This should present a good test of the Triveritas and its ability to assess truth claims and how warranted they are. Let’s see how it fairs:
The Claim: Judaism is the foundation of the free world, and the correct foundational structure of Western Civilization is: Judaism -> Christ -> Christianity -> USA.
L: Logical Validity
The claim fails L in at least three distinct ways.
First, it commits an equivocation between Judaism-as-ethnic-religion and Judaism-as-philosophical-system. The religious tradition that produced Christ was the Hebrew religion of the Second Temple, a diverse, internally fractured tradition that included Pharisees, Sadducees, Essenes, Zealots, and Hellenized diaspora Jews, among others. Modern rabbinical Judaism descends primarily from the Pharisaic tradition and was formalized after the destruction of the Second Temple in 70 AD, partly in explicit reaction against Christianity. Claiming that “Judaism” is the foundation of the free world conflates these into a single continuous entity, which is historically and theologically incoherent. The Judaism that exists today explicitly rejected the very element (Christ) that the chain claims it produced. You cannot simultaneously claim credit for the product and reject the product.
Second, the chain omits essential intermediate links. Even if the false theological genealogy were to be granted, the sequence Judaism -> Christ -> Christianity -> USA skips Greece, Rome, the Germanic tribal traditions, English common law, the Magna Carta, the Protestant Reformation, the Enlightenment, and the entire tradition of Anglo-Saxon political philosophy from which the American founding actually derived. The Founders cited Cicero, Locke, Montesquieu, and the English constitutional tradition far more than they cited Moses or the Torah. The logical structure of the chain presents a linear causal sequence while suppressing the majority of the actual causal inputs. This is not a simplification. It is a falsification. A chain that omits the most important links is not a chain. It is a narrative.
Third, it confuses necessary conditions with sufficient conditions and with foundational primacy. Even if Judaism was one of many inputs into the civilizational stream that eventually produced the American republic, being an upstream input does not make you “the foundation.” Water is upstream of hydroelectric power, but we do not call water “the foundation of electricity.” The Tigris and Euphrates are upstream of Western agriculture, but we do not call Mesopotamian irrigation “the foundation of the free world.” The claim takes one thread in a complex tapestry and declares it the entire loom.
L: 9/99 = Fail. Equivocation on “Judaism,” suppression of the majority of actual causal inputs (Greece, Rome, Germanic law, English constitutionalism, the Reformation, the Enlightenment), and confusion of upstream necessary conditions with foundational primacy. Three independent logical defects, any one of which is fatal.....
The claim fails all three dimensions. It is logically incoherent (equivocation, suppressed premises, confusion of necessary and sufficient conditions). It is mathematically incoherent in the plausibility-check sense (the predicted pattern does not match the observed distribution). It is empirically unanchored (the historical record directly contradicts it). Under the Triveritas, the claim does not merit warranted assent.
It has the structure of a claim but none of the substance. It exists to flatter a particular audience by placing them at the root of a civilizational genealogy they did not build. Every element is selected or distorted to serve the narrative rather than to describe what actually happened. The suppression of Greece, Rome, the Germanic traditions, and English constitutionalism is not an oversight. It is the point. The equivocation between the Hebrew religion and rabbinical Judaism is not a minor terminological slip. It is the mechanism by which the claim smuggles its conclusion into its first premise.
A score of 7/99 means the claim has almost no contact with reality on any dimension. It is not a good-faith attempt to describe civilizational history that gets some details wrong. It is a narrative constructed to reach a predetermined conclusion, with the evidence selected and distorted to fit. The Anti-Self-Sealing Principle identifies exactly this structure: a purely narrative system that substitutes storytelling for prediction, interprets all evidence as support, and never exposes itself to falsification by concrete data.
At 7/99, you are not in the territory of “debatable” or “oversimplified but defensible.” You are in the territory of a claim that fails every independent check available.
....This coordinated push worked against her before — it can bury this trailer before episode 1 even drops Don’t let the “discernment’ crowd spin this as brave truth-telling. It’s exploitation of tragedy.
II you’re in — hit reply with “In” and we’ll loop you into the next update.
For Charlie. For Erika For the kids. For what’s left of decency on our side.
Stay strong.
CU Team
(Forward-only — do not reply-all)
It’s not exactly hard to ID the ConJournoPros. Nor is it a surprise that the Boomers’ favorite social media performer, Catturd, is one of them. This is why you should never call yourself a “conservative”. It’s never been a coherent political philosophy or anything more than substance-free public posturing for self-appointed Public Decency Warriors.
And you can’t be a good PDW if you can’t muster a convicing “how dare you” from time to time.
The Fraudulent Scripture: Deconstructing the ‘Bless Israel’ Myth
The entire theological edifice of Christian Zionism rests on a manipulated and fraudulent interpretation of scripture. The key verse used to justify unconditional support for the modern state of Israel is commonly paraphrased as: ‘Those that bless Israel will be blessed, and those that curse Israel will be cursed, and all the world will be blessed through them.’ [6] However, this quote is a complete fabrication. It does not appear in any Bible.The actual verse, Genesis 12:3, reads: ‘And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee: and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed.’ [6] Crucially, the word ‘Israel’ is absent from the original Hebrew text and all major translations.
This scriptural fraud originated with John Nelson Darby and the 19th-century heresy of Dispensationalism, a theological system that divides history into distinct periods. [6] Darby’s framework was popularized through the Scofield Reference Bible, created by C.I. Scofield, a man accused of fraud and deceptive behavior prior to his ministry. [6] This corrupted interpretation was designed to create a separate destiny for a political ‘Israel,’ fundamentally distorting the biblical message of unity in Christ. As journalist Jeffrey Prather pointed out, ‘For most of Christian history, this verse was understood universally: the promise was ultimately fulfilled in Christ, a descendant of Abraham, through whom ‘ALL nations are blessed,’ not just the ethnic or political nation of Israel.’ [6] The entire justification is a modern invention, a brainwashing tool used to convince millions of Christians to support a supremacist project.
Philosophy needs methods, not merely principles. The most beautiful metaphysics is useless if it cannot be applied, if it provides no guidance for distinguishing true claims from false, no criterion for deciding what to believe. The Enlightenment understood this and offered scientific method as the criterion. The offer proved fraudulent: the scientific method became a rhetorical gesture rather than a practiced discipline, primarily invoked to legitimize conclusions reached by other means, and never actually applied to the Enlightenment’s core commitments.
Veriscendancy offers a genuine criterion: the Triad of Truth, the Triveritas. A claim merits assent and may be accepted as probably true when and only when it satisfies three conditions: logical validity, mathematical coherence, and empirical anchoring. Each condition is necessary; none is sufficient; the conjunction of all three elements is required......
....The Triad addresses this problem by requiring all three elements. Evidence alone can be accommodated to any sufficiently flexible theory. Logic alone can generate elegant systems with no relation to reality. Mathematics alone can become a game of formal manipulation. But evidence that is logically derived from coherent premises, that survives mathematical scrutiny, and that anchors the conclusions in observed phenomena is evidence that commands assent. The conjunction is demanding, far more demanding than false pretense of the scientific method as actually practiced in the credentialed science guilds. But truth is demanding. A criterion that was not demanding would not be worth constructing.
You can now buy the complete Veriphysics: The Treatise at Amazon in both Kindle and audiobook formats if you’d like to read ahead or have it available as a reference.
On the 25th day of September, 1957, the soldiers of the 101st Airborne Division pointed their rifle bayonets at the backs of White teenagers and forced them to integrate with blacks in the schools of Little Rock, Arkansas. This was 8 years before the passing of the Civil Rights Act officially desegregated the nation. 3 years previous to Little Rock, in 1954 a landmark Supreme Court decision, Brown v. Board of Education, became the basis for this incredible violation of posse cometatus. The ruling stated that segregated schools cannot be considered equal or constitutional, reasoning that being separate from White people causes blacks to feel inferior – that is, to have their feelings hurt. This conclusion was based on a crude sociological ‘study’ performed by the plaintiff’s NAACP lawyer where a White and black doll were shown to White and black children. They found that the White children preferred the White doll exclusively, but a lot of the black children also preferred the White doll. Yes, I’m serious.
Access to White people is a fundamental human right that can never be cruelly and unjustly denied. Disregard the fact that our White nation, founded and carved out by the blood of our ancestors, once stood to secure our interests, and Whites almost universally opposed forced racial integration – over 85% of the population. The minority that was in favor of desegregation were the Northern Whites who did not have to live in proximity to blacks, who, if they ever had met a black person, it was the rare exception who was on their best behavior, not enabled by being in a large group. While the high-minded, progressive Northerners publicly supported desegregation, privately they would never live around black people. Entire White neighborhoods up North invariably vacated quickly when blacks started moving in. Still, these Yanks vocally looked down their nose at the ignorant hicks down South and just couldn’t understand why they hated blacks for no reason other than the color of their skin. It couldn’t have anything to do with the fact that blacks, who make up just 13% of the population, commit over 55% of all violent crime, a figure that is even more remarkable when you consider that most of that crime is committed by black males between the age of 12-36, which means it is actually around 3% of the population that commits the majority of violent crime.
It should be clarified that the will of the Northerners was not what changed policy regarding segregation, rather it was the complete control of the subversive elements in the American government. For Southerners who did live around blacks, desegregation was vigorously opposed because they knew what being forced to mix with blacks meant. From a century of experience, they were all too familiar with the nature of the negro when left to his own devices. The idea of ‘separate but equal’ was established by the Supreme Court in 1896 with Plessy v. Ferguson and served both races well until the NAACP lawyer colluded with the Supreme Court justices behind the scenes and against the law to overturn the natural status quo. Alas, a committed minority of black agitators backed by Jewish lawfare resulted in the great United States Army, the supposed defenders of our Anglo-Saxon homeland, marching their fellow White citizens under threat of death into a devious and fatal social experiment, a nightmare which still has no end in sight........
The Trump Team is replete with China ‘hawks’, military hawks and trade hawks. But China knows what the U.S. plans – and has prepared. For now, Team Trump is focussed on separating the fronts: The U.S. cannot fight both Russia, China and Iran. So it is ‘Iran First’, then a weakening of Russia – plus a tightening of blockades and sieges around China.
Michael Vlahos, who taught war and strategy at the U.S. Naval War College, however, observes that:
“China represents today a military force that is the opposite of that which faced the U.S. in the Pacific in 1941. [AT that time] Japan, in terms of its military effectiveness and the size of its Navy, [wa]s really the equivalent of the U.S. and U.S. Navy today – whereas China is the equivalent of the U.S. as it was in 1941”.
“In other words, China has all the capacity to build and produce planes and ships. It has 200 times the ship-building capacity of the U.S. And the U.S. is in a position where today it cannot even maintain and repair the ships it has. If you look at American warships, they are covered in rust. It’s shameful”.
Yet the U.S. already has lost the more consequential war – the financial war.
Both Bessent and Rubio are following the same playbook, which economist Sean Foo calls “Neocon Basics 101”:
“The harsh reality for Bessent (and Trump) is that China’s trade surplus has reached an incredible $242 billion in Q4 last year – equivalent to 4.4% of GDP”.
The other side of the coin to this U.S. trade deficit is that whilst China’s trade with the U.S. is down by over 20% almost every month versus a year ago, with the rest of the world (including Africa and Asia), China’s exports are Up – and growing strongly.
Veriphysics does not pretend to religious neutrality.The Enlightenment feigned neutrality and wound up demonstrating its impossibility. A philosophy always rests on a foundation; the question is only whether that foundation is acknowledged or concealed. The Enlightenment’s concealed foundations, autonomous reason, mechanical nature, the separation of fact and value, proved incoherent, if not outright satanic. Veriphysic’s foundations are explicit, sound, and Christian.
This is not an fearful retreat from reason into the dogmatic faith of the fideists. Veriphsyics holds that faith and reason are intrinsically complementary, not contradictory. Reason investigates reality while faith provides access to truths that reason alone cannot reach. The two do not conflict because they cannot conflict: truth is one, and any apparent contradiction between the deliverances of reason and the revelations of faith merely indicates an error somewhere, committed somewhere in the reasoning, in the interpretation of the belief, or sometimes in both. The medieval formula remains valid, as philosophy is the handmaid of theology, not because philosophy is inferior per se, but because both ultimately serve the same mistress, which is Truth.......
....Veriphysics does not impose these truths dogmatically; it proposes them as the best explanation of phenomena that the Enlightenment cannot explain. Why is the universe intelligible? Why do mathematical structures describe physical reality? Why does consciousness exist? Why do human beings persistently seek meaning, justice, and transcendence? The Christian answers to these questions are coherent, comprehensive, and supported by two millennia of philosophical development.The Enlightenment’s answers are ad hoc, fragmented, and self-undermining, when it manages to provide any answers at all.The choice between Christian metaphysics and Enlightenment metaphysics is not faith versus reason, but rather, solid and coherent reason versus incoherent irrationality.
The Enlightenment’s metaphysics was materialist at its core. The universe was matter in motion, governed by deterministic laws, fully explicable in principle by the methods of physics. Mind was either reducible to matter or an epiphenomenal shadow cast by material processes. Purpose, meaning, and value were projections onto a universe that contained none of them intrinsically. The goal of science was to complete the mechanical picture, to fill in the remaining gaps, to achieve the God’s-eye view that would render everything transparent to human understanding.
The twentieth century destroyed this picture from within. The destruction came not from theology or philosophy but from physics itself, from the very science that was supposed to complete the materialist vision......
....The obvious implication is what the Christian tradition always maintained: material reality is not self-sufficient. The visible depends on the invisible. The natural participates in the supernatural. Creation reflects Creator. The mechanical universe was a brief hallucination, sustained for three centuries by the momentum of technological success and the institutional capture of intellectual life. The mysterious universe, saturated with indeterminacy, opaque to final explanation, pointing beyond itself to what transcends it, is what we actually inhabit.
This is not a “God of the gaps” argument, inserting divinity wherever science has not yet reached. It is the exact opposite: the recognition that the gaps are not temporary deficiencies to be filled by future research but the structural features of creaturely knowledge.We see as though through a glass, darkly, not because the glass could be replaced by something clearer, but because we are creatures and not Creator. The darkness is not a problem to be solved but a condition to be acknowledged. Humility about our limits is not skepticism; it is the precondition of genuine knowledge.
The reason that disease and drugs act differently on different human races is because races exist and are genetically different. This is not an invention of racists who want to introduce discrimination between men, but a scientifically demonstrated reality. And this biological difference is not limited to drugs and diseases.
As Robert Plomin, the world’s leading expert in behavioural genetics, has shown, heredity also plays a major role in behaviour, intelligence, and cognitive abilities in general. Differences in DNA can even be used today to predict a person’s psychological traits, its chances of success in school and in life. More importantly, Plomin has shown that nothing changes the genetic predispositions we inherit.[9],[10] If you have no musical talent, no education will make you a Mozart. John Locke and Jean-Jacques Rousseau are wrong: man is not a blank slate at birth on which one can write whatever one wants, provided that the social circumstances are appropriate.[11] Not just anyone can be an engineer… nature is much stronger than we are![12]
On the subject of racial differences, here is what the honourable Canadian scientist J. Philip Rushton says:
For the past twenty years, I have studied the three major races ofOrientals (East Asians, Mongoloids), Whites (Europeans, Caucasoid), and Blacks (Africans, Negroids). What I’ve found is that in brain size, intelligence, sexual behaviour, fertility, personality, maturation, life span, crime and family stability, Asians fall at one end of the spectrum, blacks fall at the other end, and whites fall in between. Asians are slower to mature, less fertile, and less sexually active, have larger brains and higher IQ scores. Blacks are at the opposite end in each of these areas. Whites fall in the middle, often close to Asians. I’ve shown that this three-way pattern is true over time and across nations, which means that we can’t ignore it.[13]
The truth is that not all races and individuals are interchangeable. There are indeed more competent races and individuals within races who are more intelligent than others, more docile or more genetically inclined to violence and crime.[14],[15], [16],[17]This is obvious to most serious researchers and people who deal with racial reality on the ground, so why deny it?.......
But ironically enough, I recently discovered that another far more successful former beauty pageant winner from my own state fell into an entirely different category.
In 2009, Carrie Prejean had won the title of Miss California and was then voted first-runner up in the Miss USA competition later that same year, an achievement far beyond those Colorado or South Dakota competitors. The year after that national triumph, she’d married former NFL quarterback Kyle Boller, and soon had a couple of children, thereby fulfilling the storybook dreams of so many young girls across America.
Although she has described herself as merely a stay-at-home California mom with two children, she had been widely celebrated by conservatives over the years for her deep Christian faith. So it was hardly surprising that Trump appointed her last year as a member of his newly established White House Religious Liberty Commission, which was otherwise heavily stocked with individuals who were deeply immersed in the worlds of politics and public policy.
These sorts of government commissions rarely attract much visibility, and until the last week or two I hadn’t even been aware it existed. But a public battle suddenly drew considerable media coverage and brought it to the attention of many millions, myself included.
Over the last couple of years, ideological controversies over anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism have become flashpoints in American society, notably leading to the resignations of the presidents of Harvard University and several of our other top Ivy League academic institutions. And Prejean and other commissioners suddenly clashed over exactly that same issue.
According to her Wikipedia page, Prejean had attended a Christian college in San Diego, worshipped at the local Rock Church, and then volunteered for a ministry, with all of these institutions affiliated with Evangelical Christianity, which apparently represented her own religious background.
Although not all Evangelical Christians in America consider themselves outright Christian Zionists, many do, and even the remainder have almost always been quite supportive of the Zionist State of Israel. There was no indication that her own views had ever departed from that longstanding religious consensus.
But she seems to have been deeply disturbed by the horrifying scenes of death and devastation coming out of Gaza over the last couple of years, and she may have even shifted her own religious affiliations as a consequence.
After having spent her entire life as an Evangelical Christian, less than a year ago she converted to Catholicism, only a few weeks before she was appointed to that religious commission.
The most recent public hearing focused upon anti-Semitism and some of the commissioners shifted the entire discussion to Israel and Zionism, prompting her to declare that as a Catholic, she completely rejected Zionism. That totally outraged several of her most vocal fellow commissioners, who followed the current party-line that anti-Zionism was a form of anti-Semitism and they immediately denounced her.
Our media has spent generations conditioning Americans to immediately back down whenever accused of harboring anti-Semitic sentiments, but that former California beauty queen was made of sterner stuff and she refused to be intimidated. Instead, she declared that her own Catholic Church had always rejected Zionism so she asked her critics whether they were accusing all 72 million American Catholics of being anti-Semites. They notably refused to directly answer that very telling question, merely repeating the statement that anti-Zionism was anti-Semitism. She also asked whether they approved of the horrific massacres of innocent women and children that Israel’s Zionists had been committing in Gaza during the last couple of years, and aside from some obvious gnashing of teeth, they also avoided answering that question.
Prejean had spent her entire life as a staunch religious and political conservative, so her views were mostly polar-opposite to those of American left-liberals such as The Young Turks (TYT) podcast, the leading progressive channel on YouTube. But TYT co-host Ana Kasperian covered her story and expressed enormous admiration for her outspokenness on that very important issue. The segment attracted hundreds of thousands of views and over 5,000 overwhelmingly favorable comments.
A few days ago, TYT invited Prejean for a lengthy personal interview. I thought that despite never having worked as a professional talking-head she did extremely well, being very smart, articulate, and poised. The progressive hosts seemed just as impressed, and that segment again attracted hundreds of thousands of views with more than 7,000 overwhelmingly favorable comments.
As Prejean told the story, six months ago some White House staffers had demanded that she stop posting her views on Gaza on social media, then tried to persuade her to resign, but she had refused. Just before the start of the recent session of the commission, the chairman and a couple of the other members had pressured her to remain silent, but she’d firmly rejected their demands.
Her subsequent public exchanges about Zionism and anti-Semitism attracted media coverage, leading to massive waves of angry attacks by prominent Zionists. The chairman of the commission was Texas Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick, and he’d quickly announced that he had fired her. But Prejean explained that although he had apparently assumed that she was just “some dumb blonde bimbo” from California who would be intimidated and go quietly, she had absolutely no intention of doing so. Instead, she pointed out that she had been appointed by the president and only he had the authority to remove her, while Patrick certainly did not, a legal conclusion that she had confirmed with lawyers.
She emphasized that Trump had received the votes of 56% of American Catholics, a far higher percentage than his Protestant support, and removing the only Catholic female on his religious liberty commission would be an outrageous blow against that huge religious community. Large numbers of Catholics had rallied to her defense on social media and were lobbying the Trump Administration on her behalf. So although she was disappointed that Trump had not yet publicly supported her, she was hopeful that he would ultimately do the right thing.
Personal courage is notoriously in very short supply among those who inhabit the political world, and she later mentioned that numerous members of the Trump Administration—and perhaps even some of her fellow commissioners—had privately texted her, saying how much they admired what she was doing and entirely agreed with her. But they were unwilling to publicly say so.
One of her hosts noted how strange it was that American government officials were so fearful of speaking out regarding a foreign country, apparently being sure that they would be fired if they did that. So he raised the question “Is this our government or Israel’s government?” The courageous California mom he was interviewing agreed that was the crucial question.
Prejean explained that she’d researched the history of Israel and had been shocked to learn that during its founding some 700,000 helpless Palestinian civilians had been brutally driven from the homes and villages their families had inhabited for centuries. In her journey of discovery, she was following in the footsteps of the very distinguished academic Prof. Jeffrey Sachs of Columbia University, who in 2023 had explained how he had recently been forced to “unlearn” so much of the supposed history of that region that he had casually absorbed over the years.
Prejean had begun discussing this true history of Israel with knowledgeable individuals who had spent decades as critics of Zionism. She requested that the commission invite some of them as witnesses to provide the other side of the story, suggesting Norman Finkelstein, Israeli dissident Miko Peled, and an anti-Zionist rabbi, as well as a couple of representatives from Palestinian organizations. But the commission hadn’t allowed any of them to attend............
......In herTYTinterview, Prejean said she had little respect for most of her fellow commissioners, nearly all of whom had kept silent during those angry exchanges, and she explained why they did so:
“They worship money and power and fame more than they have a soul. They are slaves rather than free people…Too afraid to speak out.”
But although many Christian groups in America had been brainwashed into blindly worshipping a foreign country no matter what horrible crimes it committed, she would “rather die than worship Israel, a genocidal state.” She made that same point in a Tweet that has been viewed more than 600,000 times:
Many of our country’s leaders claim to be devout Christians. Prejean may or may not be aware of just how completely they have turned their backs upon their own religion because of their service to Israel and the powerful lobbyists in its camp. In a 2024 article, I had described some of these striking political developments.
Some years ago a former senior AIPAC official once boasted to a friendly journalist that if he wrote anything on a simple napkin, within 24 hours he could get signatures of 70 Senators to endorse it, and the political power of the ADL is equally formidable. Therefore it was hardly surprising that last week an overwhelming bipartisan 320-91 majority in the House passed a bill broadening the meaning of anti-Zionism and antisemitism in the anti-discrimination policies of the Department of Education by codifying the definitions used in our Civil Rights laws to classify those ideas as discriminatory.
Although I haven’t tried to read the text, the obvious intent is to force colleges to expunge such noxious activities as anti-Israel protests from their campus community or face loss of federal funds. This represents a striking attack against academic freedom as well as America’s traditional freedom of speech and thought, and may also pressure other private organizations to adopt similar policies. In a particularly ironic twist, the definition of antisemitism used in the bill clearly covers portions of the Christian Bible, so the ignorant and compromised Republican legislators have now wholeheartedly endorsed banning the Bible in a country in which 95% of the population has Christian roots.
While I doubt that we will see any arrests that would survive legal challenge, once controversial ideas are increasingly banned from all respectable venues, much of the public, perhaps even including some confused law enforcement officers, may vaguely begin to assume that they have actually become illegal.
Although it received very little media coverage, the implications of this proposed legislation are certainly dramatic. Put simply, “antisemitism” is the dislike or criticism of Jews and “Anti-Zionism” is the same thing with regard to the State of Israel. So potentially banning any criticism of Jews or Israel would certainly represent a remarkable legal development in our society.
This massive suppression of all political opposition to Zionism through a mixture of legal, quasi-legal, and illegal means has hardly escaped the notice of various outraged critics. Max Blumenthal and Aaron Mate are young Jewish progressives very sharply critical of Israel and its current attack on Gaza, and in their most recent livestream video a day or two before that Congressional vote, they agreed that Zionists were the greatest threat to American freedom and that our country was “under political occupation” by the Israel Lobby..........
