracy and freedom of speech go hand in hand. Yet today, those preaching “democracy” the loudest are busy legislating censorship and state regulations against freedom of expression.

Canada has recently passed Bill C-18, the Online News Act, yet another nail in the legislated coffin of free speech in that country. The Act is designed to extort funds from social media platforms that feature Canadian news reports, and to distribute that money to state favored Canadian news propaganda outlets.

In response, Facebook and others chose to eliminate all Canadian news content from their platforms entirely. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau then announced that it was “extremely disappointing to see that Facebook continues to refuse to accepts its responsibility towards our democracies by refusing to pay the fair share for Canadians to get local news and independent, rigorous journalistic content.”

For Trudeau and the Left, a government enforced “responsibility towards our democracies” is also their official cause cited for everything from mandated lockdowns and vaccinations to fighting climate change and waging war against Russia.

More ominously, the Canadian government is planning to introduce an Online Safety Act allowing it to jail and/or fine those it considers guilty of disseminating “hate speech” or of spreading “misinformation” or “disinformation.” This is ironic, given that the Trudeau government itself routinely does these things as a matter of course.

For the Left, these terms are epistemological weapons used to justify the censorship of those who disagree with them. That’s why those who accuse others of hate speech are always those who “hate speech” that is Just Right.

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

Older Entries Newer Entries