This is the entire interview with law professor Robert Diab. Robert is a professor of law at Thompson Rivers University in Kamloops, British Columbia.
This is a very valuable interview, not only for the admissions, but because Robert was professional and respectful throughout. Most of the time these interviews don’t go very well. It shows we don’t need to be lawyers to destroy political/government arguments and claims.
We also don’t need to have advanced degrees to defend ourselves when those called government attack us. While we need to prepare and learn how to defend against their attacks, as this video proves, it doesn’t take much to debunk these common claims, such as, if you’re physically in Canada, then political rules called “laws” apply to you.
Most notable in the interview is the admission the applicability of the “laws” has no rational grounds and certainly not one of evidence. As Robert points out, some men just asserted it, they said their laws apply. We’ve heard contemporary politicians also say they have jurisdiction because they said so. Robert also stated it was “a blunt assertion of power.”
If there is no evidence, no rational basis, just a blunt assertion of power [aggression], then wouldn’t it be morally justified to use force to stop their assertion of power? Given Robert’s statements, he is describing exactly what I have been saying governments are: criminals, every pretended “government” is just a criminal organization.
If you doubt this, then provide the rational basis for the applicability of political rules (“laws”) and the evidence proving they apply. Prove it is not just a blunt assertion of power by men and women (criminals). If you think you can do better than law professors and a chief justice of a Supreme Court, then by all means, please contact me or call into a live broadcast.
And if you’re defending against an attack, demand the evidence to support the prosecution’s claims. Don’t accept the excuse they don’t have to back up their claims, that’s prosecutorial misconduct and evidence you’ve been forced into a rigged game. It’s rigged because the prosecutor’s foundation argument is not subject to challenge.
You cannot prove a rule was violated if you cannot prove it applies in the first place. And rules don’t magically apply because we say so; there has to be a rational basis. And as Robert stated, there is no rational basis for the applicability of rules created by men and women called politicians.
[Update] The first video is the five minute clip I mentioned on the live broadcast.