280 Comments

I have also found myself falling in the middle of this disagreement. I see the logic of both arguments and feel that the reality falls somewhere in the middle. I love the Breggins and their views on psychology. I also loved Desmet’s first book. I did however disagreed with his chapter on how there wasn’t a coordinated effort to roll out the pandemic response (he even gave some evidence of a global conspiracy while at the same time dismissing it). And I disagree with the Breggins that the average citizens were merely helpless victims. I could provide numerous examples of both evidence of a global conspiracy, and evidence that people chose to be willfully blind to the reality of the situation and helped to enable horrific things to occur.

In my opinion, problems (personal, societal, political, national, etc) usually have multiple and complex factors that all play a roll and I think this is true of the covid fiasco. Plenty of responsibility all around for all who participated.

I sincerely hope the Breggins will have this conversation with Desmet.

Expand full comment

Mattias is a thouroughly decent guy, that much i do know for a fact. I certainly appreciate his understanding on how people can be affected by propaganda and fall victim to it. Actually, it doesnt have to be a response to propaganda, I’ve observed my whole life how easily people fall in line and do not want to be critical about anything the Iraq war, the financial crash were perfect examples of that (mass formation). What stunned me about the Breggins is the viciousness with which they were apparently fine to go after Mattias. Very disturbing and very unprofessional.

Expand full comment

I agree. However, it is very strange that his book dismisses the global conspiracy, which should be obvious to anyone who is interested in doing even elementary research. And it feels suspicious to dismiss something so obvious and so important.

I believe that Desmet offered to have a conversation with the Breggins when his first book came out and they refused, which seems odd because the Breggin’s seem to be good people too. I really love a lot of their work. They both have exceptional ideas to add to the conversation. I don’t know why having a discussion could be the wrong thing…? Very strange.

Expand full comment

Their discussion has taken place on their substacks. The main rift is that Desmet says mass formation during Covid was spontaneously emerging from a mechanistic society: it was in fact a mechanistic and almost deterministic unfolding. Breggin insists that the mass formation was deliberately induced: the point was to create fear and panic and from these, usher in a global police state. These are two contradictory theses, and to resolve the contradiction we have to take a deep dive into how much of a mechanistically-thinking society we really are. I say we are not. I don't see it, not even in the many people around me who have succumbed to the propaganda and censorship campaign. If they're prejudiced and ignorant, it's because of the censorship and propaganda campaign; take that away and they can see things as they are and understand how they were seduced. Those who are behind this ongoing campaign don't want them to see.

Expand full comment

Jim, I am a mech. engineer and figured I understood your mentioning of "mechanistic"-- UNTIL I looked it up.

https://www.tutor2u.net/politics/reference/mechanistic-theory-liberalism

TOTAL BS.

I have never heard of such BS to describe the organic workings of society!

SO. My theory of the dispute is a LOT simpler: Breggins possibly, interpreted what Desmet said differently and it could very well be that instead of there being a REAL conflict of ideas, he was misunderstood; tempest in a teapot.

Totally alleviated once Desmet explained in his terms what was meant and vice versa.

Even if this idea is wrong, I fail to see how the two viewpoints must be mutually exclusive and not BOTH possible, to some degree.

Expand full comment

But Desmet doesn't mean "mechanistic" in the way your linked definition described.

Desmet means that we're alienated from nature and from each other because of our propensity to worship technology as the solution to all our ills (our "mechanistic thinking.") I disagree because I don't think that applies even to engineers or computer scientists who, for some strange reason, can still have friends and family and deep connections to nature and to others.

Expand full comment
May 3·edited May 3

I have read/listened to his book several times and I completely agree that our modern society has turned to mechanistic thinking. He described in his book the phenomenon that I was seeing all around me. Evidence of it is that people think that “science” is essentially the discovery of truths that man has found through simple experiments and trials. But science is simply a process to try and understand nature. We have a *very* poor understanding of nature, despite all the universities and experts walking around proclaiming they know the truth, and quoting from corrupted medical journals.

Look at how poorly the average person’s health is in industrialized countries. Yet we have the supposedly most advanced medical systems ever developed in the history of humans. But despite this obvious contradiction, people still choose to go to an allopathic doctor and utilize this “advanced” medical system because they believe in the mechanistic idea that taking a pill will resolve their chronic diseases. (Again, people *choose* to believe in allopathic medicine to treat chronic diseases against all evidence to the contrary.)

I was trying to explain to friends, family, and just general people on social media that lockdowns and injections were not the way to good health and that they would not solve the “pandemic”, which was essentially an extension of the epidemic of chronic disease. I was shamed, belittled, told that I was worshiping money and not god, and most often, I was told that I should defer my autonomy to the “experts” and to religious leaders, etc. There was not an honest interest in learning the truth or hearing alternative view points.

I was trying to educate people and I was not rude or demeaning. I was posting medical and journalistic articles. People do *not* want a true, factual answer, like what I was offering them, because it would mean that they would have to give up the pills, injections, and surgeries, and they would have to give up processed food, alcohol, prescription drugs, and live different lifestyles.

The messages coming from the government made no logical sense. But people didn’t want to hear anything that ran in opposition to the official narrative because they choose that belief system. It is soothing for them to hear that chronic diseases are out of their control and our savior is to listen to the experts and just simply do what they say. Viruses are an excellent boogie man for people who want to blame poor health on something outside of themselves. In their minds, all we have to do is shut down the entire economy, bleach our groceries, and sit in our houses until the injection comes out and it will go away. I literally heard people say things like, “I don’t know why people won’t just do simple things like wearing a mask”. That is mechanistic thinking! And they weren't curious as to why some people disagreed.

It’s hard to make healthy lifestyle choices and give up addictive food, drinks, and other habits like being sedentary. I had been trying to teach people how to live healthy lifestyles for many years (offering free small cooking and nutritional classes and helping anyone who asked) before the pandemic and what I found was that people wanted to be healthier and have the benefits of good health, but they generally didn’t want to live a healthy lifestyle. There are a few exceptions here and there but not many. I have heard all the excuses. Because of this desire of people to be healthier ("safe and healthy" were the buzz words from the "experts"), it was easier to believe that we could all be safe and healthy by locking down than by doing the hard things. And they convinced themselves that anyone who didn’t want to do this was ignorant, selfish, mean. Propaganda was strong but it wasn't difficult to do a little critical thinking and see that it was all smoke and mirrors. People who know me *know* that I am none of those things, yet few people contacted me to ask me why I didn’t want to go along with the mandates and why I wouldn’t take the injections because it was easier for them to go along with the propaganda by choice. So they willfully chose to literally ignore all the conflicting information that was being put out there in order to cling to the idea that adherence to the mandates and novel Operation Warp Speed injections will solve everything.

I have so many friends and family members who were harmed by the injections. Most of them won’t discuss it with me because they know I was right but they choose to keep following the narrative and just keep quiet about their injuries. One family member is completely unable to even consider that their new seizures are probably the result of their modifies mRNA injection. It's too threatening to their world view that they choose to hang on to.

My message to people is true. It is a harsh reality. If they listen to me, they have to make significant meaningful changes or they have to feel guilt for not doing so, or they have to just accept that poor health is the result of not living healthy lifestyle choices and then deal with the consequences without blaming a scapegoat. People want to hear things that makes them feel powerful and generous but they don't want it to actually be difficult. “save grandma by get the this safe and effective vaccine” was what they wanted to hear.

Before the invention of the internet, I could see blaming something like this completely on the propagandists. But, we have the internet. People could have easily done research to listen to the many educated people who were sounding the alarm. and then they could have weighed the evidence. There were entire books published and available on amazon, with audible versions if they were too busy to hold the book red it.

I did have a few people reach out to me early on who were skeptical. We shared links. We discuss what was going on. Those people took responsibility for their decision making and educated themselves. The people who didn’t want to hear alternative information also made a conscious decision, especially as time went on and the “experts” contradicted themselves over and over again.

At this point in time, every single person could have done the research to find out what is true and what is not true. There will always be some questions but we know enough now to prove that everything we were told was a lie. Most people are still largely uneducated about what is going on. That is a choice. Everyone can be fooled for a short amount of time, but continuing to be fooled is a choice.

Expand full comment

Brilliant post. 100% agree.

Expand full comment

You're discounting the massive role that censorship and propaganda play into shaping people's decisions, and how badly the medical field has been corrupted through the years by that very same censorship and propaganda.

Good and decent and thoughtful people simply trusted people who shouldn't be trusted. That's the core of the problem, not that these people are stupid and ignorant. They were and are subject to massive and unrelenting censorship and propaganda, and these two are the real origins of totalitarianism because without censorship ... well, we'd all have known that we were being fed bullshit, wouldn't we?

So are the people really the problem? Or are the people the victims of the censorship and propaganda onslaught, and wake up only slowly to the fact that it really is a censorship and propaganda onslaught? Or, in Desmet's thinking, are the people really to blame because they're mechanistic thinkers, whatever that means? And the elite conspirators are off scot-free because there are no elite conspirators, as Desmets explicitly states in chapter eight of his book?

All of this is rather subtle if we start talking about conspirators and manipulators, but we again have to refer to chapter eight to see what Desmet really means, and what he really means is ... there was no conspirators or conspiracy. End of story, and very clearly demonstrated in chapter eight, or so Desmet thinks. There's no question at all: there was and is no conspiracy, according to Desmet, only the appearance of one.

Is that really true?

Expand full comment
May 3·edited May 3

It is obvious that there was and is a conspiracy. I stated that. That is why I would love for the Breggins to meet with him and have a discussion. He is willing. The Breggins are not willing.

If it is all the propagandists fault, why did about 20% of the population not go along with it? Why didn't our friends and family ask us why we didn't want to go along with it?

The truth is available to anyone curious enough to look for it. Like I said above, we can all be fooled by propaganda for a short amount of time, but with the availability of the internet, anyone can research multiple points of view any time they want.

Out of all the people that I know who went along with the narrative, none of them asked me why I didn't support it. They didn't want to know. They chose not to know. Propaganda can only be blamed on by people for so long. At some point, with information available at everyone's fingertips, people need to take responsibility for their choice to remain ignorant.

By saying this, I am not absolving the global elites who orchestrated this. They need to be charged and tried. But they won't be. Because they won't ever be held accountable, the only people who have the power to stop this is each individual. And each individual needs to take responsibility for the choices that they make and educate themselves on corruption and how they can avoid falling for propaganda. It's the only way. Blaming everything on global elites and then saying that the average people have no responsibility is just encouraging learned helplessness and life-long victimhood.

How many people asked for the insert to the injection that they got so that they could look at the ingredients and read up about them? This would be an easy first step for people to do going forward and they do have the power to do that one simple thing. There are many things people can do to take back their power if they choose to.

Expand full comment

Yeah, Mattias seems a little too naive? I wonder how he feels about it now, though. My god, he's been put thru the wringer over the last years. Not in the least by his own employer (the University of Gent!!) - what does that tell you about Western society. Sigh... I believe he wants to hold on to the goodness in man?

Expand full comment

I think Desmet is focusing on a deeper philosophical and psychological trend that arose perhaps with the Industrial Revolution and Enlightenment science, but the wildest thing is that the psychology of totalitarianism, which investigates through a very specific lense, was studied in every university, and written about voluminously, after the Holocaust and Twentieth century Communism, studied in many disciplines, including experimental psych (Milgram, Asch, Stanford Prison Experiment), only Desmet's colleagues accused him of making the concept of mass formation or mass psychosis up, since all of that literature has disappeared from education, just as history has disappeared and been replaced. What he is doing now, leading workshops in "sincere speech," is an outgrowth of his theory, both philosophical and psychological, which he feels cracks open mass formation. If you are forced by your employer or school or social group, to censor your thoughts or to use certain language, or you can be canceled for a tweet or a political position, your relationship to your soul is cut, he says, in so many words. That when we speak sincerely, of what we feel and think, we unite with our soul, and with those around us. The devil is not called The Father of Lies for nothing, not that I"m necessarily religious, but think of the layers and layers of lies someone like the contemptible Fauci lives under, his link to his authentic being and soul frozen, short-circuited, and then encased like a Chernobyl sarcophagus, so that all that is left is his persona and his desperate need for sadism and power. The Breggins seem to be learned in political and trauma psychology. They really all should be compatriots since psychology itself has been totally corrupted by CRT and DIE, so you get to pay money to a shrink to confess to your white privilege. Now that's psychotic!

Expand full comment

It's possible it's naivety...

I notice a fairly common pattern of people who run in academic circles. Many of them recognize what a horrible thing has happened but... they often want to act like there wasn't a conspiracy or that other parts of the system are working fine. I kind of tend to think the explanation for this is that they know on some deep level that if they start pointing out the big truths, there will be consequences and they will lose relevance amongst their peers. Maybe their motivation is out of self preservation or maybe it is to appear to be a voice of reason to keep the communication open by avoiding sounding like a conspiracy theorist. I don't know. It's just kind of interesting to observe. Dr Mulhatra has a similar kind of willful blindness (understands this injection is bad but still sings the praises of the other vaccines that children are required to take, which are developed by the same corrupt industry that has give us these current injections).

Expand full comment

Again brilliant. And Maholtra still wants to be seen as "acceptable" and run with the hares (Old vaccines are the salve of mankind) and the hounds (this vaccine is disastrous). Having one foot on each side of the style, straddling a barbed wire fence never works, because the provaccine side never accepts any challenge. To the provaccine, Maholtra is a traitor regardless of his running with the hares, but he doesn't realise that.

I have a medical friend in the UK who went to a public meeting of his and asked him a question I asked her to ask him. As she was a doctor he didn't suspect much.

The question was this: "Dr Maholtra, you say the mRNA vaccines are dangerous and should be stopped. You were the face of the covid provaccine campaign. You did no research until your father died and you had sudden onset psychosis after your second injection.

Are you prepared to put the same due diligence into looking at the other vaccines as you have done with the mRNA, and if so, will you please start with Gardasil?"

No reply - he diverted and quickly moved on. That told me everything I need to know.

Expand full comment
May 4·edited May 4

I’m 100% convinced that anyone who wants to know the truth about all vaccines can find it. The information is readily available. But most people do not want to know. They want to keep believing. It’s a hard pill to swallow when you know the truth and there are often career and social consequences to learning the truth, especially for doctors and nurses.

I assume some of the people who try to straddle the fence do so because they might suspect the truth but they feel that they won’t be taken seriously if the look at the evidence and then proclaim that all vaccines have an upside down benefit to risk ratio. That is my most generous guess at what is happening with people like Maholtra. Is it the right thing to do? Maybe. Maybe not. If everyone looked all at once, and spoke out, many children would be saved. But if just a few look and speak out, they get purged from the medical system. I’m some ways, I can see the dilemma.

I have been impressed by some people who actually want to know, look at the data, and then speak out. Dr McCullough is one. Steve Kirsch is another. I’m very impressed that they looked and were brave enough to speak out. I’m sure many children have been saved by this.

Expand full comment

Is it possible because of Malone’s lawsuit against them and others who disagreed with him?

Expand full comment

Maybe. There are some very strange things going on with Malone. I personally believe that Malone is a chaos agent of some kind in the health freedom movement, and I can think of several examples that back up my belief, including things that he said during his interview with Steve last night. This is not a positive reflection on Desmet, when I weigh the evidence and try and decide what is going on.

Expand full comment

Malone has admitted he has Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, an injury he sustained years ago while dealing with a government business disaster. I believe that explains his emotional reactivity. His parasympathetic functioning is impaired. I write this as a supportive statement and a fellow traveler.

Expand full comment

I am more concerned with the content of his words combined with the conflicts of his actions. It's a consistent pattern in my mind and while I have sympathy for anyone dealing with trauma, I don't feel like trauma would play a roll in the kinds of things that concern me about him.

Expand full comment

Remember in the beginning of the pandemic Malone was always introduced by interviewers as “THE inventor” of the mRNA technology to give him credibility. But then I learned that about 1000 other people share patents on that technology. Not to detract from his personal accomplishments but I think he might be choosie about whom he shares a stage with, not to be outshined by someone else. Just my feeling; I could be wrong.

Expand full comment

Maybe. I have a more sinister view but there could be many explanations for his behavior over the last few years.

Expand full comment

We do not have evidence of top down, command/control of the conspiracy. Did the DOD use PHARMA or did PHARMA use the DOD? How did Gates influence or was he simply a cash cow? Did governments follow or lead? I think what Mattias is getting at is our tendency to identify a bogeyman (as Dr. Breggin directly does) instead of looking at a dysfunctional global system and our own shadow projections.

Expand full comment

I would highly recommend following Sasha Latypova on substack or better yet, the substack Bailiwick News by Katherine Watt. Watt has documented all the laws that have been put into place in the US that sort of "allowed" all our constitutional rights to be trampled on through the "pandemic". Another great resource is Dr. Meryl Nass. She has excellent information on different aspects of the WHO and the groundwork that they are laying for future "emergency powers" by global organizations. She was instrumental in untangling the Anthrax fraud, I believe in the 90s.

The Illusion of Consensus substack just had the most excellent interview with Dr Battychara and Debbie Lerman. Episode 50. Very interesting and again, open source material.

Here is my favorite link to a presentation that explains a lot of what happened. The great thing is, it's open source material so people can verify the information.

https://youtu.be/d3WUv5SV5Hg?si=ER-BbMsdLrDZqcaM

There is literally an endless supply of information regarding the way the pandemic was prepared in advance for by NGOs and governments alike.

Expand full comment

"the way the pandemic was prepared for in advance by NGOs and governments alike" -- Yes!

One step I remember was that WHO changed the definition of "pandemic" so that *any* contagious illness could be declared a pandemic; the requirement that the illness had to be severe (potentially disabling or fatal) was eliminated.

Another step was a proposal to change the reporting of AEFIs (adverse events following immunization) to WHO. Under the proposal, only reports of adverse effects that had been identified in the clinical trials of a vaccine would be accepted. In other words, post-marketing surveillance of AEFIs would have been "gutted" -- made meaningless and pointless because no "new" adverse effects could be discovered; and of course clinical trials are routinely designed to fail to identify adverse effects of vaccines (e.g. by not using true placebo injections in the so-called control groups). I read a critique of this proposal, but I don't know what happened to this proposal in the end.

Another step -- getting down to the nitty-gritty here -- was a new law in California (which became law in 2016 or 2017, I think) that said a county's public health department could declare an "outbreak" of a communicable disease if just three people in the county were diagnosed with it. And during an outbreak of a communicable disease, the county public health department (CPHD) had the power to direct any other local government agency to cooperate and support any "public health measure" the CPHD wanted to inflict on the population. For example, if the CPHD decided the entire population should be vaccinated against the "outbreaking" illness, the CPHD could send nurses door-to-door to vaccinate people. And the CPHD could require the local police and sheriff's departments to provide armed law enforcement personnel to accompany the nurses and enforce the forced vaccination order. This abominable law was passed by the Legislature and signed by the governor . . . (Big Pharma has owned the California state government for many years now . . .)

Expand full comment
May 6·edited May 6

Every time you look at the details, it’s a complete horror show.

Three diagnoses. Nice. And, of course, diagnoses are made by either a fraudulent pcr test, or, a group of random symptoms that are present in almost all respiratory diseases….

What’s ironic about that is that doctors can diagnose three patients with something based on symptoms and have the whole state shut down because of a scary virus. But thousands of vaccine injury and death reports from the same doctors and crickets…

If it were just one piece of legislation that made the totalitarian response possible, it would be one thing but it’s multiple laws on every level of multiple governing bodies.

I just learned the name of one of the many laws signed. Model State Emergencies Power Act, 2001.

People are just going to have to gather their courage, invite their friends to join them, and resist. I don’t see a likely path to undoing all the layers of corrupt legislation. But hopefully people are trying. I just don’t see any of it being overturned, even after all that we know now.

Expand full comment

P,ease give specific examples of the “visciousness” of the Breggins, Elleke.

Expand full comment

Always good to resolve a conflict. Why keep it in a jar your entire life.

Now there is an audience that has joined into view personal issues of both parties. ??

Life is a wisdom and learning curve that must be adhered too.

You can learn from your own mistakes.

You can learn from other peoples mistakes.

Or you can can choose to ignore and never much learn at all.

One such division was and no doubt remains the one between the Jabs and Jabnots.

I find our America is at a very precarious and precious crossroads.

Conflicts are not signed contracts of a forever hate. Love what you do, and share that love.

Expand full comment

I've noticed that people frequently argue with each other as if they were arguing against opposite extremes when they are actually very close in beliefs. Each one is against opposite extremes, so they can't see how close they actually are in their beliefs and understanding of the world.

Having someone, who can see both sides, can frequently facilitate an understanding of each one's actual beliefs and help them reconcile. I hope this can be done between Desmet and the Breggins.

Expand full comment

Takes two to tango. And often the dance can offer a shared passion.

Expand full comment

and! with Dr Robert Malone.

Expand full comment

I could be wrong, but this is my opinion, which is subject to change.

I think Desmett is sincere. I think the Breggins are sincere.

Here's my controversial opinion - I think Malone is probably a chaos agent in the health freedom movement. So, I support any and all discussions, however, I am not one who is clamoring for Dr Malone to have deep discussions with people whom I see as sincerely trying to steer us in the right direction. Although, I would certainly be happy to hear that discussion if it ever took place. And I could be wrong about the chaos agent thing but I think there is enough evidence that it would be difficult to persuade me otherwise. That's just my two cents on Dr Malone.

Expand full comment

Well, it would be awful hard for me to say Dr Malone is a "chaos" agent! I subscribe to his substack and McCulloughs and Steve Kirsch and Jessica Rose. I know zip about the Breggins, so I cannot be unbiased in the discussion as I have no knowledge of them, just what I hear which is almost ALL good except for them giving Malone SO much crapp he felt it necessary to shut them up with a 25 million $ lawsuit.

From reading nearly all his newsletters I feel I have a pretty good handle on the kind of man he is-- a great one; not one with the time to F around with fools or harassers. If Breggins have to go out in public and berate him without having a direct discussion with him, and I don't KNOW this is the case, but if so, then, I have no time for them. He had done nothing to them and they attacked him for his association with Desmet and his stand on a theory(THEORY!) Desmet published. I believe they went way overboard.

Expand full comment

So from your point of view, the people who criticized Malone’s ideas went way overboard? But the man who sued an elderly couple for $25 million dollars because they didn’t like his ideas is in the right?

How about his lawsuit against Dr Jane Ruby? She also deserved it?

If he is in the right, why were his lawsuits dismissed?

Can you tell me about his contracts with the government? I would love to hear more about those.

Expand full comment

Well Brandy, apparently you have been following all the gossip and drama a LOT more than I. I did NOT say that the people who criticized Malone's ideas went way overboard. The Breggins extreme and continued persecution went overboard. My point is that Malone adopted Desmet's ideas and supported his thesis on a THEORY. Nothing wrong with disputing Desmet's theory but that is no excuse to persecute his supporter in chief, much less incessantly. I contend Malone hit them with an(excessive) lawsuit, admittedly, but did so to obtain relief. Tough on the two old folks if they want to start a fight with an able opponent who refuses to take their shit-- regardless of how great they are and what they have done for humanity. Stuck fingers in a wasp nest. Did they finally pull them back out?!

-- never heard of the lawsuit w/ J. Ruby. Irrelevant to this discussion, possibly.

-- My take on the Breggins lawsuit is he did it NOT to persecute them but because HE was the one being persecuted by their constant bludgeoning against him out of the blue. He did not ask for it and they hit him with both barrels-- MY understanding.

-- without seeing and reading the terms of his contracts not YOU or I have any basis upon which to comment and gossip. Get one, read it, and THEN mouth off more about it. Feel free.

Expand full comment

So do you have proof of the Breggin’s persecution of Malone? He didn’t, thus his lawsuit was dismissed. Criticizing someone’s ideas and speculating on their motive is not a crime. It is not persecution. It’s freedom of speech and it’s essential in a democracy. The judge agreed. Even people who support Malone generally see the lawsuit as a little nutty, at least.

The Breggin’s are amazing and have some very profound ideas when it comes to the mental health crisis that the world is in. They are concerned that people will be labeled with a new diagnosis (mass psychosis) and medicated for that diagnosis, instead of holding accountable the culprits who preyed upon the average citizen: the globalists. Which is a valid point. I find the truth to be nuanced but I certainly think Malone is wrong when he dismisses a conspiracy. It’s pretty obvious there was a conspiracy.

Again, If people disagree, it is not persecution, even if it’s a very strong disagreement. I have heard Malone disagree with many people and disparage them. Those people aren’t suing him because that’s called freedom of speech to disagree with someone.

Sasha Latypova, whom he has spoken very ill of, tried to speak with him when Steve Kirsch offered to host both of them. Malone declined. So apparently, Malone is perfectly fine “persecuting” other people as well as suing people who disagree with him, but he won’t have a friendly conversation with someone that he disagrees with.

I was in support of Malone for a while and even listened to him in person at a convention. I have listened to many of his interviews and I agree with a lot of what he says. However, I always have more questions about him and his work after listening to him. Like why would someone who understood the dangers of mRNA take the injection? I have heard him give multiple answers for taking the injection and none of them make intellectual sense.

After his lawsuits and also after hearing him say a few key other things, I am now convinced that he is trying to steer the health freedom movement in a direction that is detrimental to the citizens.

And since you did not answer my questions about his government contracts, I assume that you are not aware of what kind of work he is involved in. I want to know more as well because this is extremely important information to help us to decipher his motives. It’s essential. Whiteout it, we do not know what his conflicts of interest may be.

I know that vaccine development is part of his work, which I find really… really curious. I don’t know if that is work connected to the government or a pharmaceutical collaboration or what. But I have found that I do not believe that vaccines are a viable solution to diseases so I’m very skeptical of anyone working in that space. Anyone employed in that space definitely stands to loose a ton of funding if the pharmaceutical industry secrets ever become well known to the public, which is slowly happening now.

The most notable instance of him causing a disruption in the health freedom movement, in my mind, was in his recent interview with Steve kirsch. He talked about how both Biden and Trump were disasters. I don’t remember his exact words. But I did find that interesting. Then, most importantly, when Steve asked if Malone supported RFK Jr, he immediately responded that RFK Jr had absolutely no chance. (This is not actually true. RFK Jr has a very strong campaign going and polls well against both candidates, especially in young voters).

Kirsch then said that he thought RFK Jr had a chance. Malone immediately said condescendingly, “bless your heart”. That is a psy-op move if I have ever witnessed/heard one in real time.

Why would Malone point out that Biden and Trump were bad candidates and then act like it was foolish to get behind RFK Jr? Even if he had no chance, why not support him on principle of Biden and Trump are both bad candidates? And, it’s very early in the campaign season to say that a candidate isn’t viable.

I’ll tell you why I think he would do this. Putting down Trump and Biden is a popular thing to do in health freedom circles because they are both clearly controlled by big pharma. This wins him credibility points on places like substack and in spaces where people know how bad those two candidates are for the free world.

Dismissing RFK Jr and acting like it’s foolish to even consider voting for him is an attempt to keep him out of the race. The MSM is doing this as well and the mSM is definitely owned/controlled by big pharma. Malone is discouraging an actual health freedom movement that has the potential to have the power of the presidency behind it. Odd. Or intentional.

RFK jr, with all of his faults and with whatever policy issues people have with him, there are two things that he is serious about and dedicated to. He will reform the regulatory agencies (thus putting big pharma out of the business of making people sick while making tons of money- and it will put the government out of the business of working with pharma to make people sick).

The other issue that RFK Jr is serious about is reforming the intelligence agencies. He will actually make things happen. This leads to my very relevant questions about Malone’s ties to the government.

To spell it out concisely, if Malone knows Trump and Biden are both corrupt, it doesn’t make any sense to not get behind RFK Jr, unless he is trying to keep RFK Jr from becoming president.

Malone worked with CHD, I believe. Which makes prefect sense if trying to undermine the health freedom movement from within is his goal.

Between all the things that I have mentioned here, and other things that I’ve heard him say, like speaking against people like Sasha Latypova, Mike Yeadon and others, I have come to the conclusion that he is a chaos agent within the health freedom movement.

I could be wrong. I am always open to evidence on either side of an issue. I think the Breggins’ criticism of his idea that there was no global conspiracy is pretty accurate. Hopefully Malone doesn’t sue me (I jest but seriously…).

I just disagree with the Breggins that we are helpless children that cannot defend our minds from the propagandists. But watching Malone operate in this space is definitely a point for the Breggin’s side of the argument. Malone is very good at what he is doing. It took me a long time to see it.

Expand full comment

The context also matter and in my opinion sheds more light about who is to blame more, the global conspirators or the masses. The context is healthcare where the masses show trust in the healthcare system and doctors, the same way we don't build our roads ourselves but trust the constructor to do a good job to build safe roads for us to drive on.

So the predators / conspirators exploit precisely that trust we extend to the medical community so that we don't have to worry about become a doctor ourselves too in addition to our normal other professions.

Since even a single shot can prove sufficient for great damage, the masses have to choose between trusting or not trusting the medical system and the "officials" telling them what to do, before taking that very first shot.

Thus while the masses definitely could be learning from previous "canary in the mine" parents that went first, the blame rests much more on the conspirators who didn't do their part ethically and in accordance with the social contract we have about medical profession.

Same thing I'm sure with you visiting a restaurant that ends up poisoning you, someone can argue that you should have done your research more, but we all agree that there's an understanding that the restaurant chef has to give you non-harming food, and most courts would correctly blame them and not you for the poisoning incident.

Thus

Breggins 99%

Desmet 1%

win this argument about culpability.

Although at this point the smartest thing is to revisit the social contract with medical space and all of medicine and how it's been built and driven by money and greed and debt and personal gains by most people in the medical profession in the US and around the globe.

Expand full comment

I respectfully disagree. How will any of this be “revisited” as you mention, if people are so incapable? If people are helpless victims, they will not be able to do this.

Your restaurant example is not a good fit for what happened during the pandemic. It would better match the situation if someone went to a restaurant and got food poisoning every night for 30 nights in a row. One time can be the restaurant’s fault. But if someone keeps going back night after night, it becomes a consensual relationship.

The public health figures lied over and over again, completely changing the narrative each time their lies were brought to the surface. Every time a lie was brought out into the light, I would think that it was over because people could now see that they were being lied to and the experts were just changing the story to string them along. But people wouldn’t do independent research or talk with their friends who had disagreements with what was going on. They didn’t want to know the truth. The truth was and is scary. They were also too flattered by the propagandists telling them that they cared about the elderly, and the “other” people didn’t. Everyone wants to feel like they are a “good person” and they let this desire be highjacked and turned against themselves and others instead of using a little humility and healthy skepticism.

The top people who orchestrated this were evil. But the people who wanted to go along with lock downs and vaccine passports because of their fear were also acting selfishly. Their selfishness and pride made them easy prey for the propagandists. They can learn to self reflect on this way of thinking. We all need to be self reflecting often. We can learn to do this.

I had a friend once that was in an abusive relationship. Her husband was extremely controlling with everything, especially money. And he would periodically beat her. Everyone in our circle of friends tried to help her escape. She wouldn’t leave him.

As she continued to choose to stay, the abuse became worse and more frequent. The police were eventually called and she moved out of the house. She was helped by many people and had an apartment to stay in. She chose to take the kids back to live with him and she told her children to lie under oath so that her husband wouldn’t go to prison.

Was it her fault that he hit her? No.

Was it her choice to stay in the abusive relationship? Yes.

Eventually she decided that the abuse was not worth the benefits of staying in the relationship and she left him and took the children with her. But it wasn’t until she decided to end the relationship that he no longer had power over her. She had to learn new ways of thinking. She had to be brave. She had to assert her power. She had to learn that she was powerful.

People can learn and grow and learn new ways of thinking but it is their choice if they don’t want to. If my friend had just accepted that it wasn’t her fault that he was beating her and decided that she had no power to change her situation because he was the abuser, she would probably still be with him today, or worse. But she took back her power. I’m glad she didn’t stay a perpetual victim.

People can learn to recognize propaganda. They can choose to take control of their health. They can learn about the corruption in medicine, the media, politics, etc. There are a lot of bad people who are harming others but you can only blame an abusive relationship on someone else for so long. Eventually people have to recognize the enabling roll that they play or they will just live as a victim for ever.

During the pandemic, people had the internet at their fingertips. They could have done some research and then made informed decisions. Some people did. Some did not. Those who did not can be helped to learn better ways to respond to propaganda.

No one is coming to save us. There are no magical world wide courts to prosecute the perpetrators. We have to stand up for ourselves or die. Learning to be helpless is something I will never consent to. I may not be able to overcome the tyranny, especially if masses of people don’t join in the movement, but I will at least give it my best effort.

We are not just agents to be acted upon. We have free will and we can be courageous. We can think critically. These are learned behaviors and thought processes.

Expand full comment

a big hug from MinnEsooOOta, Brandy.

Great post; says it all.

Expand full comment

Unlike Desmet, Breggin, you two - John and Peter McCullough, I have been in the vaccine critical work since 1981. Those who know me, and many do, know that my resume includes being part of vaccine damage cases in my own country and globally. Having worked with parents of severely vaccine injured children over more than FORTY years, and being the public face on radio, TV and written media constantly questioning the vaccine narrative, I know from experience, that both Desmet and Breggin are wrong for several reasons. Here are some.

And the canary in the gold mine are the MOTHERS of babies. Every mother has an intuition which the medical profession only approves of when it suits them. Even Dr McCullough would say, "Take the mother's words seriously because she knows...."

It has been my unfailing experience in EVERY single case I worked with that at some point the mother and occasionally the father would say, "From hours before they put the needle in my baby, my instincts screamed at me not to do this, but I didn't know any reason why not."

But it's not just intuition, it's a bullshit detector, and it's always on, when you are in a second hand car dealer, or buying a house, when you look for what is not being said. We all have a bullshit detector when it comes to daily life, and we use it. We know instinctively when you can't trust someone.

In the early days many parents "heard" what I had to say on TV and went and asked questions of their doctors, only to be told that I was a "fruitcake". Instead of taking the science I presented and checking it out, they chose to trust the alphabet soup after a doctor's name, who had been taught NOTHING about vaccines in medical school.

These are the people N.M. Mead, Ritaritabobita and Sue S., perhaps also recognise as failing the "grow up" IQ test. On the one hand education is supposed to teach you how to research and question everything. On the other hand, couch potato syndrome and personal intellectual laziness, means that most people want to "have fun" and leave due diligence to others - and THAT is how we lose democracy.

History is rarely considered useful today. Like you John, I have seriously studied history. for 15 years from 1981 to 1996, I had several medical history study focuses. Infection epidemiology and statistics as far back as they went in western countries. Vaccine history, development, ingredients and all the related cupboards where the skeletons were hidden. And the most important, the medical system itself. I did this for every infection for which there is now a vaccine.

Even back then without internet, if you used the Dewey system well, and cast a wide net, you could find a LOT of very good information. A medical library became my second home, and you would be amazed (or not) at the number of hugely valuable historical medical texts, which should still be in medical libraries, but which are not, because they threw them out and they are in my library.

As a mother with two young infants, I considered it my protective duty to check EVERYTHING a doctor said, because I'd already seen from my history study of the medical profession that the system can't be trusted and inch, and most doctors are flying on their own assumed magic carpet.

The very fact that I consistently spoke out over 40 years woke up the mothers of unvaccinated people in this country who are now frontline on the freedom movement. They have done due diligence and passed the "grow up" IQ test.

But quite apart from them, in 2020, a lot of people who would normally have just gone along to get along, found their bullshit detector screaming so loud that they had to do the difficult job of starting from scratch. Even some doctors who years later, admitted to me that they followed my facebook page, because I presented science they were never told about. One of them messaged me and said, "Thank you for holding my head above water for three years."

Okay they didn't speak out, but they knew bullshit when their radar pinged and and did what they could to indicate to patients to "do some research". (The medical council here gagged all medical doctors dentists etc from saying anything against the mRNA platform)

Given that the medical history shows that everything that happened between 2020 - now, has happened before, and not just once, Breggin cannot say that it's all the fault of the elite.

Given that many people woke up on their own, shows that this is not all the fault of the elite.

Desmet is also wrong. It is not mass formation to me, because that is almost involuntary. I do think it is a form of psychosis, which is defined as "a collection of symptoms that affect the mind, where there has been some loss of contact with reality" In a way that is what it is. For whatever reason in their heads, they have lost of contact with reality because they have constructed their own "myth" and let others bend their minds..

I've watched this for decades.

It's a combination of intellectual laziness - a refusal to understand that history always repeats itself, and that democracy has to be guarded and protected, which you can't do if you are ignorant. It's an active choice to allow others to become in loco parentis even to yourself, It's even a type of arrogance of ignorance, in believing that those "in power", be they politicians, or doctors, know best.

How anyone can think that a politician knows best, beats me.

How anyone who has studied the history of the WHO or any other "organisation" in what they call "The delicate fabric of private and public collaboration" (Yes there is a 1997 medical article with that phrase in the title, on the beginnings of that behemoth which has now vastly expanded to include the likes of B Gates.)

How anyone can think their GP, who has five years of formal training then a residence, knows everything, beats me.

So both Desmet and Breggin are, in my opinion, on two opposite sides of the truth, which is that regardless as to what authority says, we have a duty to grow up. The classic example is right in front of every parent when suddenly their children consider that their parents know nothing... a child's way of growing up is to challenge everything and establish themselves for themselves. Okay, part of their brain might drop out at the age of 15, but if you are lucky, they've gone back and picked it up and put it back in by 24 - though some never do.

And if you as a parent, have done your job properly you will teach them that every story has two sides and a rim like a coin that join those two side, and the minute you stick one side of that coin on the table, then you cannot see the bigger picture.

We homeschooled our children, so they saw the stream of parents of vaccine injured children traipsing through the house. They came to many of my talks. They sat pan faced through many immunology lessons and science as I explained to them why they were NOT going to be vaccinated.

When they left they had had a guts full of it. But come 2020, it all fell into place for them, and they mentally went "Ah, right so that was what Mum was talking about. This is a repeat of X, Y and Z." and they stood firm and said no, and paid that price.

To me that is why Desmet and Breggin are both wrong, because instinct and bullshit detectors are not there to ignore. Schools "train" children to fit the system, but parents can EDUCATE children in how to think, logics, and to never trust anyone's word as "the truth"

it's called growing up, and most people who succumbed to very obvious lies which those with instinct and bullshit detectors picked up straight away had parents who did not do their job... did not pay attention, and failed an IQ test held out by the elites, because part of this was that they wanted to know just who had brains and who did not.

That is my opinion.

Expand full comment

Wow! I wholeheartedly agree! Thank you for this thoughtful, well informed response. I will also show this to our son, 26, who is on the fence about who & what to believe. I wish we hadn’t sent him to college & wasted all that money. We, too, homeschooled for 6 years. College really f’d him up. The indoctrination is strong. I am very angry about this. I don’t know if our son will ever fully awaken to the bullsh_t. But I’ll take what I can get. Thanks again for all you do to help people learn about this stuff! 🙏🏽

Expand full comment

I will pray for you that he actually reads Hilary's tome in full.

Expand full comment

Thank you! It means a lot!🙏🏽

Expand full comment

It was late spring 2021. There was a shot sight set up in the shopping center parking lot and I was approached while shopping and asked if I had been vaxxed. I wasn't enthusiastic and was told the pharmacist would answer my questions. I decided to talk to him. I was still undecided about what to do. The news people were there and I said no to filming me as I talked to the "expert". My "bs detector" was strong that day. Actually for me I knew my fear of the mRNA vax was way more than of the virus. I declined. I did decide on jnj later which I hate to admit. It has been difficult to realize how evil some in charge are and how gullible or weak those who should know better were and many still are. Or just went along to keep a job. The good news is many of us in the masses have woken up.

Expand full comment

Best comment I've read in a long, long, while.👍🇦🇺

Expand full comment

Agreed. Please note that Mattias refers to 'mass formation' (and not 'mass psychosis'). I most definitely understand mass formation! In our Western world we have to abide by our superior Norms & Values. Come to think of it, maybe mass formation has become a psychosis. There's a lot of creepy stuff going on. But that's only my take on it.

Expand full comment

Yes, he does, but the formation is because people passively accept it, and look around and if everyone is doing the same, form a formation of dead fish who can't swim against the flow.... I've added this to that sentence.... " It is not mass formation to me because that is almost involuntary. I do think it is a form of psychosis, which is defined as "a collection of symptoms that affect the mind, where there has been some loss of contact with reality" In a way that is what it is. for whatever reason in their heads, they have lost of contact with reality because they have constructed their own "myth" and let others bend their minds. "

There isn't a time in history when people haven't been lied to, but it seems that it's another lesson that every generation has to learn, mostly because they aren't interested in understanding that this has happened before, and the price to pay for conformity and compliance is never the one they assume it will be. It's founded on intellectual ignorant, and the ignorant don't understand they are ignorant, because if they did, they would make the effort to become cognizant.

Expand full comment

Hilary Butler for President.

SOOOOO well said, Hilary. I will paste this into it's own document for my Virus Mania folder. You should write a book.

I will drink a beer in your honor today!

Expand full comment

Hi Pretty-red, old guy.

I've actually written two books nearly 20 years ago, which can be found on Amazon. The first, "Just a Little Prick" (2006) and the second "From one prick to another" 2008.

The human body and history never changes, so even though they are old, the message is still relevant.

Expand full comment

This is such a complicated issue to analyze. And basically boils down to a type of abuse - the use of others. There are answers to how this happened, but they are extremely complicated to understand and fix. Having been a decades long victim of psychopathy, sociopathy and familial seudo-mutuality perpetuated against me by people I had loved and who claimed to love me, I can relate to how people can fall victim to deceit from others who see them as something to be used to get their needs/desires met. The perpetrators have never progressed past the stage of narcissism we are all born into, and they have become pathological. Becoming a victim of abusers comes from a person having the strength of character to pass through that narcissistic stage to a more altruistic level, but not having the training and experience to develop a keen level of discernment and then (most importantly) knowing how to respond to pathologies when the perpetrators claim to care about you. It is a slow boiling pot of interaction where one person thinks altruistically, not realizing the other is incapable of being selfless. Perpetrators may be cognizant of their behavior and goals, or may be acting from their own place of wounded-ness and/or lack of discernment, unaware of their participation in the destruction of others. Some of these non-pathological, but toxic, individuals become what is known by those who study narcissistic abuse as “minions”. In other words, they enable the truly pathological individuals, who knowingly have an agenda and goal, to achieve their abuse by participating in it in order to avoid being the target of the abuser and to maintain their status or position. I believe the minions do this because to stand against the abuse they will have to lose some level of comfort and acceptance. The pathological people are excellent at manipulating and most people simply do not want to take the time to investigate or loss that entails to go against them. The minion must choose a side and they choose themselves and their comfort over truth and responsible behavior toward the victim/s. In doing this, the minion may also inadvertently become a victim of the pathological person.

However, as a person who has also survived the recovery process, developed discernment and learned how to respond to the abuse, I can say that the awakening process is equally traumatic. The worst minion in my personal world is growing past the narcissistic stage and developing altruistic behavior. It can be done, but it is difficult and must be a hyper-focus to achieve this level of success. It may take decades to achieve this. Again, there is so much more to say on this.

Re: the mass formation that led to the success of the Covid attack: Yes there were people who deliberately attempted to destroy humanity. Yes there were people who willingly enabled them to achieve that goal; some were intentional, belligerent minions, others were willing participants who wouldn’t find the courage or time to investigate the pathological abusers. However, some of us had had life experiences previously that had led us to a place where we were able to stand against the attack. We all have various degrees of and reasons for how we withstood it. Many people were ostracized who tried to stand up, many were harmed and killed.

The answers to how that all happened are extremely complex and each must be analyzed separately and within context if we are to understand it. If humanity survives this, we will have to make it a concerted effort to do this, and then an equally concerted effort to train future generations in how to avoid it if we do not want to repeat. We cannot rely on institutions or systems to “make sure it never happens again”. We somehow have to become different within ourselves. It has to become a part of what it means to be human. That will not be achieved by arguing which theory or perspective is “right” or “wrong”.

Expand full comment

Brilliant comment. It wasn't lost on thinkers here, that by far the largest group of automatic resisters, who stepped straight back and considered the bigger picture, were people who had come here from communist/fascist/autocratic/dictatorial countries, where people learned the hard way that government could never be trusted, after being ruled brutally by psychopaths.

Expand full comment

Well, living in a formerly communist country, I was unpleasantly surprised how easy most people went along. Even people who have had bad experience with the secret service in the 70s and 80s due to being a Christian. When I asked a friend about her old dad who did everything he was told, why with the communist experience he would do that, she said: He is way better of now than he was back then, materially and financially speaking. And so as not to have his comfortable way of life disrupted, he will do what it takes to keep it the way it is. That and because he simply was scared and didn't think.

My observation is, that most people I know who withstood the pressure are the ones who have experience with a form of abuse in their personal history, rather than their national history.

Expand full comment

Perhaps it's only the ones who hated it enough to travel to the other side of the world, so their memories are of the really bad days, not that their former compatriots are better off. Yes, I can see how what you say could be a trap for many old, and even some young who never knew what it was like 50 - 60 years ago.

What do you think it was that enable you to see through the propaganda?

Expand full comment

Sadly, I disagree with your last sentence. I feel like what 2020-2024 revealed to me what how many "nice" but willfully ignorant people there are running around. WILLFUL ignorance... it's more than laziness... they know something's up but they don't want "that world to be lost to me." They like their fantasy and thus stay in (and embolden) the Matrix.

Expand full comment

Hi Thoughtful. You are correct, and the word "willful" is correct. And love of the pleasures of the world, and addiction to films, tiktok and the drivel on IT, which is behind why they lose connection with the actual reality of what is happening, and fail to see that the narrative is actually poppycock. Fiction shuts off the bullshit detector.

Could it be said that people who are lazy, are usually willfully lazy? They just chose with their will, not to know?

The post felt harsh enough without weaving more skewers into the fabric of conversation. The reality is that if people lack any self-awareness of the implications of their own willful refusal to see behind the regime media mirage, it's almost impossible to work out how to help them get a grip on their own delusion.

Even serious vaccine reactions for some, don't wake them up.

Many thinkers struggle to know what to do with puppeticians, and media who have become pimpocrats pushing coronaphobia clickbait.

The willfully ignorant inhale fake-news buzzwords for their daily fuel, and believe the thought terminating cliches used to categorize anyone who questions anything, no matter what it is.

Is it a generational chasm, or have brains been addled to the point where thinkers are from now from an endangered planet?

The question is where to now?

It's ironic that it's very hard for thinkers to get through to people who have willfully decided to close their minds to rational analysis and logical deduction based on easily findable fact.

Expand full comment

"The question is where to now?"

I ask myself this all the time. For me, all I've come up with so far is:

1. Teach my children the truth and remind them of their primary purpose (Glorify God, be fruitful, multiply and fill the earth and subdue it...)

2. Hold my loves ones (who are awake) close and build my "red-pilled posse" in case SHTF in some catastrophic way.

3. Prepare to be self-sufficient in all things (i.e. no one is coming to save us).

4. Stop giving money to the enemy (where I have the freedom to make that choice... still have to pay income tax until I can figure out how to stop).

5. Don't participate in the white lies the zombie class perpetuates. Speak uncomfortable truths in case there are some who can still be awakened. For those who can't, let them go.

6. Buy more ammo.

Expand full comment

Indeed. Time to end the professional-worship. I don't know how that ever got emplaced.

I didn't think the 'Elite' had any interest in finding out who had brains. The segregation of the unvaccinated looked very Nazi Germany to me, here in Australia - with the media revving up hatred it really seemed like we were one step away from being forced onto trains.

I find the better explanation for the 'Elite' is that they are Lucifierians (whatever that means or something equivalent) and the karma is not on them if they tell everyone what is going to happen and the people don't resist.

Expand full comment

The reason (I think) they have an interest in finding out who has brains, is to first identify and locate them all, then better work out tactics to put the screws on them really hard, the next time around, based on what the nudge units come up with after studying the non-compliers.

Just maybe this was the trial run to work out how to manage the real end game. This was psychological smoke and mirrors.... the next time could well present psychological situations we never met this time.

Expand full comment

Although... They're giving themselves a much bigger challenge, next time around, given the increasing knowledge in the public. I think a far larger % will be very cynical if a vaccine appears.

Expand full comment

But they have to take that chance anytway. Otherwise they will lose face amongst each other. It's like they have a contract with each other in front of satan, and actually have no option.

Either they face the fact that the potential end for them is public lynching - which I have no doubt that our ex puppetician Jabcinda feels deep down, since the freedom movement doesn't lose any opportunity to let her know how much she is despised.

She will never be able to live in this country "in peace".

So for them, their survival depends on completing the agenda.

Our survival depends on beating them at their agenda, which may cost a lot of lives in the process.

But a life lived in fear, or subjugation, is a life not worth living.

Expand full comment

I accept that explanation in its entirety. It was meant to be a trial run.

Oh dear :D

Expand full comment

And there were lots of trial runs in all spheres of society before that. People talk about CIVIL-ization, failing to realize that that word wallpapers over the reality of big "dogs" feeding off little "dogs" without an ounce of caring about anything but their own mental empire.

Expand full comment

I’m afraid that this vaccine insanity was only the next step and then after this ‘test run’ is the ‘mark of the beast’ whatever that is. We will be cut off totally from the economic system (buying & selling) and that will be our motivator to accept their ‘mark’. There will be no acceptable resistance then. It will make the vaccine mandates look like a Sunday School picnic!!! Best be right with the Lord before that happens IMHO. God bless all you awake folks. Substack like these helped me keep my sanity during these last 4 years!!! 🙏🏻

Expand full comment

and the moTB may well be central digital banking.

Expand full comment

Wisdom and discernment are not medical terms

Neither is 'grow up.'

And a sharp 'bullshit detector'.... certainly not. LOVE your perspective.

Expand full comment

"Given that the medical history shows that everything that happened between 2020 - now, has happened before, and not just once, Breggin cannot say that it's all the fault of the elite."

Yes it's happened before and essentially it's a political problem when the state has too much power over individuals, and yes this is exactly why it's happened before and why it happened in 2020: the attempt by the state to usurp power from the people to institute what may seem to be a "greater good" but always ends up being a police state. Like the "greater good" during Covid.

The power of the state is now aligned with the power of massive surveillance and other technology, and this power wants to be assumed by some faction-- the elite or the deep state or whatever-- for its own use. This is a historical trajectory that manifested in the rise of totalitarian systems that Hannah Arendt described. There can be little doubt that the faction that wants to seize power today is one of an alignment of the WEF/WHO and the largest corporations and banks on earth.

The key strategy used by the deep state to seize power is censorship and propaganda so that only their own narrative is the correct one.

I don't think Breggin is wrong because there is in fact a faction (elite, deep state, or whatever) that wants to seize power and has been working on this for years, and apparently has been planning for a eugenics/socialist/transhumanist society for decades or longer. I think Desmet is wrong because he strongly asserts that there is no such conspiracy to do any such thing, the fatal flaw in his theory of how totalitarianism arises.

Expand full comment

Well, what if in fact one of these parties is "right"? Sees the truth for what it is.

The ONLY important thing is that they bury their differences and take actions consistent with stopping the madness perpetrated. Either party FAILING to take action in that regard, then, I feel has a right to be castigated. Until then, neither should be obsessing with the other.

Breggins' attacks against Dr Malone and Desmet are uncalled for . . .

my opinion.

Expand full comment

Breggin merely stated his opinions on Desmet's theory and his questions about Malone. Malone turned around and sued Breggin for $25 million because Breggin disagreed with Malone-- that was a bit over the top, no?

The big issue is that Desmet's theory provides cover for the globalists who want to seize power, because for Desmet there is no overarching conspiracy to do any such thing. This is the point of chapter eight in his book: there is no conspiracy to induce totalitarianism. Really??? That's a naive view, at the least. Those who wish to install a totalitarian system have a completely different take on this, but are happy if we believe they have no such conspiracy.

Expand full comment

And Desmet doesn't think that the "victims" of mass formation are to blame for their inability to see reality and believing a mirage.

I disagree with Desmet too.

Expand full comment

I think he sees everyone to blame, including the victims. From his invitation to Breggin substack:

"We are all part of the problem, also the people who fall prey to the actions of ‘the elite’. Dr. Breggin seems to interpret this as ‘victim blaming’. In my opinion, I rather make people aware of the fact that they are not powerless. We are all part of the problem and hence we can all contribute to the solution."

Expand full comment

But for Desmet there is no elite in the same sense as Breggin uses the term: for Desmet, the conspiring elite do not exist. This is a complete fiction, with the appearance of conspiracy corresponding to the appearance of planning in a Sierpinski triangle.

This is exactly what Desmet says in chapter eight of his book. On page 134 of his book he says, "The 'plans' do not precede the developments, as conspiracy logic likes to suggest. They rather follow them." There is no one planning a massive global government, then: this is only mechanistic thinking in action, spontaneously evolving into a totalitarian system until we start speaking authentically (but ... how can we do that if we're censored?)

We'll have no choice but to see that even though parts of what Desmet says ring true, overall his theory of the origin of totalitarianism makes no sense at all. Breggin sees that, as do many others. Breggin's "attack" was merely to call out the inadequacy of his theory. Desmet didn't like that. Malone didn't like that even more.

Expand full comment

That seems to me to be a step forward from his original position.

Expand full comment

Yes, there is a faction that wants to seize power, (Breggin is wrong) but only if 7 billion people let them do that. People forget that there IS power in numbers, if everyone wakes up, and that is the problem. It is said that 6,000 people actually "rule" the world, but they can only rule 7 billion people, if people refuse to take responsibility and allow them to do that. But Desmet is wrong, because it seems to me that he asserts that mass formation prevents the "formed" from fighting back.... and they are not to blame for that.

Expand full comment

Breggin states that there is indeed a faction that wants to seize power. Desmet says that mass formation is all because of an organic evolution of Enlightenment thinking into mechanistic thinking, and not because of any grand conspiracy to seize global power. But of course, this contradicts what we all know, and what Desmet knows too, and thus he has to bring in "manipulation" through the back door so that he can somehow acknowledge the conspiracy without saying there was a conspiracy to induce a fear-based mass formation in society. To acknowledge the conspiracy blows a hole in his origin of totalitarianism as evolved from mechanistic thinking, and BTW contradicts chapter eight in his book, in which he decisively states that there was no conspiracy during Covid, only the illusory appearance of one. Yes, this is exactly what he says.

Why in God's name does Desmet do this? Why in hell did he even write chapter eight? Because for Desmet the origin of totalitarianism lies in the people themselves and not in any deliberate censorship and propaganda campaign to control and mold thought to follow along with one narrative, with screws tightening more and more until all misinformation is banned and penalized. Then, we have real totalitarianism, and not because the people somehow asked for it through their propensity for mechanistic thinking.

Expand full comment

Just shows how NOT having a much broader understanding of medical history itself, leads to automatic blind spots of ignorance in those who think they have the whole answer.

Expand full comment

Wow, great summation which resonates 100%. My first intro to the vaccine BS was Barbara Loe Fischer in 1987 at a DC conference in Atlanta. Clearly you have done an impressive deep dive that stands at the top of the class. Bravo!!’

Expand full comment

Barbara has a strong legacy in USA, and much more on her plate. My country is very small, and myopic, and people are much more compliant with a "she'll be right" shrug-type attitude to it all. "don't look at it, and it will all go away." Another form of denialism...

Expand full comment

W.O.W.!!!!! Well said!! My eyes have been opened to the astounding amount of greed and evil ruling this benighted planet. Where to go from here? I can only look to Heaven and to the Lord for wisdom and strength. God bless your words and work!! Wow! Well said!

Expand full comment

I. LOVE. THIS. !!!! BRAVA!!!! I'm going to now print this out and share it with my children. They, too, have learned so much in the last 4 years about the Matrix of bullshit around them and what's actually important.

Expand full comment

Dear John— Dr. Breggin is in the process of finalizing his response. We sincerely hope you will give it equal attention in the Courageous Discourse Substack- Very best, Ginger Breggin

Expand full comment

It will be an interesting discussion. Perhaps a medical analogy could be: do we blame the immune system if it succumbs to a carefully engineered bioweapon that uses the host's immune response function against itself? Humans have certain herding instincts that we use to create functioning social structures. It seems to me that the elites have scientifically studied how to use every aspect of what makes us social critters against ourselves.

Expand full comment

Interesting analogy. Maybe a closer analogy is germ theory vs. terrain theory. In my view, each contributes to our understanding, and our picture is incomplete without both. Perhaps it is the same to see contributions from both populations and totalitarian elite.

Expand full comment

A public conversation among the parties facilitated by John would be good for our movement.

Expand full comment

Omg the breggins are just looking for attention AGAIN.. ridiculous. You ppl are limelight chasers.

Expand full comment
deletedMay 3
Comment deleted
Expand full comment

I have people very close to me who are good, kind, loving people who are not mechanistic thinkers at all, who have nevertheless succumbed to the censorship and propaganda campaign because "trusted authorities" were part of that campaign.

The evil isn't in us. The evil is laid over us to smother us. This is what Desmet denies because for him, there was no conspiracy. Of course this contradicts reality so this is why he has to bring in "manipulation" after the fact of the censorship and propaganda campaign, so that he can then acknowledge that bad people merely took advantage of the situation in a more-or-less mechanistic way. But this isn't what happened at all.

Expand full comment

I think it would help the discussion to call it something other than 'evil' because that word has too strong emotional connotations. Maybe 'denial' - denial is in all of us, to varying degrees. Those with less denial within were better able to withstand the onslaught of propaganda. I've not read Desmet's book so I haven't an idea if he denies any conspiracy at all or - more reasonably - denies that a conspiracy would be necessary.

Expand full comment

Evil is in all of us. The Covid psychopaths merely triggered it in the masses.

Expand full comment

I've read both books and think both make excellent points. Like Peter noted (above), this nuanced problem isn't one that can be narrowed down to "one is right, one is wrong." I think both doctors can be right at the same time, due primarily to your final point: not all that happened was the result of just propaganda (which, to be sure, was dealt to us in volume). Something else was at play, and mass formation does seem to answer that question.

I pray this dispute can be resolved because, imho, we all need to come together to fight the evil before us, not argue amongst ourselves. We can accept two thoughts at the same time and not allow this disagreement to divide us in our work.

Also, "avid boneheads" was stellar. Point to John! :)

Expand full comment
May 3·edited May 3

I've read (and own) books written by both Breggin and Desmet. I respect both as both have made important contributions. Breggin was wrong to go after Desmet personally, attacking the man rather than the argument he makes. I've also thought Breggin fundamentally misunderstands Desmet, incorrectly interpreting Desmet's theory of mass formation as putting the blame solely on the masses when in fact Desmet clearly and unequivocally recognizes that the criminal elite seek to manipulate the masses. The Breggins should accept Desmet's offer to talk, and both should approach it with open minds and actually listen to one another.

Expand full comment

Well put! Another fundamental error of the Breggins was not considering Dr Malone‘s self acknowledged, mental health history. That alone should have caused them to use more temperate language.

Expand full comment

I agree wholeheartedly! I've thought this from the beginning...you just worded it so much better. :) Thank you!

Expand full comment

Thanks for saying what most of us think! Well done Catie.

Expand full comment

Thank you! Love your screen name! :)

Expand full comment

To accuse others of "victim blaming", you have to be, to some extent, steeped in what might be called "victim consciousness". We are not victims of the world we see, and therefore we can take responsibility for whatever we perceive and for the emotions we experience based on our thoughts and perceptions. Many people made the mistake of blindly trusting the CDC, Fauci and other authorities. They are responsible for that misperception. They are only "victims" insofar as they remain unconscious of that responsibility.

Expand full comment

Uh no. They are not "responsible" for having believed the government's experts. THEY are not who is responsible. It's the cheating Government who is responsible.

Expand full comment

Critical thinking allows you to decide to believe what you are being told, or of course to dismiss it. It’s a very important attribute to have in life.

Expand full comment

My point is that many don't have it. I'm guessing they would like to have that skill, but they don't. Maybe they weren't taught the skill, or maybe their brains weren't wired to recognize certain things. However they were brought up or made, unless they made fun of others, none of this was their fault. Think how frustrating your life would probably have been if you'd never been taught how to think

critically. It's not something we're born knowing how to do. That's why we need better teachers.

Expand full comment

Everyone is ultimately responsible for their own perceptions. This means that they are capable of consciously responding to what they perceive, rather than unconsciously reacting. With all due respect, you may be confusing accountability with responsibility.

Expand full comment

I agree with you.

Expand full comment

No. The masses that succumbed to the propaganda from politicians that they’ve observed have lied to them their entire lives (or should have) ARE responsible for their apathetic and cowardly behavior. A free society can only be compromised of engaged, thoughtful and responsible citizens.

Expand full comment

A free society is ONLY free when people distinguish the evil and don't tolerate it. There is no such thing as a free society without people who aren't engaged thoughtful or responsible.

Expand full comment

Well sure, "people" must..." Alas, it's not that simple. Were it was.

You are always going to have some people who cannot "distinguish the evil" and do "tolerate it." But, what is most important is that the PERCENT of a group, country, or society that DOES recognize evil, and DOESN'T tolerate it, is large enough to keep the society free. I understand that you need anywhere from 30% to 60% of the people in the society being strong. We try to help those who aren't so strong. Only about 30% of the men in the colonies

actually fought in the American Revolution. The other 70% didn't engage.

Expand full comment

I'd argue that a free society is only possible with free speech, which speech has historically been understood to be speech that criticizes government power and action.

I'd also argue that the reason so many people are thoughtless is because of censorship and propaganda that they can't see through because they trust the authorities. So it's a matter of misplaced trust, and a failure to comprehend how bad the corruption is, and this failure is because of ... censorship and propaganda.

Expand full comment

Well said, Traveler.

The folks have to take responsibility for their own actions and inability to take action. I'm done with this "oh poor me" philosophy!

Expand full comment

Well, anyone who was apathetic about the shot, sure, I could agree to that, but apathetic means "to not care." I'm not sure you meant to use the word "apathetic" to describe these people who took the shot. I would say "naive" in some ways. Did you know that ELON MUSK took it. Are you saying he's apathetic and cowardly? I think not.

Expand full comment

I meant the word "apathetic" as in not caring enough to know about what was being "sold" to them the do just a little research on their own. I was in a bit of a "panic" in March 2020, like most, but it didn't take but a month's research for me to have serious misgivings about the whole *covid* BS and the vaxx. Not to mention masking. I sent information I was finding, some of it ON the CDC website, to family and friends, strongly encouraging them to review. They didn't care enough to do so, wore masks and ended up getting the inoculation, to many's detriment. "Apathy" is certainly the right word.

Expand full comment

And Elon is certainly not dumb!

Expand full comment

It doesn't have to be one or the other. Both can bare some guilt. I do agree the liars are more to blame, but too many went along to get along and refused to look at the available evidence. In many cases they actively attacked the independent thinkers. They also bare some guilt.

Expand full comment

In what seems like a former life I researched the horrors of “medicating” kids with psych drugs. On that front Breggin is both a pioneer and a hero. With regards to the past 4+ years, Desmet is no doubt one of the heroes. Desmet applies social psychology in an ultimately empowering way. If we understand what is being attempted to be done to us, we can both resist and awaken others. This is valid and infinitely better than wringing our hands and needlessly accepting being psychologically controlled by the “evil elite”.

It has been disheartening to see infighting amongst the good guys. We don’t have to agree on everything to be on the same side. There is too much important work to be done to be distracted by disagreements.

Expand full comment

Well said, agree totally.

Expand full comment

Yes. Personally, i think that if Dr Breggin's statement: the public’s response to propaganda should not be understood as an expression of mass psychosis, but as a "perfectly understandable response to being psychologically conditioned by predatory manipulators" --is the acceptable theme, people will never grow up and will continue down the same childish path. This is supposed to be "Childhood's End". It seems that people are behaving as though they are under a black magic spell. For all my life we unwillingly accepted that only 10% of people are actively working towards a better tomorrow. Now it is even less. Articles have been written about people who use filter bubbles to filter the information they receive so they knowingly remove information that are not from their democrat channel or republican channel and those people accept information as truth based on naive realism. There are ways of receiving many pieces of information and triangulating it by reviewing it all to see what fits into the puzzle. As RFK Jr said: we have to love the Truth more than we Fear a virus. (not verbatim)

Expand full comment

Well, some people will not ever see or understand it. "Grow up?" Harsh. Some, especially older people, cannot imagine that their doctor would lie to them. Like your grandparents. That is NOT "childish," to use your words. Maybe better words would be "uninformed" or "uneducated" or "naive." But NOT "childish." Would you really think or say that your 83 year old Grandma who trusted the doctors and the CDC was a "childish" person? I hope not. Love these people. My God, they did what they thought was best for themselves.

Expand full comment

No. They did what the lying politicians told them was best. There was no thought given whether or not they should follow the diktats. And many suffered and suffer still for their naivete.

Expand full comment

Then, feel for them. I'm guessing it wasn't the politicians, but their own doctors, who convinced them to take it. That's the doctors' fault. They should be able to rely on their own doctor to tell the truth. Those doctors are the ones who should be held accountable, not the people who asked for their advice. It is doctors who need to wake up and not be so selfish.

Expand full comment

We'll all have a much better read on the folks who did as they were told in round one, when round two arrives. I expect to be disappointed, again, by humans behaving as sheep, and I refuse to be invested in anyone who caves yet again.

Expand full comment

I, like many I'm sure, was vilified by people that I cared deeply about for refusing to get vaxxed like a good little lemming. Never mind that I spent THOUSANDS of hours studying everything I could get my eyes on, trying my best to share this information with others, only to be a pariah in my own family and circle of friends. I lost a lovely relationship with a woman I loved dearly over this mess. Pretty much all of them have come to realize I was right, but save one buddy, not a one has apologized to me about how they felt and treated me at the time. I do feel for them whether they've been injured by the shot or only are now worrying about injury, but this is, without a doubt, ON THEM. I found out when tyrants raise their ugly evil heads, there's scant few of us that can be counted on to FIGHT BACK. "May their chains rest lightly upon them.", to paraphrase Sam Adams.

Expand full comment

AGREED, Mattias Desmet: "I rather make people aware of the fact that they are not powerless. We are all part of the problem and hence we can all contribute to the solution."

AGREED, John Leake: "...while our dreadful elites certainly played an instrumental role in fomenting the disaster, we also witnessed a stunning lack of virtue, prudence, intellect, and courage on the part of much of the population. Many people were all too willing to go along with the tyrannical nonsense inflicted on us by our rulers."

Expand full comment

Personal responsibility is a primary part of being a mature adult. It means we can examine our actions, take responsibility when we err and also see when we are falsely accused. This requires confidence. It requires self examination. Many people have neither, they remain children. We have let ourselves be seduced by the goodies and led along. This does not excuse the perpetrators, they know what they are doing, as they enjoy the power they wield over others. Those who knowingly exert their will over others deviously have a greater responsibility in the end. But, those who wish to remain children will have a dramatic lesson, if they survive.

Expand full comment

I share your thoughts re: the discourse between Drs Breggin and Desmet. I believe they both have valid points to make although one does not exclude the other. Let's hope that they can meet and exchange views in a calm and rational manner - as I am sure they can. As to your comment:

"... Life is too short to spend with avid boneheads...", I would have written "...with acquaintances that are neither discerning nor aware."

Expand full comment

I have one answer for Dr Breggin: Darwin. Those who fail to see the lying Lion will be eaten. No value judgement on the Eater or the Eaten necessary. Just the facts, Ma'am. Learn the ways of the Jungle or become dinner. That's Life and That's Death. And kudos to Mattias Desmet for saying "Let's talk" instead of "Shut up". We need more of that!

Expand full comment

Lots of thoughtful dialogue here. The essence of our existence is a battle between truth and lies. Our eternal destiny hinges upon recognition of and surrender to God who is the only source of truth.

This nation has turned away from God and the faith that formed the foundation of a strong nation.

This turning away causes vulnerability to the “strong deceptions” that are always presented as tempting alternatives to submission to God.

In my view Desmet is right. Belief in a strong deception becomes delusion which can become a kind of mass formation or common false belief.

Breggins is right about the culpability of those in leadership positions but also fails to see the root cause of vulnerability being the individual having turned from the only source of truth.

My sense of these people is a humility in Desmet that is lacking in Breggins.

I doubt conversation between them will come to an understanding of this root cause whereby starting in the garden of Eden Satan used a form of propaganda he knew would appeal to our pride to lead us into fatal deception.

I do not believe government is the primary enemy. They are merely useful idiots whose minds have been taken captive by the one who seeks to kill and destroy. That makes them victims like those they victimize.

I have no doubt this truly is a spiritual battle. We do not fight against flesh and blood but principalities and powers unseen. There is where global coordination took place and continues on multiple fronts to continue the battle to tear down a once godly nation one family at a time in order to establish global power and control via a one world government.

Government is the most powerful weapon in killing off humans and suppressing knowledge of the truth that leads to eternal life. It is all foretold in prophecy.

Expand full comment

This is an account I've often given - sorry to bore the frequent readers - but I can't explain it without mass formation.

My mother, 90, former teacher, exposed to many bugs in her life, believed she had an excellent immune system. She had never had a flu vax in her life. She believed a flu vax killed my father when he was 62. She was healthy, living alone at home, getting around in buses and ubers.

When vaccine time came I said that the Astrazeneca (which was offered to her) was looking quite bad - bad blood clotting - so many bad reports.

I rang her a week or two? later. She answered excitedly saying she'd booked in for her vaccination. She thought I was someone else. My impression was that she was excited to be going along with everyone else to get vaccinated. Completely out of character with her life, being and beliefs. Mass formation was the only explanation that fitted.

Expand full comment

Yes. But the key question is: was the mass formation spontaneous (Desmet) or was it induced (Breggin)?

I believe it was deliberately induced through a massive and ongoing censorship and propaganda campaign delivered during High Covid by a relentless 24/7 fear campaign. Deliberately.

I think people hear Desmet's description of mass formation and then assume that he must be correct in the cause of that formation (or, they never consider if he has the cause correct.) But it's important to understand that the cause is important, and it's not the mechanistic thinking of the people that leads to totalitarianism. It's massive and unrelenting censorship and propaganda, such that even science is corrupted, and this is done by those who wish to seize power, snuff out individual self-determination, and manage a global police state in the name of a fictitious "stay safe" greater good.

Expand full comment

I don't think Desmet is arguing that mass formation was not induced? I thought the discussion was more about who was responsible for the dire outcomes - the inducers, or the induced?

While I understand the people-of-goodwill trusted their media and experts, I no longer tolerate that willing level of ignorance. I expect far, far more of them now, than passively obeying the inducers. As I wrote somewhere else, "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me."

Expand full comment

Yes but many people simply don't understand the depths of the corruption. Isn't that the problem? If we actually has a free press in the mainstream media then they'd act on accurate information, wouldn't they? And they'd understand how bad it is.

As for whether or not mass formation is induced, Desmet's entire thesis is that it emerges more-or-less spontaneously because of the mechanistic thinking of the population. In a sense, it's almost inevitable because of how we think, and it only needs a trigger such as Covid.

But during Covid the fear was deliberately induced, and all other reasonable and scientific narratives that contradicted the main fear narrative were censored-- and this on a simultaneous global scale. Not planned? Just due to our mechanistic thinking? I don't believe that for a minute.

Expand full comment

At times people have a responsibility to ask questions, to discomfort themselves a tiny bit to see if there's any corruption. For those still choosing to float with the tide... I don't have much sympathy left.

I'll have to go back and watch Desmet on mass formation, but I have a strong memory of what he said to the EU parliament on the origins of Totalitarianism - I substacked it because it was so striking. He quoted Hannah Arendt, describing the diabolical pact, whereby, at the emergence of a Totalitarian system "a substantial part of the elite, the leaders of the society, and a substantial part of the population, become fanatically convinced of a certain narrative, a certain ideology, a certain theory, become so fanatically convinced of it, that they believe that it is their duty to impose it to society in a relentless way, transgressing all normal ethical boundaries”.

Up until recently I had not only sympathy but personal suffering, agony really, for how the people had been coerced on the vaccines. I no longer offer excuses for people who are still willingly in that pact.

Expand full comment

"a substantial part of the elite, the leaders of the society, and a substantial part of the population, become fanatically convinced of a certain narrative ...."

How do they become convinced? Simply through massive censorship and propaganda. Through the loss of free speech and free expression, which loss is of the essence of a totalitarian society.

One cannot believe that there are global predators attempting to install a global police state and at the same time believe that they never conspire to do so. Yet this is exactly what Desmet says. This is really the issue, and the fact that some or many people are captured by the official narratives is somewhat beside the point.

Desmet describes the people under what he calls "mass formation" accurately, and hence many of us believe he's telling the truth. Yet speaking authentically-- as Desmet advocates as a counter to the psychology of totalitarianism-- makes no difference at all in a society that suppresses speech and thought. The antidote isn't to speak authentically; the antidote is that we are allowed to speak our thoughts at all without censorship.

So again: the psychology of totalitarianism begins in censorship and propaganda deliberately installed by those who conspire to do so. It does not begin in the so-called "mechanistic thinking" of the people, as Desmet says. This is why Breggin objects: Desmet is blaming the people for what originates in those who would seize power from the people.

Expand full comment

I no longer offer concessions to people sucked in by propaganda. We were all meant to learn from our school lessons on the failings of the Good Germans. The young Germans of the 1990s were saying 'oh, that was the Nazis', to which one must reply, no, that was your great/grandparents.

As for the rest, recalling more of Desmet's mass formation explanation, I dispute the founding premise of your argument, that Desmet disputes the propaganda. To the contrary, he said the situation was fully engineered. He knows full well the construction of the circumstances by the 'Evil Elite'. My understanding is that despite this, or perhaps with the passage of time, he considers the people to be responsible for being suckers. People have got to wise up, grow up.

Expand full comment

I can see the merit in both sides of the argument, but tend to agree more with Mattias Desmet based on my own experience with a life-long friend whom I had always considered exceptionally bright. After the roll-out of the "vaccines", we needed to drive together to meet with another friend. When she learned that I was not "vaccinated", she suggested that the three of us meet elsewhere that would not require my sharing a ride with her. I told her that my decision to not receive one of these products was based on extensive research & that I did not dismiss them out-of-hand. I also told her that they were not vaccines, but were poorly tested, experimental genetic injections that were dangerous & needed to be removed from the market. In other words, she had done zero research in spite of her above-average IQ & Ivy League education. She had simply rolled-up her sleeve & donned a mask without asking any questions. If she was a victim, it was of her own ignorance & of her own making. This was true of the vast majority of the population. I have yet to meet anyone who did even 1/100th of the reading & research that I did & continue to do. Yet if you ask them about the safety & efficacy of the "vaccines", they will keep defending them & their decision to get them. It's astonishing.

Expand full comment

Well, now you've met someone who almost certainly did more than 1/100th of the reading and research that you did and continue to do. Allow me to introduce myself. I am the mother of a vaccine-injured baby who has grown up to be a disabled young adult. Pre-COVID, I had, like a good number of other mothers of vaccine-injured children, spent hundreds of hours studying vaccines and their effects, and the "alternative medicine" approaches to treating vaccine injury. So it was natural for me to question the "establishment" propaganda about this new virus and its treatment and the vaccine that was supposed to save us all. I did my own research (gasp!)...hundreds more hours...and I have spent enormous amounts of time sharing (primarily online) what I've learned, starting in about May 2020.

I'm always pleased to meet another "Do your own research" person. Hello, how's it going?

Expand full comment

Hi Kayla. I am very pleased to make your acquaintance. First let me say that I am very sorry that your precious child suffered a vaccine injury. This was obviously devastating for all of you. As to how I am doing, though I am personally fine, I have seen the fall-out from these products, referred to as vaccines, both directly & indirectly. I know of at least (20) injected people who have suffered grievous injury, (3) of whom have died. Yet when I share information about the injections & the harm they have caused with others, I rarely get a response or reply. Or, they simply arch their backs & refuse to engage in any meaningful discussion. That in itself is very disturbing, as it is either the result of cognitive dissonance or a "hurray for me" mentality of those who have thus far, not suffered an injury as a result of having been "vaccinated". Neither one is good. As I've commented previously elsewhere, that is like saying that you had relatives in Germany during the 1930s & 1940s, & nothing bad happened to them. Therefore, you have no problem with Hitler or the rest of his regime in spite of the fact that six million Jews & seven million others died under this regime. They have no interest in learning the truth about anything. They are more interested in their next tee-off time, their next game of mah jong or booking their next cruise. As result, I do not even attempt to share information anymore. It is an exercise in futility.

Expand full comment

Hi Debra, Sorry to be so late in responding to your reply. I had a long-overdue major project to plow through and now that it's 95% done, I'm coming up for air.

Twenty people who've suffered grievous injury, three of whom have died . . . That's horrendous! I'm something of a recluse, so I don't know many people. Among the people I know who got the spikeshots, no one has had notable adverse effects. They all live in obedient-to-the-narrative "blue states" and I know the most obviously dangerous spikeshots were concentrated in the non-obedient "red states." So I suspect they've all been lucky and gotten only placebo shots. Still, I wonder and worry whether subtle longterm adverse effects will occur in these "lucky" people.

I warned family members and close friends against the spikeshots within the first month of the spikeshot roll-out, but nobody wanted to listen so yes, it was an exercise in futility and I quickly gave up.

But from the early months of the pandemic, I had gone online and worked at educating people there, about each new issue that arose (faulty PCR testing, suppression of early treatment options, devastating effects of lockdowns, ineffectiveness of masks and social distancing, inadequate testing of the spikeshots, adverse effects of the injections, etc.).

I got many an argumentative reaction from fellow commenters on my county's public health department's Facebook page. I doubt I changed a single "true believer's" mind about anything. But I kept going, remembering some good advice from my husband: "Write to reach the bystanders." In other words, write to reach the people who are just listening in on the conversation. Be a calm, courteous, "reasonable person" in the discussion, no matter what your opponents say or what names they call you.

I had a strict rule for myself that I never called people names online, with the exception that I would occasionally say that a specific politician was a "puppet" for the pharmaceutical companies. I was meticulously accurate in what I said, and backed almost everything I said up with links to studies, interviews with honest (unbought) medical experts, government statistics. I would also back up (with corroborating links) things that other people wrote questioning the approved narrative or contradicting the propaganda. This was a satisfying project (partly because it thwarted Facebook's censorship) and I kept it up for a long, long time.

As the casualties from the spikeshots mounted, I switched to sharing information about the known mechanisms of harm from the injections and treatment approaches for each mechanism. People who'd gotten the shots, or who had family members who'd taken the shots, were showing up in the comment sections of various Substacks, either panicky and hopeless because they (or loved ones) were suffering adverse effects, or terrified that they (or loved ones) soon would be. I would throw these people "life-preservers" of hope, information on treatments, and links to protocols or knowledgeable doctors. This was very satisfying, because people were genuinely grateful for my efforts to help them; and I figured I was reaching bystanders, too.

These days, I'm glad that the spikeshot disaster has gotten some people to take a closer look at vaccines in general and question the "safe and effective" mantra; but also concerned because so many people are still "true believers" worshipping the golden calf of vaccination and the gene-messing injections mislabeled vaccines.

Expand full comment

I come into this with the same experience with vaccine injury and that most are not interested, even family members. As you explained, they are interested in their own pleasures and satisfactions. If they accepted the truth about your injury, the bottom line is that they might have to sacrifice some pleasure or some resource to help you in order to maintain their identity that they are a good person. And guess what? They are NOT going to give up one iota of their comfortable lives to help you. So they engage in some kind of mental tactics that blots out the reality of what really happened to you so they don’t have to go out of their way. Not forsake one round of golf, not a penny or help of any kind. Forget about the intellectual exercises on how to categorize this. It’s described in the Bible when a poor traveler gets waylaid by bandits and left for dead on the side of the road amd goes ignored by a couple very “nice” fellow travelers before being rescued by the “samaritan”. Let’s call this phenomenon out for was it is. Immorality. Callow, superficial, selfishness. It seems civility of society hangs on the 1 in 3 of who live a life of compassion And pay for it with their personal sacrifices. This is not mass formation. This is not being the victim of clever propaganda. It requires conscience and self sacrifice. This is walking the walk and talking the talk and it can be hard.

Expand full comment

I agree with you, Rose. In my own life, all one need do is to look at the soles of my shoes, the odometer of my car, and my checkbook ledger to know that I have routinely & continually come to the aid of anyone whom I sensed needed help. It did not have to be a family member. Maybe that is why I have been so incensed that others are not at least somewhat concerned or angered by all of the needless suffering & deaths from either the suppression of early out-patient treatment for covid (we're talking between 750,000 - 900,000) to those whom have died from the "vaccines" (we're talking at least 550,000). Where is the outrage??? It is largely absent. It is as if the federal health agencies have been playing a very perverted game of musical chairs whereby people keep being eliminated instead of chairs. What it will take for the average person to wake-up is anyone's guess, especially when they don't seem to care very much.

Expand full comment

Also, we haven’t seen the end of the carnage by a long shot. The fertility assault has not yet revealed itself.

Expand full comment

Sadly, every country is seeing a decline in birth rates. Dr Mark Trozzi, of Ontario, Canada, provided this information yesterday in his substack...https://drtrozzi.substack.com/p/ontarios-plummeting-fertility

Expand full comment

I tried to comply, but I just couldn't do it. I knew I would be living a lie. It was obviously about control, not health or safety. How anyone could believe that wearing any kind of a scarf or N-95 mask over your face could prevent viruses from escaping both through or around these mouth coverings with your breath is beyond ludicrous. Improperly fitted masks leak. Nobody wore fitted masks. Viruses are smaller than mask materials. Will a chain link fence stop a mosquito? And did people really believe that walking down a grocery store aisle six feet behind another person would be protective, as if the other person's exhaled virus would drop to the ground before you occupied their space? Really? Do viruses not hang in the air and float for a while? It was obviously a control mechanism. And could I really be safe at Lowes or Home Depot with a parking lot and store full of people, but be in danger at the hair salon or restaurant? Oh yes, wear a mask as you enter the restaurant and walk to your seat, but you're safe when you sit down at the table so you can take it off. How about the guy arrested in the ocean for surfing? It was a mind game about control and following what you know to be a lie. "My heart wouldn't buy it", to quote Sammy Davis Jr. So I got in fights with my wife, arguments with a doctor's staff, almost was asaukted by someone at the grocery store, because I refused to wear a mask (remember any face covering was acceptable) that I knew did not stop the spread of any potential virus. I used to believe 10% of what government officials told me. That has now dropped to zero. I require third party, independent, non-conflict-of-interest persons to provide evidence. Should I believe the NIH, where scientists are sharing in vaccine royalties and as co-patent owners with Pharma companies, or with the few nurses or doctors who risked losing their job for blowing the whistle? Fauci or Dr Marik? Walensky or Dr McCullogh? Governor Newsom or Dr Pierre Kory? I think you know my decision.

Expand full comment

The Breggins keep holding fast to their (valid) point that people should not be blamed for being weak and for the problems that are going on, due to "mental illness". But, in my opinion, the lack of wiggle room in their stance hinders us from all coming together in the Fight of our Lives to battle the people and cartels and other entities that are propagandizing, corrupting, controlling, stealing, abusing, and decimating us. To agree to disagree on some points as we focus on our huge challenges and critical goals is the way forward. Dr. Breggin is one of my all-time favorite heroes with decades of incredible work of fighting Big Pharma and helping people understand how dangerous psych drugs and psych treatments are. In my humble opinion, dear Breggins, please see the forest for the trees on this one. It's all hands on deck!

Expand full comment