Many thoughts come to mind when watching Cruz but put simply he is an ignoramus, a psychopath and a thug. I want to throw in that he is a pretentious, vulgar twat as well, but I wonder, is that being too Baroque?
Thank you for sharing your thoughts Trish, you wear your deep knowledge of life and media lies so lightly - it feels sometimes like I am dancing a sad waltz with you.
If Iran has to strike Israel with a nuclear bomb on the scale of Hiroshima in the summer of 2026, what would you be saying if the American decision to eliminate the three known uranium enrichment sites and key leaders had been planned but not executed?
Put another way, America has a chance to eliminate the potential for such a future Iranian strike today. The Ayatollah and others in Iran leaders are known to want “death to Israel” and “death to America” with no capability to credibility act on that desire. Are you willing to gamble on Iran achieving a nuclear bomb destined for Israel.
Points to consider:
1. Diplomacy has failed. Iran shows no signs of stopping efforts to build a nuclear bomb.
2. You are critical of Trump and others in American leadership, but you do not have access to his knowledge nor the details that go into such a serious decision to take out the Iranian nuclear threat. Are you really the best person to second guess their decision when you champion “critical thinking” yet sound critical thinking depends heavily on reliable and trustworthy facts and insights into the political and economic factors that orbit such decisions.
3. What does “America First” mean to you personally, given that you are Canadian? I am also a Canadian who has no vote in America. Its foreign policies will affect me, but I feel totally unqualified to second guess Trump et al regarding its policies and actions. My Canadian vote is just as feeble since Carney et al don’t know I exist or what I want to protect my family from the consequences of America’s actions. We are helpless, and no amount of talking or lobbying public representatives will change that fact.
Finally, your discussion about the tenuous Trump-Musk bromance came across as schoolyard gossip. Yes, we want leaders you are transparent and accountable to the people they represent, but to dwell upon the spat that those two men have undertaken publicly may be popular in gossip rags but are beneath the classy standards I expect from your show.
Another comment. Tucker Carlson was horrible in his interview with Ted Cruz. Disrespectful doesn’t begin to describe Tucker’s performance for a man who carries a huge responsibility with many legitimate variables to consider before he makes decisions and takes actions. If Tucker wants to make decisions on behalf of the American people, he should get elected and rise to the heights of power that Trump and Cruz have done. Until then, respect is required even if Tucker does not agree with the current foreign policies of the current administration.
Please note that I referred you to the 1962 Bill of Rights, not Trudeau Sr’s flawed Charter.
I fully agree that none of our enforcement institutions at any level of have enforced the Bill of Rights or (or even the good parts of the flawed Charter) faithfully, or in the interest of Canadians.
“Your Provincialism” is another ‘tell’ of your bigotry and authoritarian views. I have every right to support whatever causes I wish, and wonder why you feel entitled to define me with your straw man arguments. Have I defined you, or accused you of not living up to my expectations on a matter that is important to me? Have you somehow concluded that I have unlimited time, attention and resource from which I must carve out some to avoid being condemned by you as “provincial?”
You suggest that I show more concern for the “human race”. I deal with people one at a time because individual persons are real and collective constructs like “the greater good” and “the human race” are intangibles. You can argue on the basis of all the “collective nostrums” you like, but all such sentiments are nothing more than virtue signalling to me. If you want to pretend that you care about the 8 billion people on the planet, be my guest, but don’t expect me to take you seriously.
Dear Eugene Balfour Declaration (what's in a name?);
You are too obviously a mollifier and a Zionist. To speak of an Iranian 'threat' while backing the modern Nazi Axis of Terror - the US and Israel (which has infiltrated the US) - who have, and continue, to perpetrate the greatest atrocities, in both quality and quantity, that the world has ever seen, is Evil.
To do so as voluminously and pedantically as you do is Sophist Perfidy of a perfectly nauseating kind. I know many Khazar 'jews' who think like you. They are a herd of Gadarene Swine. Go jump off a cliff!
Thank you Franz. Your hatred of my freedom of expression and thought has been noted.
I appreciate your candour. It shows how some people like you, who might appear civil and respectable in person, can be emboldened to reveal their true nature from behind the anonymity of a keyboard.
Can I assume that you live and work in Canada? If so, can I ask what it is about my views that offends you so grievously? After all, I offer just one small voice that will have no bearing on the outcome of foreign conflicts - as such, I am no threat to you.
Conversely, I do feel great concern for the health and safety of my loved ones here in Canada from those same foreign conflicts.
Are you suggesting that I have no right to express those concerns?
Do you believe that your concerns are the only ones acceptable for public discourse?
If so, from where does your authoritarian stance come? After all, as a Canadian (can I assume that you are?), you live under the same constitutional laws than I do.
I suggest that you read the Canadian Bill of Rights and reply will your arguments as to how it grants you the right to attack my views publicly. And if you somehow believe I have an obligation to take your side on a foreign conflicts and request my support, calling me names is a weak strategy.
I do apologize to Trish, as your questions were directed at her but this is an open forum so I interjected my response to your 'questions'.
In no particular order:
The Charter of Rights and Freedoms has been abrogated by the Liberal Government in the cases surrounding the Freedom Convoy persecutions by the various Ministers and Trudeau cabinet, thus setting the precedent for future 'events' (e.g. Protests of any kind).
The Charter has a 'notwithstanding clause' making it 'alienable' and 'at the pleasure of the crown/state'. You should have known this, as a Canadian.
Your Provincialism, makes you indifferent to human rights and the person-hood of anyone that you do not identify with. Your special attitude to Iran, denies their humanity as I suspect it denies the humanity of Palestinians being subjected to genocide in Gaza, Palestine. This is a casual and odious xenophobia and cognitive dissonance of the sort that the population of Germany is blamed for to this day - namely that they did not 'stop' the thing that happened in Germany. The world claims to be far more global now, why do you think so locally (Provincially? Is your fault not greater that that ascribed to the Germans?
You are not "one small voice' - you happen to sing, knowingly or not, in a choir of Zionist-influenced and manipulated, primarily Western, public opinion.
As for your "right" to anything, you do not have one in Canada for the reasons I stated above.
Perhaps you should, as a human concerned "for the health and safety of my loved ones here in Canada" spare a little of that concern for the "health and safety" of a broader circle called the human race.
Simone Weil wrote "No talk of rights, without talk of responsibilities" and she was correct in this. You delimit your responsibilities to "loved ones" but deny them to the billions of people which you seem to, somewhat vaguely, hate.
Your sweet-talk of rights, is actually richly mixed with veiled threats and an almost palpable sense of entitlement to whatever group it is you are currently identifying with, to the exclusion of all others.
Your opening line, "Your hatred of my freedom of expression and thought has been noted," quite tragi-comically, is an echo of an earlier disastrous set of actual, not imagined, 'virtuous' war crimes unleashed by Bush the Second and his supporters Bush said: "They hate us for our freedoms."
Finally, to take seriously the alleged 'adjudication rights' in the matter of the use of nuclear weapons by a state which has used them twice already, on civilians populations is absurd. If needed, add to that the fact that the other co-belligerent with Iran is a state which has signed no nuclear treaties, does not admit to, but winks about having them, and as their 'Samson Option' clearly grants itself the 'right' to use them.
Do you not think that you are favoring the wrong side when trying to save your 'loved ones' from harm?
It is not freedom of expression that I hate. It is creepy and odious, narrowly-selfish,
exclusionary, and globally dangerous 'thoughts' such as yours. Express them all you want. But "Do not" as the abrogator of Canada's Charter of Rights and Freedoms Trudeau, said "...expect to sit beside normal people on a bus" nor, I might add, not get a response in a public forum.
By the way, I assume you have a dog the that fight which explains why you are well informed and passionate about the topic. I am sorry that it hurts you so deeply.
I also have no idea who Simone Weil is. Anything that she has to say carries little water with me. I could quote from dozens of books that I have read, and two of my own that I published, but they will likely not carry water for you also.
You preach about ‘responsibility’ to me, a man you know nothing about. My life lens is radically different than yours. If you want to know what I mean by this, ask GROK to summarize the contribution in The MINDVERSE Hypothesis to current philosophical thought. I have GROK a pdf copy yesterday. I am waiting for it to be published in the Journal of Consciousness Studied in the Fall.
My 'dog in the fight' is called Human. His family name is 'Race'. Ever met him? He only bites when someone deserves it.
I know a lot about you. Iran went to Beidu today for global positioning and other needs. I use Logos. That system has been working flawlessly for hundreds of thousands of years.
I am interested in the fact that you seem to equate 'knowledge' with 'having a dog in the fight'. I assume from that that you also believe that 'everyone has their own truth' and that therefore no such thing as Truth exists.
If the above is true, why are you even here pretending to 'discuss' things?
Her intellectual prudence and her fervour make Simone Weil hard to classify: she was a pacifist, but thought that the Allies shouldn’t capitulate to Germany. She was an anarchist, but thought that attachment to one’s homeland is a good thing. She abhorred capitalism, but considered herself neither a communist nor a socialist. In the workers’ strikes of 1936 she experienced “pure joy”, “without mixture”; but she was wary of collective movements that destroy thought. Jewish by origin, she converted to Catholicism following a mystical experience, at the age of 27, and yet she rejected the authoritarianism of the Church. She saw the Marxist revolution as an illusory opium, but condemned reformism as a guilty form of inaction. She still had so much to say about the world when she almost let herself die of malnutrition at the age of 34 after joining the Free French movement in London.
All these contradictions could leave the impression of an incoherent person, prone to fragmented and anarchic thinking; or, even worse, of someone who, out of vanity or ease, took a non-conformist stance out of principle. But the tensions of Simone Weil’s life and work serve above all as proof that she always put her ideas to the test of real life. And so the complexity of reality inevitably ended up permeating her thinking.
My comments.
Simone was an activist in Europe in the era of WW1 and WW2. Her interests and concerns were relevant for her times, her Jewish heritage, and her socio-economic circumstances. Has it occurred to you that maybe her dated perspectives may my be relevant to people living in Canada in 2025 who do not possess a Jewish heritage or socio-economic circumstances like hers?
Why quote some who is so irrelevant to the vast majority of Canadian citizens? There are so many more contemporary thinkers whose interests and priorities are better synchronized with those of average Canadians. Who not quote them and issues that relate to the cost of housing, food, energy and excessively rapacious governments? Or are you not a Canadian citizen? (I don’t know you so I have no idea about you or even if your true name is Franz Kafka).
There is not much point in having a dialogue with you. “There are none so blind as one who will not see (or listen, or consider another point of view respectly”. Your “human race” is your cause. Please keep it to yourself willout criticizing others who don’t share your virtue-signalling delusions.
For the most thorough and professional appraisal and discussion about the latest strikes on Iran, featuring a panel of smart analysts and veteran commentators who truly understand the regional conflicts, you won't find better than this:
I have been listening to Dave Smith and Candace Owens who both voted for Trump because he was not a war monger and promised to negotiate peace. Tulsi Gabbard claimed a few months ago that Iran had no nuclear weapons! Many MAGA supporters are dismayed and feel betrayed by Trump. I’ve seen clips of Tucker challenging Cruz…this is Iraq all over again however I believe more Americans are going to rise up and revolt against being drawn into Israel’s war. In fact it appears every US backed war in the Middle East benefitted Israel in the end not the US. This is concerning!
Anyone who watched the 9/11 attack live on TV as l did from my livingroom in Manchester England 2pm local time, then watched as the whole Bush/Blair (Israel) story unfolded should have seen this coming. Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and, finally Iran. Seven countries in five years was always the plan.
I'm sorry but, l am so tired of politicians, journalists and reporters feigning shock and horror over Israel's unprovoked attack on Iran on 13/6 in the same way the whole world was taken by surprise on 7/10 and the ramped up genocide of the Palestinians that ensued.
If this is all about religion and a mythical war between good and evil, then it's obvious evil is winning. The Zionists want amolek and the rapture and we in the west keep electing feckless politicians that haven't got a clue.
Having actually listened to the entire interview, some thoughts. Tucker, while I believe he is on the right track via the Iran issue, interrupted Cruz too much, kept using the "Newman'esque" - so what you're saying is, type interjections, and made the interview hard to follow in some sections. Trish should know, as an interviewer, that you should allow an interviewee to answer/formulate their answers to pointed questions. I get that Tuckers style is to "sort of" provide commentary while listening to answers, but at some points the interview was hard to listen to and was incoherent. How can you understand what someone thinks if you don't let them answer without interrupting with multiple add-on questions and suppositions. I do think Tucker is being criticized without merit for being some kind of anti-semite. A poor interviewer (at least in this case), sure. The woodshed? I actually thought Cruz kept his cool the entire time, did not resort to "snark", like Tucker, and tried to answer the questions. Did you like the answers? That's up to you to decide. As an interview, Cruz came off better than Tucker IMO. Tucker came off, at times, argumentative, aloof and overly defensive. On a scale of 1 to 10, I give Cruz a 7 for staying poised against Tuckers "snark"; Tucker - 8 for fearlessly challenging Cruz (however incoherently), but a 5 for his approach. I don't think the interview was productive, by and large, except as a spectacle for click bait. Final score: 5 out 10. Tuckers interview style is hurting him right now, so expect to see the warhawks, neocons and haters attacking him relentlessly. He deserves criticism for conducting a bad interview but not hate for his personal stance.
America has been attacking us all for years with weaponised psyops and subliminal manipulation. Such foulness is being exposed everywhere. Truly a terrorist attack on us all. My friends are sick and dying from the american killshots and many will never have children now.... This is americas war against us all. Mass murder. Truly the most evil satanic psychopathic nation on the planet. Truth is americas greatest enemy. Exposing their evil destroys them. I feel sorry for all those good people who are waking up to the shameful acts committed by their own nation against the world. Together we can push for reparation but to cheer about your "greatness" shows your proudness of all the vileness commited by your people against the world.
The ninety million people living under the thumb of the IRG for forty years are already celebrating and hundreds of the top shelf Iranian govt are fleeing as fast as they can . Israel’s intelligence regime is stunned that the Hezbollah have left the room , no one saw the regime built and financed by Iran saying sayonara . See dozens of videos of school kids hysterically cheering the current activity in Iran . The out come of this will be a major surprise to many many people in the world .
Imagine hating Jews so much that you end up defending a terrorist regime that literally kills women for showing their hair. Talk about a perversion of one's politics, and a failure of one's moral compass.
Would love to, but you are a 'goner'. To talk such evil, racist, bigoted rubbish so glibly tells me that triage is needed in this case. And you are a goner. Change your shirt, your shoes, your religion, what you think to know, and your life. Then you may come right in the end. Start now and apologize for your nasty unforgivable and hate-fuelled post.
As WWI American hero, General Smedley Butler, once said in a speech back around 1935 "War is a racket." Dire prognostications of an enemy state that requires preemptive attack galvanizes a lazy, distracted, public with an oversupply of free floating anxiety. The demons are all about us, pointing to the latest nation to put in the crosshairs of the war machine. And the shareholders of arms manufacturers and the boards of directors of these companies are very happy, especially as they sell weapons often to both sides.
Leonard Cohen wrote "You want it darker" in one of his last albums. I guess the answer is that we do, or at least those who lead us into war are banking on the population to be trained once again to believe war is the only solution to this latest international impasse.
Many thoughts come to mind when watching Cruz but put simply he is an ignoramus, a psychopath and a thug. I want to throw in that he is a pretentious, vulgar twat as well, but I wonder, is that being too Baroque?
Thank you for sharing your thoughts Trish, you wear your deep knowledge of life and media lies so lightly - it feels sometimes like I am dancing a sad waltz with you.
Trish. I have one question for you.
If Iran has to strike Israel with a nuclear bomb on the scale of Hiroshima in the summer of 2026, what would you be saying if the American decision to eliminate the three known uranium enrichment sites and key leaders had been planned but not executed?
Put another way, America has a chance to eliminate the potential for such a future Iranian strike today. The Ayatollah and others in Iran leaders are known to want “death to Israel” and “death to America” with no capability to credibility act on that desire. Are you willing to gamble on Iran achieving a nuclear bomb destined for Israel.
Points to consider:
1. Diplomacy has failed. Iran shows no signs of stopping efforts to build a nuclear bomb.
2. You are critical of Trump and others in American leadership, but you do not have access to his knowledge nor the details that go into such a serious decision to take out the Iranian nuclear threat. Are you really the best person to second guess their decision when you champion “critical thinking” yet sound critical thinking depends heavily on reliable and trustworthy facts and insights into the political and economic factors that orbit such decisions.
3. What does “America First” mean to you personally, given that you are Canadian? I am also a Canadian who has no vote in America. Its foreign policies will affect me, but I feel totally unqualified to second guess Trump et al regarding its policies and actions. My Canadian vote is just as feeble since Carney et al don’t know I exist or what I want to protect my family from the consequences of America’s actions. We are helpless, and no amount of talking or lobbying public representatives will change that fact.
Finally, your discussion about the tenuous Trump-Musk bromance came across as schoolyard gossip. Yes, we want leaders you are transparent and accountable to the people they represent, but to dwell upon the spat that those two men have undertaken publicly may be popular in gossip rags but are beneath the classy standards I expect from your show.
Another comment. Tucker Carlson was horrible in his interview with Ted Cruz. Disrespectful doesn’t begin to describe Tucker’s performance for a man who carries a huge responsibility with many legitimate variables to consider before he makes decisions and takes actions. If Tucker wants to make decisions on behalf of the American people, he should get elected and rise to the heights of power that Trump and Cruz have done. Until then, respect is required even if Tucker does not agree with the current foreign policies of the current administration.
This may help
https://open.substack.com/pub/gbalfour/p/discussing-the-human-mind?r=16emgc&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web&showWelcomeOnShare=false
Great start… “I think it will be wasted on you”.
Please note that I referred you to the 1962 Bill of Rights, not Trudeau Sr’s flawed Charter.
I fully agree that none of our enforcement institutions at any level of have enforced the Bill of Rights or (or even the good parts of the flawed Charter) faithfully, or in the interest of Canadians.
“Your Provincialism” is another ‘tell’ of your bigotry and authoritarian views. I have every right to support whatever causes I wish, and wonder why you feel entitled to define me with your straw man arguments. Have I defined you, or accused you of not living up to my expectations on a matter that is important to me? Have you somehow concluded that I have unlimited time, attention and resource from which I must carve out some to avoid being condemned by you as “provincial?”
You suggest that I show more concern for the “human race”. I deal with people one at a time because individual persons are real and collective constructs like “the greater good” and “the human race” are intangibles. You can argue on the basis of all the “collective nostrums” you like, but all such sentiments are nothing more than virtue signalling to me. If you want to pretend that you care about the 8 billion people on the planet, be my guest, but don’t expect me to take you seriously.
Dear Eugene Balfour Declaration (what's in a name?);
You are too obviously a mollifier and a Zionist. To speak of an Iranian 'threat' while backing the modern Nazi Axis of Terror - the US and Israel (which has infiltrated the US) - who have, and continue, to perpetrate the greatest atrocities, in both quality and quantity, that the world has ever seen, is Evil.
To do so as voluminously and pedantically as you do is Sophist Perfidy of a perfectly nauseating kind. I know many Khazar 'jews' who think like you. They are a herd of Gadarene Swine. Go jump off a cliff!
Thank you Franz. Your hatred of my freedom of expression and thought has been noted.
I appreciate your candour. It shows how some people like you, who might appear civil and respectable in person, can be emboldened to reveal their true nature from behind the anonymity of a keyboard.
Can I assume that you live and work in Canada? If so, can I ask what it is about my views that offends you so grievously? After all, I offer just one small voice that will have no bearing on the outcome of foreign conflicts - as such, I am no threat to you.
Conversely, I do feel great concern for the health and safety of my loved ones here in Canada from those same foreign conflicts.
Are you suggesting that I have no right to express those concerns?
Do you believe that your concerns are the only ones acceptable for public discourse?
If so, from where does your authoritarian stance come? After all, as a Canadian (can I assume that you are?), you live under the same constitutional laws than I do.
I suggest that you read the Canadian Bill of Rights and reply will your arguments as to how it grants you the right to attack my views publicly. And if you somehow believe I have an obligation to take your side on a foreign conflicts and request my support, calling me names is a weak strategy.
Thank you for your attention to this matter.
I do apologize to Trish, as your questions were directed at her but this is an open forum so I interjected my response to your 'questions'.
In no particular order:
The Charter of Rights and Freedoms has been abrogated by the Liberal Government in the cases surrounding the Freedom Convoy persecutions by the various Ministers and Trudeau cabinet, thus setting the precedent for future 'events' (e.g. Protests of any kind).
The Charter has a 'notwithstanding clause' making it 'alienable' and 'at the pleasure of the crown/state'. You should have known this, as a Canadian.
Your Provincialism, makes you indifferent to human rights and the person-hood of anyone that you do not identify with. Your special attitude to Iran, denies their humanity as I suspect it denies the humanity of Palestinians being subjected to genocide in Gaza, Palestine. This is a casual and odious xenophobia and cognitive dissonance of the sort that the population of Germany is blamed for to this day - namely that they did not 'stop' the thing that happened in Germany. The world claims to be far more global now, why do you think so locally (Provincially? Is your fault not greater that that ascribed to the Germans?
You are not "one small voice' - you happen to sing, knowingly or not, in a choir of Zionist-influenced and manipulated, primarily Western, public opinion.
As for your "right" to anything, you do not have one in Canada for the reasons I stated above.
Perhaps you should, as a human concerned "for the health and safety of my loved ones here in Canada" spare a little of that concern for the "health and safety" of a broader circle called the human race.
Simone Weil wrote "No talk of rights, without talk of responsibilities" and she was correct in this. You delimit your responsibilities to "loved ones" but deny them to the billions of people which you seem to, somewhat vaguely, hate.
Your sweet-talk of rights, is actually richly mixed with veiled threats and an almost palpable sense of entitlement to whatever group it is you are currently identifying with, to the exclusion of all others.
Your opening line, "Your hatred of my freedom of expression and thought has been noted," quite tragi-comically, is an echo of an earlier disastrous set of actual, not imagined, 'virtuous' war crimes unleashed by Bush the Second and his supporters Bush said: "They hate us for our freedoms."
Finally, to take seriously the alleged 'adjudication rights' in the matter of the use of nuclear weapons by a state which has used them twice already, on civilians populations is absurd. If needed, add to that the fact that the other co-belligerent with Iran is a state which has signed no nuclear treaties, does not admit to, but winks about having them, and as their 'Samson Option' clearly grants itself the 'right' to use them.
Do you not think that you are favoring the wrong side when trying to save your 'loved ones' from harm?
It is not freedom of expression that I hate. It is creepy and odious, narrowly-selfish,
exclusionary, and globally dangerous 'thoughts' such as yours. Express them all you want. But "Do not" as the abrogator of Canada's Charter of Rights and Freedoms Trudeau, said "...expect to sit beside normal people on a bus" nor, I might add, not get a response in a public forum.
By the way, I assume you have a dog the that fight which explains why you are well informed and passionate about the topic. I am sorry that it hurts you so deeply.
I also have no idea who Simone Weil is. Anything that she has to say carries little water with me. I could quote from dozens of books that I have read, and two of my own that I published, but they will likely not carry water for you also.
You preach about ‘responsibility’ to me, a man you know nothing about. My life lens is radically different than yours. If you want to know what I mean by this, ask GROK to summarize the contribution in The MINDVERSE Hypothesis to current philosophical thought. I have GROK a pdf copy yesterday. I am waiting for it to be published in the Journal of Consciousness Studied in the Fall.
My 'dog in the fight' is called Human. His family name is 'Race'. Ever met him? He only bites when someone deserves it.
I know a lot about you. Iran went to Beidu today for global positioning and other needs. I use Logos. That system has been working flawlessly for hundreds of thousands of years.
I am interested in the fact that you seem to equate 'knowledge' with 'having a dog in the fight'. I assume from that that you also believe that 'everyone has their own truth' and that therefore no such thing as Truth exists.
If the above is true, why are you even here pretending to 'discuss' things?
about Simone Weil, I found this….
Her intellectual prudence and her fervour make Simone Weil hard to classify: she was a pacifist, but thought that the Allies shouldn’t capitulate to Germany. She was an anarchist, but thought that attachment to one’s homeland is a good thing. She abhorred capitalism, but considered herself neither a communist nor a socialist. In the workers’ strikes of 1936 she experienced “pure joy”, “without mixture”; but she was wary of collective movements that destroy thought. Jewish by origin, she converted to Catholicism following a mystical experience, at the age of 27, and yet she rejected the authoritarianism of the Church. She saw the Marxist revolution as an illusory opium, but condemned reformism as a guilty form of inaction. She still had so much to say about the world when she almost let herself die of malnutrition at the age of 34 after joining the Free French movement in London.
All these contradictions could leave the impression of an incoherent person, prone to fragmented and anarchic thinking; or, even worse, of someone who, out of vanity or ease, took a non-conformist stance out of principle. But the tensions of Simone Weil’s life and work serve above all as proof that she always put her ideas to the test of real life. And so the complexity of reality inevitably ended up permeating her thinking.
My comments.
Simone was an activist in Europe in the era of WW1 and WW2. Her interests and concerns were relevant for her times, her Jewish heritage, and her socio-economic circumstances. Has it occurred to you that maybe her dated perspectives may my be relevant to people living in Canada in 2025 who do not possess a Jewish heritage or socio-economic circumstances like hers?
Why quote some who is so irrelevant to the vast majority of Canadian citizens? There are so many more contemporary thinkers whose interests and priorities are better synchronized with those of average Canadians. Who not quote them and issues that relate to the cost of housing, food, energy and excessively rapacious governments? Or are you not a Canadian citizen? (I don’t know you so I have no idea about you or even if your true name is Franz Kafka).
There is not much point in having a dialogue with you. “There are none so blind as one who will not see (or listen, or consider another point of view respectly”. Your “human race” is your cause. Please keep it to yourself willout criticizing others who don’t share your virtue-signalling delusions.
Grok ‘Simone Weill’ - even though that sounds quite obscene. I do not “Grok” nor do I look at “fact-checking” sites. I know who runs them and why.
But here is another litmus test for you: https://open.substack.com/pub/normalislandnews/p/glastonbury-to-be-banned-after-kneecap?r=1d5s28&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=email
Any ‘feelings’ or ‘consciousness’ evoked by this?
https://open.substack.com/pub/beeley/p/suffering-beside-the-innocent-is?r=1d5s28&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=email
Persecuted Iranian Christians Break Their Silence
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lHiAxs3cuTA
Also worth a visit.
For the most thorough and professional appraisal and discussion about the latest strikes on Iran, featuring a panel of smart analysts and veteran commentators who truly understand the regional conflicts, you won't find better than this:
https://youtu.be/9Ymory2Fgdc?si=uGUZ8bKXdIlC2VSq
You're welcome!
Cruz is the entire herd of Gadarene swine.
I have been listening to Dave Smith and Candace Owens who both voted for Trump because he was not a war monger and promised to negotiate peace. Tulsi Gabbard claimed a few months ago that Iran had no nuclear weapons! Many MAGA supporters are dismayed and feel betrayed by Trump. I’ve seen clips of Tucker challenging Cruz…this is Iraq all over again however I believe more Americans are going to rise up and revolt against being drawn into Israel’s war. In fact it appears every US backed war in the Middle East benefitted Israel in the end not the US. This is concerning!
Anyone who watched the 9/11 attack live on TV as l did from my livingroom in Manchester England 2pm local time, then watched as the whole Bush/Blair (Israel) story unfolded should have seen this coming. Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and, finally Iran. Seven countries in five years was always the plan.
I'm sorry but, l am so tired of politicians, journalists and reporters feigning shock and horror over Israel's unprovoked attack on Iran on 13/6 in the same way the whole world was taken by surprise on 7/10 and the ramped up genocide of the Palestinians that ensued.
If this is all about religion and a mythical war between good and evil, then it's obvious evil is winning. The Zionists want amolek and the rapture and we in the west keep electing feckless politicians that haven't got a clue.
Having actually listened to the entire interview, some thoughts. Tucker, while I believe he is on the right track via the Iran issue, interrupted Cruz too much, kept using the "Newman'esque" - so what you're saying is, type interjections, and made the interview hard to follow in some sections. Trish should know, as an interviewer, that you should allow an interviewee to answer/formulate their answers to pointed questions. I get that Tuckers style is to "sort of" provide commentary while listening to answers, but at some points the interview was hard to listen to and was incoherent. How can you understand what someone thinks if you don't let them answer without interrupting with multiple add-on questions and suppositions. I do think Tucker is being criticized without merit for being some kind of anti-semite. A poor interviewer (at least in this case), sure. The woodshed? I actually thought Cruz kept his cool the entire time, did not resort to "snark", like Tucker, and tried to answer the questions. Did you like the answers? That's up to you to decide. As an interview, Cruz came off better than Tucker IMO. Tucker came off, at times, argumentative, aloof and overly defensive. On a scale of 1 to 10, I give Cruz a 7 for staying poised against Tuckers "snark"; Tucker - 8 for fearlessly challenging Cruz (however incoherently), but a 5 for his approach. I don't think the interview was productive, by and large, except as a spectacle for click bait. Final score: 5 out 10. Tuckers interview style is hurting him right now, so expect to see the warhawks, neocons and haters attacking him relentlessly. He deserves criticism for conducting a bad interview but not hate for his personal stance.
You are all about style, not content.
America has been attacking us all for years with weaponised psyops and subliminal manipulation. Such foulness is being exposed everywhere. Truly a terrorist attack on us all. My friends are sick and dying from the american killshots and many will never have children now.... This is americas war against us all. Mass murder. Truly the most evil satanic psychopathic nation on the planet. Truth is americas greatest enemy. Exposing their evil destroys them. I feel sorry for all those good people who are waking up to the shameful acts committed by their own nation against the world. Together we can push for reparation but to cheer about your "greatness" shows your proudness of all the vileness commited by your people against the world.
Love your critical outlook..you tell it like it is...don't let anyone convince you otherwise!
The ninety million people living under the thumb of the IRG for forty years are already celebrating and hundreds of the top shelf Iranian govt are fleeing as fast as they can . Israel’s intelligence regime is stunned that the Hezbollah have left the room , no one saw the regime built and financed by Iran saying sayonara . See dozens of videos of school kids hysterically cheering the current activity in Iran . The out come of this will be a major surprise to many many people in the world .
Imagine hating Jews so much that you end up defending a terrorist regime that literally kills women for showing their hair. Talk about a perversion of one's politics, and a failure of one's moral compass.
What is alarmingly perverse is your selective skewing of reality.
Such as? Where have I gone off reality? Please inform. Happy to debate.
Would love to, but you are a 'goner'. To talk such evil, racist, bigoted rubbish so glibly tells me that triage is needed in this case. And you are a goner. Change your shirt, your shoes, your religion, what you think to know, and your life. Then you may come right in the end. Start now and apologize for your nasty unforgivable and hate-fuelled post.
Okay. I've changed my shirt, shoes, religion, and life.
Now, are you okay?
Do you know how to debate? It starts with a position. What is yours?
Some things are not debatable. Genocide is one of them. Grow up.
Ad hominems not admissable in a debate, sorry.
Let me help? Your position might go something like this:
"Israel has gone from genociding Gaza to genociding Iran."
Would that be about right?
As WWI American hero, General Smedley Butler, once said in a speech back around 1935 "War is a racket." Dire prognostications of an enemy state that requires preemptive attack galvanizes a lazy, distracted, public with an oversupply of free floating anxiety. The demons are all about us, pointing to the latest nation to put in the crosshairs of the war machine. And the shareholders of arms manufacturers and the boards of directors of these companies are very happy, especially as they sell weapons often to both sides.
Leonard Cohen wrote "You want it darker" in one of his last albums. I guess the answer is that we do, or at least those who lead us into war are banking on the population to be trained once again to believe war is the only solution to this latest international impasse.
Here's my take on the Israel-Iran war where I'm critical of both sides. What about the experience of Canadians who criticize Israeli? Tony Hall
https://anthonyjhall.substack.com/p/from-decapitation-to-obliteration
Thank you for continuing to call it as you see it.
I wonder if Trump believes Iran tried to assassinate him so now we have what appears to be an abrupt face on regime change?