This is a video presentation of the final episode of a five-part podcast series entitled: "The Essence of the Problem That Lies Before Us". It was written in the middle of 2020, and it is one of many resources that have been posted to: https://www.billwhitehouse.com/Queries/index.html , during the COVID-19 crisis.
And, now, for something completely different! Although the foregoing opening is from Monty Python, the video accompanying this description is not a comedy, but, nonetheless, seeks to draw the audience's attention to some important issues just as the Monty Python sketches tried to do -- sometimes quite successfully and sometimes less successfully, and which of those two, foregoing possibilities might apply to the accompanying play will be up to you to decide.
The production costs for the play were about $37.00 dollars. Notwithstanding such a budget, the play has been years in the making (a lifetime really) and required considerable time to put together by a team of one.
The video gives expression to a complete play concerning the issue of sovereignty. The play runs for 3 hours and 20 minutes, with the first and third acts lasting about an hour each, while the second act comes in at about an hour and a quarter.
There are twelve characters, plus a moderator, who are featured in the play. Although I did not have access to human actors to play the different roles, I did attempt -- notwithstanding an extremely limited production budget and a cranky director -- to creatively improvise as best I could.
As the beginning of the video points out, the visual aspect of the video is quite static (moreover, just as the video indicates, I am working on adding a more dynamic dimension to the visual aspect of things for a later edition of the play), but, hopefully, this current defect will be compensated for by the quality of the issues that will be discussed during the course of the play ... issues that are relevant to what is transpiring in the world today. I suppose – given its limitations -- one might consider the current offering a far off-Broadway production.
Try to keep in mind that the setting for the play is just a vehicle for transporting ideas to an audience. That setting does not necessarily have to be realistic in order to have a potential for some degree of effectiveness.
If you like, you can download the video and engage it at your leisure. Alternatively, you can just attend to the play via my channel on Odysee.
And, now, for something completely different! Although the foregoing opening is from Monty Python, the video accompanying this description is not a comedy, but, nonetheless, seeks to draw the audience's attention to some important issues just as the Monty Python sketches tried to do -- sometimes quite successfully and sometimes less successfully, and which of those two, foregoing possibilities might apply to the accompanying play will be up to you to decide.
The production costs for the play were about $37.00 dollars. Notwithstanding such a budget, the play has been years in the making (a lifetime really) and required considerable time to put together by a team of one.
The video gives expression to a complete play concerning the issue of sovereignty. The play runs for 3 hours and 20 minutes, with the first and third acts lasting about an hour each, while the second act comes in at about an hour and a quarter.
There are twelve characters, plus a moderator, who are featured in the play. Although I did not have access to human actors to play the different roles, I did attempt -- notwithstanding an extremely limited production budget and a cranky director -- to creatively improvise as best I could.
As the beginning of the video points out, the visual aspect of the video is quite static (moreover, just as the video indicates, I am working on adding a more dynamic dimension to the visual aspect of things for a later edition of the play), but, hopefully, this current defect will be compensated for by the quality of the issues that will be discussed during the course of the play ... issues that are relevant to what is transpiring in the world today. I suppose – given its limitations -- one might consider the current offering a far off-Broadway production.
Try to keep in mind that the setting for the play is just a vehicle for transporting ideas to an audience. That setting does not necessarily have to be realistic in order to have a potential for some degree of effectiveness.
If you like, you can download the video and engage it at your leisure. Alternatively, you can just attend to the play via my channel on Odysee.
In either case, just close your eyes, sit back, relax with your favorite form of libation and/or snack nearby, and listen to the tale that is being spun during the play. However, don’t forget to critically reflect on the ideas that will be cast before you during the course of the play.
I don't think there are many plays that are on Odysee, so, in that sense, the current presentation will be something that is, indeed, completely different. Despite such differences, I hope you will enjoy the production ... as well as, hopefully, cut me some slack for trying to do a lot with very little money and limited resources.
An overview of how the American Constitution has been abused by the judiciary, congressional, and executive branches of both federal and state forms of governance at the expense of the sovereignty of the people. In addition, some comments and recommendations are offered concerning the need for, and nature of, a sovereignty project that might be the only way to constructively redeem the sullied promise of a republic that is fast disappearing.
There is a great deal of discussion these days among various Muslims about the topic of "revivalism" -- that is, the process of reviving, or bringing back, what someone believes to be the original nature of Islam. In conjunction with such notions, one also hears about the idea of shari'ah which often is referred to as "Divine Law". I believe that many aspects of the foregoing kinds of discussion are problematic and stand in need of a course correction ... a correction which I believe the mystical path has the potential to offer. The present talk provides an overview of both the nature of the problem and the character of the solution.
The following material encompasses an interview that was conducted by Dr. Len Ber of Targeted Justice --https://www.targetedjustice.com/ -- in late January of 2024. For those who are unfamiliar with the term, “Targeted Individuals” are people who are being terrorized everyday of the week by: Various government agents, would-be overlords of the corporate sector, medical people who lack ethics and integrity, academic experimenters who care only about their careers, military black operatives, abusers of the policing system (on a federal, state, and local level), as well as independent contractors who are willing to torture people for a buck. These perpetrators use a variety of protocols governing wireless networks of energy that been have established by the IEEE (Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers) and which have enabled unscrupulous, greedy, and self-serving individuals to subject people all over the world (estimated to consist of some 6,000,000 individuals) to programs (operated both through systems of artificial intelligence as well as manual apps on mobile phones, iPads, or computers) that seek to impose physical, emotional, and cognitive torture as well as mind-control programs on innocent people. The phenomenon of the Havana Syndrome is but one expression of the world-wide program of terror that is being run by people that many modalities of media are actively protecting and attempting to keep hidden from a more wide-spread public awareness.
This video seeks to offer a critically reflective tour through not only some of the Constitutional dimensions of the COVID-19 crisis(at least as those dimensions pertain to constitutional possibilities in America), but, as well, the video undertakes forays into a number of issues involving public health, virology, PCR testing, immunity, and medicine. The latter part of the video also touches on some of the work of Stanley Milgram and Philip Zimbardo by offering a brief overview concerning how two of their experiments in particular have considerable relevance for many of the controversies that surround, and are entailed by, the events to which COVID-19 has given rise.
Quite frequently, the biggest obstacle to being able to properly understand various issues is not necessarily a function of ignorance but, instead, often tends to arise when we become entangled in the illusion that we believe we know something to be true when such a belief might not be tenable when critically examined. Hopefully, the Gaslighting video will provide potential viewers with an opportunity to meditate on a variety of issues of importance to everyday life.
For those who complete the foregoing journey, you will discover that near the end of the video there are directions for how to go about downloading a number of free e-books covering topics such as sovereignty, constitutionality, and education. And, no, you will not have to give your e-mail in exchange for those free books, nor will you required to join anything in order to acquire the foregoing material.
What’s the trick? There is none.
If you like the books, then, we both will be happy. If you don’t like the books, then, we both will be happy as well, because you didn’t lose any money to acquire them, and I didn’t receive any money for something you didn’t like.
Of course, if you are so inclined, you could skip to the last portion of the Gaslighting video and just take note of the information about the free books. However, I am hoping that you will be intrepid and explore the whole video … I feel doing so would be worth your while.
This is a video which compares Trump and Biden across 32 issues which, when critically reflected upon, seem to indicate that there are no essential differences between the two individuals when considered in terms of the metric of sovereignty. They each speak, in their own way, about the ideas of "freedom", "rights", "democracy", "justice", and so on, but, when one examines the things that they do, or don't do, then, whatever differences exist between the two individuals tend to be superficial in character – that is differences based on style, taste, and personality rather than being a function of essential, substantive, guiding principles. As indigenous people might say, the two aforementioned men seem to speak with forked tongues. In other words, they both are committed to speaking about political and economic ideologies rather than being committed to the principles of republicanism – the kind of principles to which Presidents (as well as members of Congress and the Judiciary) should be committed and the sorts of principles that are being guaranteed in Article IV, Section 4 of the Constitution. Nothing in the Constitution will work unless it is engaged through the qualities at the heart of republicanism, which is a moral philosophy that arose during the Enlightenment, and, consequently, emerged at a time that was not all that long before the transition took place which transformed people, states, and colonies into a country. Republicanism is not a political ideology but, rather, it gives expression to a way of treating people as human beings who matter – both individually and collectively -- rather than serving as a set of political techniques for treating people – both individually and collectively -- as political pawns who are to be manipulated into serving the vested interests of the overlords who are seeking to control money, resources, property, and the live of people. Furthermore, the apparent absence of the principles of republicanism in the actions and lives of Trump and Biden go a long way to explaining why both of their presidencies (along with virtually any other president one might wish to cite) were, and are, disasters for "We the People."
Some twelve years ago, or so, Michael Murphy, along with G. Edward Griffin and Paul Wittenberger, made the film: What In the World Are They Spraying?. The documentary featured, among others, Dane Wigington. During the 3-4 years following the release of that film, a dispute opened up between Murphy and Wigington with various allegations and counter-allegations taking place. The purpose of the accompanying video is not to resolve those differences but to show how that dispute leads to a much more important set of questions concerning the issue of geoengineering.