Posted on 11/26/2022 8:33:36 AM PST by Presbyterian Reporter
At the moment, there is a very active discussion regarding the increasingly viral video “Died Suddenly”. Other commentators (for example “The Daily Skeptic” and Josh Guetzkow) have appropriately noted that the (generally well funded and produced) video includes segments which are misleading at best, falsely imply one or more cause-effect relationship between a sudden death event and vaccine administration, or otherwise employ cinematic license to stoke outrage. I have previously written regarding the business model of Stoking Rage for the up and coming podcaster, and in my opinion this strategy is fundamentally the same as the “fearporn” business model of corporate media - and in particular CNN.
For what its worth, I hold “our side” to higher standards than I have come to expect from corporate (broadcast and published) media. I reject the assertion that, on the battlefield of the current 21st century unrestricted media and information war which we are immersed in, it is acceptable to employ the tactics of our opponents. I have heard others in the medical resistance community advocate the schoolyard “logic” of “they are doing it to us, and so we have to do it to them”. I firmly reject this. Any “win” on the information war battlefield which is based on this type of rationale will be transitory and self defeating. It is not a win if we become one with the ethics of our opponents.
This is not just an information war, it is a battle over what is right and good versus what is fundamentally evil. Our opponents clearly believe that the ends justify the means, and that ethics - right and wrong- are completely situational and subject to the same logic widely accepted by the “Virtuals” caste; that there is no objective truth or reality, and reality and ethics are whatever one believes it to be. The ultimate derivative of the logic of “cultural relativity”. The logic from which springs the transsexual movement denialism of the genetic/biologic basis of gender.
As I have said so many times, in so many lectures, our opponents in this information war, this war on truth and integrity, have no ethical guardrails. Ethics are entirely situational in their world.
Repetition has merit in this case; our opponents appear to believe that the ends justify the means, and their cause is sufficiently compelling (in their minds) to justify any actions of censorship, defamation, mis- dis- or mal- information deployed to support their cause. In their minds, they are fighting for a higher cause (Globalism? Utilitarianism? Socialism/Marxism? Totalitarianism? Fascism?) which justifies jettisoning ethics and fundamentals of respect for integrity and the dignity of others.
Furthermore, this has become about tribalism and demonstration of tribal allegiance, and is not about me, or you, or medical freedom, or anything rational. This IS about mass formation, or mass psychosis, of the formation of crowds, or whatever term you wish to apply to the phenomenon so thoroughly described and documented by Freud, Le Bon, Arendt, and (yes) Desmet and their contemporaries.
I have consciously and intentionally chosen to cross-post the Daily Skeptic and Josh Guetzkow commentaries concerning “Died Suddenly” because I believe that they have made important points which should be discussed, but in so doing I have become a target for a small troll army which has swarmed those threads with accusations that I have a personal vendetta with Stew Peters, and which have attacked me as if I were the author of the cited essays.
Let me assure you now that I have no time or interest in further engagements with Stew Peters. He is irrelevant, as far as I am concerned. A modern carnival barker.
There is nothing in this “Died Suddenly” which represents new news, as far as I can tell. This seems to mostly be a sensationalized but well-produced video covering information which has been known for quite some time. Steve Kirsch did not endorse use of his likeness in this production, did not endorse, did not sponsor it, and neither he nor his organization in any way supports it.
For me, this is sort of “round two” on this general topic of “died suddenly” video clips. Long, long ago, in what seems like a galaxy far, far away, I was still on Twitter and GETTR was still coalescing. Which is to say between one and one and one half years ago. And I cross-posted another video regarding the “died suddenly” meme. In that case, the cross post involved a compilation of short video clips of athletes who had “died suddenly”. One of the clips in that montage was of a young male who most definitely died suddenly on the field while competing, but the tragic event took place prior to the vaccine deployment. In other words, it fit the broader “died suddenly” (presumably from acceptance of mRNA vaccine), but this was clearly a false association.
Because I once was one of the more prominent members of the Twitter and Linked In communities who were speaking out concerning the lack of ethics and safety in the EUA mRNA vaccine deployment and mandate policies, I was seen as an important influencer on those platforms. As a consequence of cross-posting a video montage which included a false association involving the tragic death of a young man, I received a rather aggressive and accusatory cease and desist letter from lawyers representing his family and estate. Basically, I was accused of exploiting his death (and the associated video of same) for political purposes, even though I did not produce the video in question (rather, I merely cross-posted it). Strong language was used in asserting that I was intentionally disrespecting the young man and his family.
Frankly, my reaction to the letter was a mix of horror and pity. Pity for the parents and family, who were probably being inadvertently forced to re-live a personal tragedy. Horror that I had in some way compounded or contributed to their pain.
What did I do? I immediately deleted the cross-post, and apologized to the family via their legal representative who had contacted me. I had acted in ignorance. I assumed that the video (which I believed came from a credible source) was accurate. But I had acted wrongly. Immediate deletion and apology, acknowledging the harm inadvertently done, was the closest I could get towards being consistent with my own personal commitment to fundamental integrity, respect for human dignity, and valuing my community (and community ethical standards).
This is directly analogous to one of the apparent breaches of accuracy in the current “Died Suddenly” video, wherein (apparently) an example of sudden death is being used which is demonstrably unrelated to SARS-CoV-2 (COVID) vaccination. It may or may not even be the same event.
My opinion is that these breaches of technical accuracy are not acceptable. For either side of the debate. It is often said, when debating an opponent (or an internet troll) that “you are entitled to your own opinion, but not to your own facts”. Furthermore, these types of “artistic license” distortions of truth cause both damage to the credibility of the arguments being made (which may other wise be valid), and can also cause psychologic pain.
Furthermore, these types of errors become weapons which will be deployed against us by our opponents in this unrestricted information war battlefield.
Allow me to provide a counter example from recent history. The Jeff Hays video production of “The Real Anthony Fauci,” a full-length feature documentary based on Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.’s runaway bestseller, was meticulously (internally) fact checked before being released. Anything stated during the many interviews which were used to generate the final product which could not be documented was left on the cutting room floor. It did not rely on either hyperbole or misrepresentation. And (unfortunately) it did not go viral. But it will withstand the test of time.
As stated previously, I could care less about a former bounty hunter who started a podcast to take down Alex Jones, and has seemingly sought to replace him by becoming a sort of well-financed (?huh, where did that come from?) second-tier shadow projection/mimic of a shock jock. Alex Jones, whatever his personal flaws, is the real deal. Just read his book, which analyzes the Klaus Schwab/King George III “Great Reset” agenda. Solid. Factual. Insightful.
The question which I do think we all need to grapple with is what is Stew Peters, and who does he represent? Based on what I have observed, he mostly represents himself. Are his ethics your ethics? Are they our ethics?
The collective answers to these questions by the medical freedom community will further define who we are. What are the ethical standards to which we will hold ourselves?
As far as I am concerned, that is the question that really matters.
The rest is merely a tale, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing, but full of passionate intensity.
Is this (below) who we are, and does it represent an example of the type of “ends justify the means” ethics that we wish to promote? If not, then I suggest that we all think long and hard about what “our” community standards are going to be, now and in the future.
The truth is like a lion. You do not have to defend it. Let it loose and it will defend itself.
Turkish bath house entrance bell, Istanbul
Furthermore, the truth will eventually come out. Maybe not today, maybe not tomorrow, and maybe in some cases (JFK and RFK senior assassination?) it can be hidden for a long time. But it will come out.
To that end, the “truth” of the corporate media subterfuge concerning the “Hunter Biden Laptop” story may soon be revealed by Mr. Elon Musk. If so, then this is a shot across the bow of corporate media and the Administrative State. I suspect that Elon has the receipts on much of what has gone on. And he is in a position to enforce “new rules”. Maybe, maybe, there is hope for the cause of integrity. When the dust settles, which side do you want to be on?
You seem to be afraid of being put in a gulag. Okay. How does lying about vaccines keep you out of these supposed gulags?
Doctor Malone's article addressed much more than lying about vaccines or even health and science.
I have previously written regarding the business model of Stoking Rage for the up and coming podcaster, and in my opinion this strategy is fundamentally the same as the “fearporn” business model of corporate media - and in particular CNN.Doctor Malone's field is vaccines, health and science, but he is equating his ethical beliefs to other related struggles in the culture war.This is not just an information war, it is a battle over what is right and good versus what is fundamentally evil. Our opponents clearly believe that the ends justify the means, and that ethics - right and wrong- are completely situational and subject to the same logic widely accepted by the “Virtuals” caste; that there is no objective truth or reality, and reality and ethics are whatever one believes it to be. The ultimate derivative of the logic of “cultural relativity”. The logic from which springs the transsexual movement denialism of the genetic/biologic basis of gender.
As I have said so many times, in so many lectures, our opponents in this information war, this war on truth and integrity, have no ethical guardrails. Ethics are entirely situational in their world.
Repetition has merit in this case; our opponents appear to believe that the ends justify the means, and their cause is sufficiently compelling (in their minds) to justify any actions of censorship, defamation, mis- dis- or mal- information deployed to support their cause. In their minds, they are fighting for a higher cause (Globalism? Utilitarianism? Socialism/Marxism? Totalitarianism? Fascism?) which justifies jettisoning ethics and fundamentals of respect for integrity and the dignity of others.
Furthermore, this has become about tribalism and demonstration of tribal allegiance, and is not about me, or you, or medical freedom, or anything rational. This IS about mass formation, or mass psychosis, of the formation of crowds, or whatever term you wish to apply to the phenomenon so thoroughly described and documented by Freud, Le Bon, Arendt, and (yes) Desmet and their contemporaries.
As stated previously, I could care less about a former bounty hunter who started a podcast to take down Alex Jones, and has seemingly sought to replace him by becoming a sort of well-financed (?huh, where did that come from?) second-tier shadow projection/mimic of a shock jock. Alex Jones, whatever his personal flaws, is the real deal. Just read his book, which analyzes the Klaus Schwab/King George III “Great Reset” agenda. Solid. Factual. Insightful.
To that end, the “truth” of the corporate media subterfuge concerning the “Hunter Biden Laptop” story may soon be revealed by Mr. Elon Musk. If so, then this is a shot across the bow of corporate media and the Administrative State. I suspect that Elon has the receipts on much of what has gone on. And he is in a position to enforce “new rules”. Maybe, maybe, there is hope for the cause of integrity. When the dust settles, which side do you want to be on?I agree with Doctor Malone and he is a champion among men but his limited arguments should not be the final consideration.
Color me confused. So what do you think conservatives should lie about? Vaccines? Transgenderism? Hunter Biden’s laptop?
What is wrong with the truth?
You say you agree with Malone, but Malone is saying honesty is the best policy and the truth will out. Yes, I am confused.
I am no particular fan of Malone or Jones. Alex Jones may have said some sensible and truthful things (I really don’t know), but he has said so many outrageously ridiculous things and spouted enough nonsense to entirely destroy his credibility.
I'm just saying in the fight against Socialism, nothing is off the table. If you cannot understand or accept that, stay confused.
I’m confused about *why* there would be any need to lie in the war of words against socialism. The truth suffices, no?
If commies somehow take over the US, and drugged-up commie goons are running around shooting old ladies, then I’ll lie if necessary to protect them. “Nope, no one’s left in that village. Everyone fled.”
Dr. Malone did not appear to be addressing such scenarios.
From my link...and what you should be looking at...
So...you really don't know anything...(I really don’t know)...yet you expect to be believed by others and you think that because you've been fed, and follow, a narrative from the MSM they should as well.
Just the fact that you've heard ONLY the bad and none of the good, by your own admission ought to give you pause, yet you still plow on down the road, unquestioningly.
Got it! Carry on.
I never said you claimed that, nor implied you were up to anything nefarious. What the blazes are you going on about?
I thought it a bit curious that you responded to a question about chicken fat clots with a link to an article about autopsies of teens with myocarditis who tragically died, no blood clots — unless your intention was to prove no clots were involved in those deaths.
Now you get angry at me over chicken fat clots? I don’t get it.
Yes, the vaccines carry an elevated risk of myocarditis, especially among young males. The research is there, no quarrel from me on that point. What on earth has that to do with the hokum about “strange” rubbery clots supposedly never seen before that keeps getting posted here?
What does myocartis is have to do with clots? I’m baffled by your response.
BS! Simply following the conversation disproves your lie!
I responded to a comment, not a question....
I have seen no reports by people who have expertise in dealing with dead people.
Something like a coroner's report?
Now you get angry at me over chicken fat clots? I don’t get it.
You poor, pathetic thing. You don't know the difference between anger and indignation.
What does myocartis is have to do with clots?
What is myocartis?
I’m baffled by your response.
You're just baffled.
You have made a whole bunch of assumptions here. It’s silly to accuse someone who is skeptical when it comes Alex Jones of following “the MSM narrative”. That is a false dichotomy. It’s not an either-or thing, as in “either you totally believe Alex or you totally believe the MSM”.
The MSM gets some things right, such as “a volcano began erupting at 8:07 am local time” on some island in the Pacific, or “a jackknifed tractor trailer rig is blocking two southbound lanes on the interstate, expect delays ...” They get a whole lot of things wrong, though. So I’m skeptical of most things they put out.
I know Alex Jones has spouted a bunch of crazy things with no basis in reality. So I’m very skeptical of anything he says. I suppose he’s said some correct things — stopped clock and all that. Why should it matter if I can’t recall anything factual he has said?
Where’s your beef? You want me to just blindly believe whatever comes out of Jones’ mouth? Why are you so angry?
You conveniently left out a pertinent portion of post #4. Here’s the whole thing:
*******
My main concern about the ‘Died Suddenly’ video regards the ‘light, yellowish clots’ being removed from dead people.
Are those clots simply ‘chicken fat clots’ that are commonly seen by embalmers?
Or are those clots rarely seen in the past by embalmers and only started appearing after people were covid vaxxed?
I have seen no reports by people who have expertise in dealing with dead people.
As Malone says: “Let the truth out and it will defend itself.”
https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/4111963/posts?page=4#4
*****
See? You quoted only the last bit. He clearly stated his main concern was about the clots, and his question was about that. You responded with an article about autopsies that found no clots. What are people supposed to think?
Why get so nasty? Why did you imagine I was accusing you of “being nefarious” when I clearly was not.
Perhaps I’m baffled because you are baffling.
You want me to just blindly believe whatever comes out of Jones’ mouth?
Have I ever given any inclination that you should?
Why are you so angry?
Why do you keep trying to infer I'm angry?
I posted the RELEVANT part of post #4, the last bit, the STATEMENT to which I responded, not any questions as you claim...you responded to a question about chicken fat clots..., which you accused me of doing.
He clearly stated his main concern was about the clots, and his question was about that.
AGAIN, I didn't answer any questions asked, I responded to a statement. I guess the thought never occurred to you that I posted an autopsy that didn't cover blood clots and which would possibly direct attention to another aspect of the gene therapy injection injuries and spread discussion, not stifle it.
All of your chicken fat BS is now nothing more than obfuscation, a diversion or distraction.
Reread your posts. They’re rather nasty. As if something set you off. All I did was quote a line from the article you posted saying no clots were found. How was I to know you would take offense? I still don’t know why you took offense. How was I to know that was not your point (no clots) when you posted the link to that article in reply to a question about clots causing deaths in the vaccinated? How could anyone know?
And why did you write “Keep feeding the chicken fat line, if you so choose, but there are other things of equal importance to consider”? The original question was about chicken fat clots. Which have nothing to do with myocarditis. If you think myocarditis is more important, I agree. These postmortem chicken fat clots are a distraction from real issues. Yet they go and on posting stuff on FR about these clots and making them sound scary and claiming the vaccines caused people to die from these clots.
I have been saying all along that the goofy stuff that keeps getting posted here (snake venom, wiggly parasites, tiny mechanical nano-octopuses, itty bitty razor blades, etc. supposedly in the vaccines, these supposedly mysterious clots) distracts from the real concerns. And hurts the anti-mandate cause.
I simply don’t understand why you got so upset.
INDIGNATION at your actions set me off. That isn't ANGER.
All I did was quote a line from the article you posted saying no clots were found.
AGAIN...I never said the autopsy found clots.
The damn TITLE tells you it wasn't about clots yet you want to make issue of it.
And why did you write “Keep feeding the chicken fat line, if you so choose, but there are other things of equal importance to consider”?
Yep, you're stupid.
You took the “statement you replied to” out of context. The context was the clots. The statement you replied to was relevant to the majority of the post, the sentences preceding it. Can you not see that?
Why can’t you simply say. “Oh, misunderstanding. I was just offering a link to autopsies I think are more important than the clot business. I can see where people might think I was implying that it’s myocarditis, not clots, we should worry about, as the autopsies found no clots.”
That’s precisely what I thought. And I agree it’s myocarditis one should worry about, not these clots they keep going on about.
The study of diseased cells and tissues using a microscope.
No microscope needed to see chicken fat.
Where did I claim you said the autopsies showed clots? Nowhere! I never did. I thought your point was that there were no clots found. What else could I think?
You can't see that.
Why can’t you simply say. “Oh, misunderstanding.Blah, blah, blah”
Because there is no misunderstanding on my part, only on yours.
I think I'll read THE TITLE!
Ah, I see. You refuse to take any responsibility. You imagine you are the sole arbiter of whether something is “a stand alone statement” and claim anyone who took it in context was wrong to do so, while you were right to take it out of context.
Misunderstandings almost always go both ways, with both people taking some responsibility. I’m perfectly willing to take responsibility for assuming you were replying in consideration of the context, when that was not your intention. You are apparently unwilling to acknowledge that a reasonable person might make such an assumption and that you had not made your intention explicit, hence the misunderstanding. We both made wrong assumptions: you wrongly assumed I should know you were replying to that bit of #4 without taking the context into consideration. I wrongly assumed you were taking the context into account.
The irony is, as far as I can tell, we both think the clot business is a distraction and the myocarditis the real issue.
I never, ever said you claimed blood clots were found in those autopsies, and think you owe me an apology there. No, I’m not expecting one. And for calling me stupid and various other undeserved insults. Again, not expecting any.
It’s a shame we can’t simply laugh at what is surely a big misunderstanding and part amicably and with good humor. Perhaps you can reread this thread tomorrow and see that. It’s kind of funny, in its way.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.