Feb 282024
 


In their struggle against tyranny, many dismiss ‘philosophy’ while calling for ‘practical’ solutions to a condition that is wholly the consequence of ideas – and ideology. Given that the predominant zeitgeist of today’s culture is primarily on the Left, it should not be surprising that the field of philosophy has been largely discredited and dismissed as a failed subjective approach to the problems and challenges of life. However, this is a tragic error.

Reality dictates that one cannot possibly separate the philosophical from the practical without encountering a contradiction. If the ‘theory’ does not match the ‘practice’ then the ‘theory’ is no longer valid and cannot be regarded as such. The proper response is not to dismiss all ‘theory’ out of hand, but to formulate a theory that does indeed match the practice.

In the fields of ethics and politics, ‘theory’ is often equated with ‘philosophy’ or ‘ideology.’ Each of these terms is properly associated with modes of thinking that lead to certain intended outcomes or results.

So why do so many applied ‘theories’ fail to result in their intended outcomes? For a simple reason: the ‘theories’ are based on a mode of thinking philosophically referred to as the “primacy of consciousness” which stands in direct opposition to the “primacy of existence.” Continue reading »

Feb 212024
 


As victims of COVID-19 government policies, each of the witnesses who testified before Canada’s National Citizens Inquiry (NCI) shared their own unique experience and personal tragic consequences. But what they all truly witnessed in common was the official betrayal of Canadians on a scale once thought to be unimaginable.

Released on November 28, 2023, the final report of the NCI’s Inquiry into the Appropriateness and Efficacy of the COVID-19 Response in Canada permanently places on the record the Canadian government’s intentional misinformation and disinformation campaigns about the COVID-19 pandemic. What is undeniably clear is that Canadians were betrayed by all of their institutions and politicians.

As our guest Ches Crosbie notes, the “censorship industrial complex” must be eliminated before the truth reaches enough people and a proper reconciliation can be pursued. And significantly, the testimonies and information found in the final report can serve as a resource for other betrayed victims who have yet to seek some kind of justice. It is a treasure trove of information for litigation purposes.

Given that the truth is now visible to anyone who cares to look, a call for reconciliation appears to be the next step in the direction that is Just Right.

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

Feb 192024
 


The COVID-19 pandemic plunged Canada into a culture of fear and panic, marked by egregious violations of individual rights not seen since times of war. One might assume that the federal and provincial governments would have faced opposition to their unjustified and tyrannical measures aimed at curbing the spread of what amounted to nothing more than a severe flu. However, they did not. Instead, all of “officialdom” supported the measures taken, and anyone who questioned those measures were tormented, canceled, and vilified. Some were even beaten, arrested, and imprisoned.

In turbulent times Canadians normally turn to the mainstream media to pose challenging questions regarding the actions of government, pursue a balanced approach to the available “expert” information, and at the very least document the experiences of Canadians. Not this time. The mainstream media, receiving funding by the federal government since 2019, completely failed Canadians. No probing questions were asked, no alternative opinions were offered, and the negative effects of government actions were ignored. Some legacy media outlets even stooped to inciting hatred and encouraging Canadians to turn on those who did not share the official narrative.

With the lack of responsibility and probity on the part of Canadian officials, institutions, and media, it fell to the People themselves to document the effects of the government’s overreach and offer solutions.

The National Citizens Inquiry (NCI) marked a first for Canada. Citizen-led and funded it traversed the county gathering the heartbreaking stories of 305 victims, the testimony of 94 experts in law and medicine, and over 76,000 signatures on a petition of support.

Ches Crosbie, a Canadian Lawyer and spokesman for the NCI, joins Robert Vaughan to discuss some of the recommendations of the NCI’s final report: Inquiry into the Appropriateness and Efficacy of the COVID-19 Response in Canada, released November 28, 2023, and the disregard of the report by those who would benefit most from its findings.

If you found this presentation valuable please consider donating:
🧡 PayPal

847 – Rules of the game—of definitions

 Comments Off on 847 – Rules of the game—of definitions
Feb 142024
 


A Jan 26 2024 provisional judgement finding it “plausible” that Israel is violating the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide has unleashed yet another epistemological conflict in which the two sides of the debate have been polarized over the valid definition of a concept, in this case, the word “genocide.”

Rendered by the International Court of Justice (ICJ), the judgement was made in response to an application filed against Israel by South Africa. Though the definition of “genocide” used by the ICJ is far broader and, to the minds of many, invalid relative to its long accepted “dictionary” definition, this objection fails to recognize the “rules of the game” that were accepted by each of its players long before the first move was made.

“It happens. That’s politics,” explains our guest Salim Mansur in describing the apparent injustice and unequal application of the rules to differing players in the game. As America and other nations escape judgment, Israel appears to be unduly targeted for “genocidal” activities no different from those nations with “veto” power.

In light of the fact that each of the governments involved are signatories to the conditions and definitions being adjudicated, it is important to understand the rules of the definition game in which they are engaged, before attempting to apply definitions and standards proven to be Just Right for most of us not playing games.

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

Feb 132024
 


Tucker Carlson’s interview with Russian President Vladimir Putin did not reveal groundbreaking insights into the leader or his policies to those of us who have been closely monitoring events in that region. However, it did bring to light previously overlooked facts to hundreds of millions, courtesy of a journalist committed to honesty, in stark contrast to the West’s dismissive yellow press.

In this insightful discussion, Professor Emeritus, Salim Mansur and Robert Vaughan delve into the interview’s implications, exploring its impact on a global audience that is typically shielded from the truth but now finds itself unexpectedly confronted with reality, thanks to a journalist who values integrity.

If you found this presentation valuable please consider making a donation:
🧡 PayPal

Feb 112024
 

When the International Court of Justice (ICJ) announced that it found it “plausible” that Israel is violating the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, many immediately drew parallels to the Holocaust, suggesting that Israel’s actions were akin to the treatment of Jews under Nazi Germany.

However, this interpretation is not accurate. The common understanding of “genocide” as the “systematic extermination” of a group of people does not align with the definition in the UN’s Convention, nor is it the definition under scrutiny by the ICJ.

In UN law, “genocide” encompasses a broad range of actions, including killing any number of people in a defined group, even a single person, or causing serious mental harm to a member of the group. This expansive definition implies that nations involved in any conflict, anywhere, at any time could potentially face allegations of “genocide.”

Professor Salim Mansur from Western University joins us to explore the implications of the ICJ’s provisional decision and its potential impact on the very existence of the state of Israel.

If you found this presentation valuable please consider making a donation:
🧡 PayPal

Feb 072024
 


Due to the emergence of an officially registered party in Alberta called the United Freedom Party (UFP), we find ourselves forced to conduct some damage control given our own association with Ontario’s officially registered Freedom Party. The two parties have literally nothing in common.

Organizers of the UFP, Luke Denis and Chris Hampton, have described themselves as “extreme right wing Christian conservatives,” whose key agenda includes the advancement of anarchy, libertarianism and the socialistic redistribution of wealth. Citing the “fifth greater re-set event being held right now, from the libertarian sector and the yellow and black anarchist types,” they attribute the current functionality of society on “some kind of magic hootenanny.” Seriously.

Unable to offer an objective definition of political freedom, the UFP organizers suggest that freedom is “the ability to do whatever one wants, so long as it does not ‘harm’ other individuals or the environment.” Among the ‘harms’ it includes in this definition is, for example, the inability or failure of a private road contractor to meet the financial or construction obligations of its contracted agreements. They appear to be unaware that using the so-called ‘harm’ argument to justify restricting freedom was the very ground on which everything from covid injections to wearing masks to mandated lockdowns was justified.

For the most part, the UFP’s perspective on politics and the economy is incoherent, contradictory, and so bizarrely oblivious to any kind of consistency or civilized standard that it is difficult to comprehend what kind of people would support such madness. The principle of justice, due process, or consent is nowhere to be found in their rhetoric. “We don’t need their bloody permission” they say of their fellow Albertans.

At one point it was suggested that Bill Gates should have been “murdered and ripped apart on stage.” They see people like Tucker Carlson and Douglas Murray as mostly “controlled opposition.”

Among the UFP’s bizarrely contradictory and anti-freedom proposals are the following:

The UFP would institute an across-the-board 3% resource tax and provide all Albertans with cheques drawn upon that account “because these are natural resources that we should share.”

In a pure Joe Biden open border policy, the party would “flood the province of Alberta with millions of people from outside the province (doubling Alberta’s population) who would theoretically support and vote for “unity” and “solidarity” though no means of vetting such people was deemed necessary. At the same time the party would expel all current Albertans who disagree with the party’s policies: “Get the ‘f’ out.”

On the democratic front, there is simply no way to reconcile or make sense of the party’s utterly contradictory and illogical proposals. On the one hand they would “remove the power of politicians” to legislate, and would “end the voting process after the UFP is voted into power.” On the other hand, they would encourage people to “vote more furiously in all the time honored ways of voting.” The UFP would also be in favor of “forming a new country” in the province of Alberta and within other jurisdictions around the world.

While they pay lip service to “private education” they claim the right to “educate the sheep” and “if you don’t like it get the ‘f’ out.”

And all this is just the tip of the iceberg of the UFP’s irrationality.

Claiming that ‘unity’ and ‘solidarity’ are their central concerns, one must question the motives of a party that would register in a province where there are already a myriad of conservative splinter groups with those same objectives, including Artur Pawlowski’s political party which had already successfully registered candidates in all of Alberta’s ridings.

Given the utter irrationality and contradictory statements made by the UFP, it’s beginning to look like the only way to define Alberta’s UFP in a way that’s Just Right is as some kind of psyop designed to disrupt and destroy any opposition to the existing regime.

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