I pondered for a while on whether to make this post or not, because what it says, or rather what the video portrays the speaker as saying, to my mind comes from ignorance rather than from truth. But for the most part, what is said, largely agrees with what I hold to be the truth. And so I decided to post it, regardless.
In any case, what is truth? There is no truth, because if there were, we would surely by now have come to some consensus as to what that truth actually is, and could get on with our lives happy in the knowledge that we don’t need to keep on arguing constantly over petty differences of opinion. That will never happen of course, even if there is a ‘great reset’ and we are all coerced into accepting a version of the truth – or we are canceled, permanently, thereby removing dissent, or a new breed of humans is engineered to be incapable of dissent, superseding our present argumentative rather than obsequious variety. But even then, that would not necessarily represent anything like the truth, other than what is wanted by some party to be seen as the truth.
Every single one of us has our own truth. Few of those truths intersect to any great degree. Partly, or maybe much more than partly, due to feigned or learned ignorance. And the remainder due to how we all think differently, possibly fostered by our individual life experiences as much as what we may have been taught.
One thing is clear. To live in any state of balanced mindedness, one should never believe anything we are told by others – no matter who they are – without subjecting those thoughts for agreement or otherwise to our world view of what is right and truthful. I am trying hard not to use the word ‘facts’ in this discourse, because there are, in fact, no facts at all which can ber relied on to be absolute truth. Especially those decreed as truth by such venerables as politicians, scientists, theologians, judges, ‘bosses’, ‘experts’, ‘leaders’ (at whatever level), your mother, your father (if you have one), your priest (or equivalent), police chiefs, Generals, scout leaders, tipsters, lobbyists, co-workers or relatives.
And even when you have performed that test, no matter how many times in your life (or even your day) you have done that, and even if that assessment agrees with how you think, then you have to understand that even your own way of thinking about the truth may be and likely is a faulty one. Only then can you reliably stand with or adjust slightly – in light of what you have just discovered – alter your views on the matter. Whatever the matter is.
Note that I have not discussed researching in written sources of knowledge. Well, honestly, who does research these days? Well I do. All the time. And research should always be part of the learning process. Perhaps the lack of research and the willingness to too readily accept what others say, is why the world has been able to be fooled into doing things no right minded human being, properly informed, would ever consider doing, over the past two years since early 2020. Think on that for a while.
Ok. I’m about done with that. Please note that I don’t expect any person to alter their way of thinking as a result of reading this. Nor do I expect many, out of the few who began, to actually have reached this far into the piece. It would be nice to be surprised though. What is baked into our near-to-mid term future relies on everybody keeping to the plan. It would be painful at this stage for anyone to freshly realise that things are not what they seem and ‘It’s Not About What They Say It’s About’. Better to go into that future with eyes wide shut (or something like that).
As soon as I saw the name and the face of Neil Oliver (the speaker on this video), and heard his voice, I knew I had seen him before, but couldn’t remember under what circumstances. He is of course an archeologist, historian, author and broadcaster, with most of his fame rising from series presentations on Britain’s BBC.
OK. Nearly there. Just two things I will say here. I disagree with some things he says, as I said before, and I want to correct a mistake he made in referring to ‘Mr Jinping’, President of PRC. The President is actually ‘Mr Xi’ – Jinping being his given name (or names, since I am not sure if there hasn’t been some joining of names there). In general, this would be forgivable, since there is no defined way (in the West at least) for ordering Chinese given and family names, and it is sometimes difficult – without knowing what is a family name, and vice versa – to make the right determination. But this is a world leader- one of the best (and most influential) – so in this case there is no excuse if users of the name have familiarised themselves with that particular truth out of respect to the individual. Of course Westerners these days are largely disrespectful and ignorant people. Something I would not have expected of ‘Mr Neil’ đŸ˜‰
“The Hypocrisy of the World ‘Leaders’.” – a powerful presentation by Neil Oliver published (shared) by ‘The Truth Is Where?’ (home of many fine essays combating the fictions of today)
I have not had the time to inspect this piece for typos and spelling errors. I beg your indulgence if such there are.
Not Something Else 
Reblogged this on muunyayo .