Mar 26, 2023·edited Mar 26, 2023Liked by Tereza Coraggio
Thank you for pointing out these two crucial facts, as they are essential to my understanding of the personality and motives of Dr. Malone and other well-known characters in this domain:
»His career, however, has been the exact opposite: working in the spaces between militarized empire—the Pentagon, CIA and DoD, the economic empire—Big Pharma and government contractors, and the global healthcare empire—the WHO and Billionaire ‘Philanthropy’.«
»And that’s where it comes back to motive. When someone makes a mistake and it’s pointed out, they change course. They apologize. They don’t sue for $25M. When Malone apologizes, I’ll be the first to forgive.«
When Malone sued the Breggins, the image I had of him changed abruptly. – He should own up to his mistake regarding his silence about the 2020 ResearchGate paper, ask for forgiveness, and withdraw the lawsuit against the Breggins.
Mark Kulacz says the same thing, and even qualifies it more specifically. There was a delivery system that Malone was involved with, a company that Jill wrote the incorporation papers for, that 'pulsed' the mRNA into the skin without breaking the surface and entering the bloodstream. That would have kept it more localized. If Malone were to say, "I thought this was going to be how it was used. I'm sorry for not speaking up," Mark says all would be forgiven--he would be honest about his mistake.
Thank you for this reflection, Tereza. You're so good at keeping all the various pieces in mind and turning that kaleidoscope for another view. I appreciate the pulling in various angles attempting to find a more accurate view. But alas, the image will quickly shift with another piece. (And which ones are keepers and which ones will fall out?) Hard to hold anything steady.
There is enough 'smoke' around Malone for me to keep my distance. More significantly, my bodily BS detector goes off when he talks, and I rely on that since it's always ahead of my head.
Suing the Breggins - of all people! - remains for me the primary alarm. His deep state connections are a tangled mess, but choosing to go after clearly well-intentioned truth tellers is not tangled at all. It's a warning to would-be critics and speaks reams.
Thank you for that, Kathleen, and great kaleidoscope metaphor! It does feel like it keeps shifting but it also seems like it's coming more into focus. And my purpose is to see beyond Malone to what the agenda is and who's behind it. We're in agreement that we don't need more convincing that he isn't who he says. But he, of all people, does know what the game plan is, at least from the US perspective (who knows WHO (sic) is play them). So he keeps being a source of clues for me.
Just a quick hello and thank you for a well done piece Tereza.
I've been too busy on this end to keep up with the reading, much less writing (joining the unemployment line again, health, and family matters back in the states). Just wanted to let you know your take on things is appreciated.
Tereza I'd recommend a reading of "The Trillion Dollar Silencer: Why There Is So Little Anti-War Protest in the United States" by Joan Roelofs. While Roelofs addresses the capture of the US by the MIC and assorted accomplices, it speaks to just how the system works.
I have more or less concluded, anyone who gains a significant following (an influencer) is targeted by special interest (the system) for monitoring and cooptation. It follows the logic of Perkins' "Confessions of an Economic Hit Man".
As you know the world we live in was fabricated by those with the power and wealth to do so, and continue in that endeavor. It's a 5,000 year project.
Thanks for that book recommendation, Art, it sounds right up my alley. I met Perkins once at a local fundraiser. In the Q&A part of his presentation, I asked him why Israel seemed to be the tail that wagged the dog of US foreign policy--why did the US do things against even their own corporate interests to benefit Israel? He didn't have an answer and, honestly, didn't really consider the question.
But what he showed is sound--there's hard power and soft power, the fist inside the glove. That soft power is being certainly used against anyone with an audience. I see our protection in my sole (soul) dogma--I am no better than anyone else. It's superiority that seduces, I think.
Thank you, Tereza. I think it's SUPER important to have a look at George Webb's Twitter account right now about Malone. AND the ongoing Vaccine Litigation Conference. Yikes and Wow. This is all so crazy. But George seems to have receipts we haven't yet seen before. As if we needed more evidence, smh...
Not familiar with that but I don't see it as an eternal struggle, in fact, I think the belief that it is is part of the psyops that keeps it going. "If not our empire, it will be someone else's." To go deep, I think that duality is part of the illusion of time and by letting go of our own dualities, we allow reality to emerge unchallenged--heaven on earth for a little bit before earth disappears into only heaven. ;-)
Thank you, Tereza. The reference to Enlil and Enki was a suggestion that perhaps what we are witnessing is the continuing struggle between the immortal gods, who, at various times and various places through the ages, have manifested themselves as the Anunnaki, the Elohim, the Titans and the Olympians as well as the Egyptian, Roman and Welsh pantheons and others. The theory is that perhaps, although mythology is littered with innumerable gods and demigods, there is in fact only a small number of these beings, who reincarnate or manifest as many different personas over time.
Tied in with this also is the notion that perhaps time is circular rather than linear?!
Funnily enough, I watched a presentation about this only yesterday. The discussion was in terms of collectivism versus individualism; but I felt there were clear parallels with empire versus sovereignty:
On time, something that I talk about is that time and eternity can't co-exist, any more than space and infinity. Once you calibrate something into increments, it needs a start and an end point. The infinity sign is a loophole to this, literally.
I entertain the possibility that only eternity and infinity exist in reality, and we're on a little hamster wheel in a bubble of time and space in the middle of it, that doesn't really exist. I talk about this in one of my pre-Substack episodes called What is the Matter? on Iain McGilchrist: https://youtu.be/KFXxrARtIkc.
We’re floating in the same plane! Again, no such thing as coincidence!! I’m not alone in my realm of what so many deign better to just walk away from the crazy. While nodding and pretending to smile.
Excellent article Tereza, you actually laid that out very clearly. Through the Information Embargo, he obviously did try to protect the institution of virology and vaccinology; this is something that, in light of all the needless death from vaccines, I cannot condone.
Guys like Malone have done us all a favor by showing us how fortunate we will be once the "Empire's" power structure is dissolved. Obfuscation will soon be way too expensive for even the richest Elites to pay for.
If we can make this a "case study," for everyone to learn from, then public trust will be very hard to earn. As it should be. If Malone is actually really working for our concerns, he would give up that stupid lawsuit, just for starters.
On another note; he has published some articles on the topic of a decentralized cooperative social structure sans government organizations, whereas every individual is sovereign. This means that the TRUE enemy calling themselves "The Family," are well aware of our power to NULLIFY their system of hierarchy. So they know their end is near and they use assets like Malone like a cheap ragg to throw in, just to confuse us and buy them more time. They hope we will "fight" amongst ourselves before making means of war on their system.
These Elites know how to make a believable case for anyone, by infusion of actual truth combined with their usual flotsam; their patented version of bullshit ice cream in caramel rockyroad. We're not having any of it.
Yes, Nefahotep, that was something that really confused me about Malone. He published on the need for decentralized systems and I commented, "This is just what my book and Substack are about!" That was when he subbed me.
So I have two theories for this discrepancy, as Daniel would term it. First, no one knows the truth of what's happening like Malone and he's answering to someone. There has to be a part of him that wants it to fail, and knows that decentralization is the only way to defeat it. I'm certain this is true at some level.
Second, what we've seen from Mathew Crawford's account and others, a key technique that psyops uses is reflecting our own words back to each other. It takes our clarity and strength and turns it to a different purpose, an opposite intent. That's why intent is the only thing we can expose and critique, not words and actions. The same can serve empire or sovereignty.
And yes, I feel this is really important as a case study. I do think we're in an empire deflection point that's going to succeed this time.
Mar 26, 2023·edited Mar 26, 2023Liked by Tereza Coraggio
Thanks again for bringing some cool-headed thought into this very over-heated subject. It's still a bit too much for my poor little brain to be able to take sides on the controversy. I'm a simpleton, I guess.
In other news, I ordered your book and am looking forward to reading it soon.
As someone who reads your blog, Mark, simpleton does not apply! Back in my Sonata days, when I was trying to learn jazz, I thought it was the hardest thing I'd ever tried to wrap my brain around. By comparison, global economics is a breeze! So you have the hard part down pat ;-)
Thank you for ordering my book! I'm looking forward to your thoughts on it.
Mar 27, 2023·edited Mar 27, 2023Liked by Tereza Coraggio
Tereza,
First, thank you for the thoughtful exploration of these ideas. Second, I really love your title.
And we are in agreement that understanding intention not only helps us discern what's true, but that it is inseparable from our destination.
You are really making me think about what I am trying to say. I appreciate how deep you go, that is where the truth will be.
And so I may not have this all worked out, but I am going to try and meet you at this deeper level in support of my argument.
I think there has to be some alignment in our journey - of intention, action and belief - and I think although we don't always get it right, the alignment gets truer in us and in our culture as we act out our beliefs with intention.
I think doing this brings us into alignment (spirit, intellect, body) with ourselves, with each other and with the world and with our Creator.
And so to the 'argument' of motive.
I want to make the distinction, between privately considering motive, which seems like an inseparable part of discernment and publicly assigning motive which, if we get it wrong, has social consequences that I would argue might outweigh any benefits and even undermine our intention.
This may seem like a contradiction and a dis-alignment to hold private and public thoughts, and on one level it is, but I think it's not so much a state, or a place that we settle at, as much as a process of bringing reality into higher resolution, through our inner and outer faculties, which do not always align due to our limitations. And so we do this first by acknowledging our limitations, our imperfections and propensity to get things wrong, in order that we might have the clarity, tools and opportunity to get things right.
There are consequences to getting things wrong in public that can be orders of magnitude greater than getting things wrong in private and I think that is part of what needs to be considered.
We get certain things wrong as a natural course of learning. We poke and prod and make mistakes to work out what is real and not real and what works and doesn't. This expirementation is essential. In private getting it wrong is relatively inconsequential. But when we get things wrong in public, like mistakenly assigning motive, the consequences can be severe. It can be the difference between being friends or enemies, manslaughter or murder, war and peace. I would argue it is a moral imperative to get it right, before we pass judgement on someone and so as a rule, we should avoid going there in public.
And again, that's not to say we don't publicly judge each others actions, or make valuations on right or wrong or objective reality. That is a moral imperative aswell. I think that when we stick as closely as we can to what is objectively real and provable in the process of group problem solving and political movement, we leave tools for each other to work out problems and learn from each others mistakes. In the case of an impasse or crisis - this leaves an off ramp for our self-centred nature to get out of each others way without activating defense mechanisms, that might spin our world and our relationships out of control. Criticising each other while going to motive arms each other. Criticising each other while making room for human error is disarming.
I think on the other things you bring up I am going to have to think about them some more, especially my belief in the bible as a source of truth and Jesus as a redeemer to all people and not just Christians. I read a couple of your pieces on this and there is a lot there, I think to be productive or for me to add anything I should start there and try and find the right frame.
These are not easy topics and they can be flattened and easily cause grief. I have never done apologetics, but I dont think I should avoid addressing your points, I will just need to think about it some more. I do believe there is a way to approach conversations of politics and theology that benefit everyone.
Something like speaking in the spirit of cooperation and mutual benefit. And I couldnt see that as being a bad thing and so I am going to leave it there and thank you again for taking the time to chat here about these things which we agree are so important. I will think about these things and return with my thoughts.
Oh good, Dan, I was just going to look for your comment on Meryl to link my post.
Since I got an entire post to express my views, I'm happy to give you the last word. We don't need to agree but I appreciate you reading my thoughts in such detail.
thanks for linking to the nagase piece. that is fire.
global search-and-replace "malone" with "hotshot conspiracy substacker" and suddenly a lot makes sense
your man dan is thoughtful but my rule of thumb is start with cui bono and then work backwards and watch how words and deeds unravel.
on one hand there's no shame in welcoming and capitalizing on any positive development, even if the source is ultimately malign. on the other, that tends to put us in a smallball mindset. am i the only one whose patience is wearing thin? where is the drive to be as utopian as the evil ones are dystopian?
Excellent point, nymd. My experience is that, even if good intentions don't have good results in the short term, they'll always win out. And that good results from covert intentions are just a set-back in disguise. Sooner or later, they'll lead to worse outcomes than before and you'll have to do the additional work of sorting out the deception before you can deal with them. The 'lesson' you'll have learned from the last time will be a false one so you have to go back and unlearn it in order to move forward on the next crisis.
Hi Tereza, So isn't the DNA altering one of the reasons we don't want the vax. Of course there are other reasons but I thought it was common knowledge or at the very least a possibility? Interesting about him leaving the call for 10 minutes. Also the funding of the Pepcid studies was news to me. So is Malone following you now, that's a tell. Thank you for being such a good detective.
Yes, that's exactly what Daniel was trying to alert Malone to, when he told Daniel to stick to the messaging. This was back in Nov 2021 so maybe it was common knowledge but at least a strong suspicion. Since then Daniel has pointed to evidence that the alarm he was raising was justified. Daniel's articles are very interesting and methodical. He goes through many possibilities for why Malone wouldn't have wanted to draw attention to the RNA affecting DNA. His final one, after eliminating all the others, is the one I posted.
I linked the Breggins column on could this man have saved lives to A Midwestern Doctor substack amid a litany of oohs and aahs over how great Robert Malone is. I also linked the incredibly informative Housatonic podcast on Malone. Crickets. Again. Anytime I try to offer anything that goes against a certain paradigm, not the 3rd:-), I get totally ignored.
I saw that Cynthia! I thought about adding on but realized what a superlative job you'd done as a naive but curious commenter. I'm waiting to see if s/he answers my last question but I've saved the thread to post. Here's our last exchange:
Midwestern Doctor: One thing I will add is that he was one of the early people who was pushing forward research Ivermectin and HCQ, which I know directly from people who worked with him. I also must respectfully decline your request; my policy has been to not get involved in this topic, I don't have enough time to cover most of what I want to cover and I can't see anything positive coming from doing a deep dive on it.
Tereza Coraggio: Exactly, which is why there is a discrepancy btw his words and actions. In April 2020 he had $21M to do clinical trials showing that IVM or HCQ worked, making the vaccine unable to get EUA. That's not coming from a 'conspiracy theory,' that's from Branden Borrell and RM's own CV. His technology, DOMANE, is designed to select repurposed drugs. If he had run trials of either, not one of those vaccine injuries or deaths would have happened.
I understand if you don't want to do a deep dive on it but can you tell me where either my facts or logic are wrong on this point?
Also Tereza, George Webb posted a photo he credits to Malone in which Malone says ‘I only drink DOMANE.’ fashioning himself as the Dos Equis most interesting man in the world.
Talk about in your face arrogance, and a bunch of other adjectives.
Not only that, if Robert Malone claims are true that he was possibly patient zero (😂) for Americans getting ‘Covid,’ seems he could have made an eloquent and fervent argument on behalf of natural immunity.
"In it, Cynthia Bowers did a masterful job of asking an innocent question, "Did Malone try to help the mess? This is a confusing topic and one that is widely debated in a number of substacks." She then slips in the Breggins, the lawsuit, Mark Kulacz, Joe Rogan asking about ADE, and links to the Breggins and Mark. She then ends, "Don't shoot the messenger!" That's my girl!"
the intro remarks about the new testament and sovereignty gave me a huge smile. brilliantly spoken, without offending anyone.
Well well, maybe some of the texts have been written and inserted by a ruling family dynasty im Rome in order to save their power. So some that didn't question the empire and accepted the new religion could be saved in heaven, while the "barbarians", Jews and Muslims would not be spared from destruction.
Maybe much of the misunderstanding and hatred between humans in the west stems from a very twisted mythology or "religious innovation" that did abandon the concept of sovereignty in favor of the divide into the good and the evil of mankind. people where betrayed some 1900+ years ago and most are unaware of it.
If only the library of the Vatican would be digital for anyone to access. The ultimate way-back machine for peace and prosperity for all.
There's a different version of Judeo-Christianity that emerged at the turn of the millenia: the zealots who were militantly anti-imperial and kicked out Rome under the leadership of Judas the Sicariot and Zadok the Pharisee. This version that's been buried by the empire is the one we need to unearth.
This is a Bible translation to English from Hebrew that didn’t meet the ‘standards’ of King James. It was banned by the British monarch (who was widely believed to be gay, fwiw). And voila we get the revered KJV.
Interesting she wants to read aloud from it after suggesting that she can understand the English because of her scholastic background and therefore we should listen to her read aloud. Link included.
I had to guffaw because the entire story of the Geneva Bible, which Naomi points out, is the translation suggests man doesn’t need any intermediaries or middle men to get to know, understand, and love God and yet she offers herself as an intermediary. 🙄
You'll understand, when I leave on my caps lock, that I'm not shouting at you:
THERE IS NO WRITTEN HEBREW VERSION OF THE GOSPELS!
International Bible scholars ALL agree on this. Never been found. In addition, the speculative hypothetical Aramaic spoken version has been debunked. The tropes in the parables, supposedly Jesus' own words, don't work in Aramaic. They're plays on words that only have meaning in Greek. So either 'Jesus' was speaking in Greek to other elite Hebrews, or the whole thing's a fabrication by Greek-speaking Hellenic Hebrews for other elite Roman-sympathizers--if not Rome and Caesar himself.
Why couldn't it be that what Jesus said was just originally written in Greek? Obviously He Himself spoke Hebrew, but it was written in Greek after He died, so that more people could understand/read what He said? It would make perfect sense to write the New Testament in Greek and not in Hebrew, when you're trying to bring the gospel to the rest of the world.
Well ironically I thought I understood the Geneva bible to have been translated from Greek and even said so to my husband and then I read Naomi and I thought well…I’m sure she knows more about it than I do!
Thank you for pointing out these two crucial facts, as they are essential to my understanding of the personality and motives of Dr. Malone and other well-known characters in this domain:
»His career, however, has been the exact opposite: working in the spaces between militarized empire—the Pentagon, CIA and DoD, the economic empire—Big Pharma and government contractors, and the global healthcare empire—the WHO and Billionaire ‘Philanthropy’.«
»And that’s where it comes back to motive. When someone makes a mistake and it’s pointed out, they change course. They apologize. They don’t sue for $25M. When Malone apologizes, I’ll be the first to forgive.«
When Malone sued the Breggins, the image I had of him changed abruptly. – He should own up to his mistake regarding his silence about the 2020 ResearchGate paper, ask for forgiveness, and withdraw the lawsuit against the Breggins.
Mark Kulacz says the same thing, and even qualifies it more specifically. There was a delivery system that Malone was involved with, a company that Jill wrote the incorporation papers for, that 'pulsed' the mRNA into the skin without breaking the surface and entering the bloodstream. That would have kept it more localized. If Malone were to say, "I thought this was going to be how it was used. I'm sorry for not speaking up," Mark says all would be forgiven--he would be honest about his mistake.
And yes, it was the Breggin lawsuit that changed my perception too. In case you haven't seen my first episode on that: https://thirdparadigm.substack.com/p/who-is-robert-malone-really
Thank you for this reflection, Tereza. You're so good at keeping all the various pieces in mind and turning that kaleidoscope for another view. I appreciate the pulling in various angles attempting to find a more accurate view. But alas, the image will quickly shift with another piece. (And which ones are keepers and which ones will fall out?) Hard to hold anything steady.
There is enough 'smoke' around Malone for me to keep my distance. More significantly, my bodily BS detector goes off when he talks, and I rely on that since it's always ahead of my head.
Suing the Breggins - of all people! - remains for me the primary alarm. His deep state connections are a tangled mess, but choosing to go after clearly well-intentioned truth tellers is not tangled at all. It's a warning to would-be critics and speaks reams.
Appreciate your posts.
Thank you for that, Kathleen, and great kaleidoscope metaphor! It does feel like it keeps shifting but it also seems like it's coming more into focus. And my purpose is to see beyond Malone to what the agenda is and who's behind it. We're in agreement that we don't need more convincing that he isn't who he says. But he, of all people, does know what the game plan is, at least from the US perspective (who knows WHO (sic) is play them). So he keeps being a source of clues for me.
Just a quick hello and thank you for a well done piece Tereza.
I've been too busy on this end to keep up with the reading, much less writing (joining the unemployment line again, health, and family matters back in the states). Just wanted to let you know your take on things is appreciated.
Cheers,
steve
Happy to hear from you, Steve, I was wondering how you were. I hope that all those issues resolve as best they can. I'm sure your students miss you.
Tereza I'd recommend a reading of "The Trillion Dollar Silencer: Why There Is So Little Anti-War Protest in the United States" by Joan Roelofs. While Roelofs addresses the capture of the US by the MIC and assorted accomplices, it speaks to just how the system works.
I have more or less concluded, anyone who gains a significant following (an influencer) is targeted by special interest (the system) for monitoring and cooptation. It follows the logic of Perkins' "Confessions of an Economic Hit Man".
As you know the world we live in was fabricated by those with the power and wealth to do so, and continue in that endeavor. It's a 5,000 year project.
Thanks for that book recommendation, Art, it sounds right up my alley. I met Perkins once at a local fundraiser. In the Q&A part of his presentation, I asked him why Israel seemed to be the tail that wagged the dog of US foreign policy--why did the US do things against even their own corporate interests to benefit Israel? He didn't have an answer and, honestly, didn't really consider the question.
But what he showed is sound--there's hard power and soft power, the fist inside the glove. That soft power is being certainly used against anyone with an audience. I see our protection in my sole (soul) dogma--I am no better than anyone else. It's superiority that seduces, I think.
And my book follows that fabrication back 3500 of those 5000 years, since the dual inventions of coinage and democracy, two ways that we got seduced by superiority into not questioning: https://www.amazon.com/How-Dismantle-Empire-2020-Vision/dp/1733347607
"The Matrix" and "The Truman Show" are both documentaries, aren't they?!
Thank you, Tereza. I think it's SUPER important to have a look at George Webb's Twitter account right now about Malone. AND the ongoing Vaccine Litigation Conference. Yikes and Wow. This is all so crazy. But George seems to have receipts we haven't yet seen before. As if we needed more evidence, smh...
Empire vs sovereignty. Is that another way of saying Enlil vs Enki (the seemingly eternal struggle)?
Not familiar with that but I don't see it as an eternal struggle, in fact, I think the belief that it is is part of the psyops that keeps it going. "If not our empire, it will be someone else's." To go deep, I think that duality is part of the illusion of time and by letting go of our own dualities, we allow reality to emerge unchallenged--heaven on earth for a little bit before earth disappears into only heaven. ;-)
Thank you, Tereza. The reference to Enlil and Enki was a suggestion that perhaps what we are witnessing is the continuing struggle between the immortal gods, who, at various times and various places through the ages, have manifested themselves as the Anunnaki, the Elohim, the Titans and the Olympians as well as the Egyptian, Roman and Welsh pantheons and others. The theory is that perhaps, although mythology is littered with innumerable gods and demigods, there is in fact only a small number of these beings, who reincarnate or manifest as many different personas over time.
Tied in with this also is the notion that perhaps time is circular rather than linear?!
Funnily enough, I watched a presentation about this only yesterday. The discussion was in terms of collectivism versus individualism; but I felt there were clear parallels with empire versus sovereignty:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SK9rQKytwis&t=4830s
On time, something that I talk about is that time and eternity can't co-exist, any more than space and infinity. Once you calibrate something into increments, it needs a start and an end point. The infinity sign is a loophole to this, literally.
I entertain the possibility that only eternity and infinity exist in reality, and we're on a little hamster wheel in a bubble of time and space in the middle of it, that doesn't really exist. I talk about this in one of my pre-Substack episodes called What is the Matter? on Iain McGilchrist: https://youtu.be/KFXxrARtIkc.
We’re floating in the same plane! Again, no such thing as coincidence!! I’m not alone in my realm of what so many deign better to just walk away from the crazy. While nodding and pretending to smile.
I'm glad to be keeping you company in staying with the crazy and figuring it out! No such thing indeed.
Excellent article Tereza, you actually laid that out very clearly. Through the Information Embargo, he obviously did try to protect the institution of virology and vaccinology; this is something that, in light of all the needless death from vaccines, I cannot condone.
Guys like Malone have done us all a favor by showing us how fortunate we will be once the "Empire's" power structure is dissolved. Obfuscation will soon be way too expensive for even the richest Elites to pay for.
If we can make this a "case study," for everyone to learn from, then public trust will be very hard to earn. As it should be. If Malone is actually really working for our concerns, he would give up that stupid lawsuit, just for starters.
On another note; he has published some articles on the topic of a decentralized cooperative social structure sans government organizations, whereas every individual is sovereign. This means that the TRUE enemy calling themselves "The Family," are well aware of our power to NULLIFY their system of hierarchy. So they know their end is near and they use assets like Malone like a cheap ragg to throw in, just to confuse us and buy them more time. They hope we will "fight" amongst ourselves before making means of war on their system.
These Elites know how to make a believable case for anyone, by infusion of actual truth combined with their usual flotsam; their patented version of bullshit ice cream in caramel rockyroad. We're not having any of it.
LOVE "bullshit ice cream in caramel rockyroad!"
Yes, Nefahotep, that was something that really confused me about Malone. He published on the need for decentralized systems and I commented, "This is just what my book and Substack are about!" That was when he subbed me.
So I have two theories for this discrepancy, as Daniel would term it. First, no one knows the truth of what's happening like Malone and he's answering to someone. There has to be a part of him that wants it to fail, and knows that decentralization is the only way to defeat it. I'm certain this is true at some level.
Second, what we've seen from Mathew Crawford's account and others, a key technique that psyops uses is reflecting our own words back to each other. It takes our clarity and strength and turns it to a different purpose, an opposite intent. That's why intent is the only thing we can expose and critique, not words and actions. The same can serve empire or sovereignty.
And yes, I feel this is really important as a case study. I do think we're in an empire deflection point that's going to succeed this time.
Thanks again for bringing some cool-headed thought into this very over-heated subject. It's still a bit too much for my poor little brain to be able to take sides on the controversy. I'm a simpleton, I guess.
In other news, I ordered your book and am looking forward to reading it soon.
As someone who reads your blog, Mark, simpleton does not apply! Back in my Sonata days, when I was trying to learn jazz, I thought it was the hardest thing I'd ever tried to wrap my brain around. By comparison, global economics is a breeze! So you have the hard part down pat ;-)
Thank you for ordering my book! I'm looking forward to your thoughts on it.
thanku well done
Tereza,
First, thank you for the thoughtful exploration of these ideas. Second, I really love your title.
And we are in agreement that understanding intention not only helps us discern what's true, but that it is inseparable from our destination.
You are really making me think about what I am trying to say. I appreciate how deep you go, that is where the truth will be.
And so I may not have this all worked out, but I am going to try and meet you at this deeper level in support of my argument.
I think there has to be some alignment in our journey - of intention, action and belief - and I think although we don't always get it right, the alignment gets truer in us and in our culture as we act out our beliefs with intention.
I think doing this brings us into alignment (spirit, intellect, body) with ourselves, with each other and with the world and with our Creator.
And so to the 'argument' of motive.
I want to make the distinction, between privately considering motive, which seems like an inseparable part of discernment and publicly assigning motive which, if we get it wrong, has social consequences that I would argue might outweigh any benefits and even undermine our intention.
This may seem like a contradiction and a dis-alignment to hold private and public thoughts, and on one level it is, but I think it's not so much a state, or a place that we settle at, as much as a process of bringing reality into higher resolution, through our inner and outer faculties, which do not always align due to our limitations. And so we do this first by acknowledging our limitations, our imperfections and propensity to get things wrong, in order that we might have the clarity, tools and opportunity to get things right.
There are consequences to getting things wrong in public that can be orders of magnitude greater than getting things wrong in private and I think that is part of what needs to be considered.
We get certain things wrong as a natural course of learning. We poke and prod and make mistakes to work out what is real and not real and what works and doesn't. This expirementation is essential. In private getting it wrong is relatively inconsequential. But when we get things wrong in public, like mistakenly assigning motive, the consequences can be severe. It can be the difference between being friends or enemies, manslaughter or murder, war and peace. I would argue it is a moral imperative to get it right, before we pass judgement on someone and so as a rule, we should avoid going there in public.
And again, that's not to say we don't publicly judge each others actions, or make valuations on right or wrong or objective reality. That is a moral imperative aswell. I think that when we stick as closely as we can to what is objectively real and provable in the process of group problem solving and political movement, we leave tools for each other to work out problems and learn from each others mistakes. In the case of an impasse or crisis - this leaves an off ramp for our self-centred nature to get out of each others way without activating defense mechanisms, that might spin our world and our relationships out of control. Criticising each other while going to motive arms each other. Criticising each other while making room for human error is disarming.
I think on the other things you bring up I am going to have to think about them some more, especially my belief in the bible as a source of truth and Jesus as a redeemer to all people and not just Christians. I read a couple of your pieces on this and there is a lot there, I think to be productive or for me to add anything I should start there and try and find the right frame.
These are not easy topics and they can be flattened and easily cause grief. I have never done apologetics, but I dont think I should avoid addressing your points, I will just need to think about it some more. I do believe there is a way to approach conversations of politics and theology that benefit everyone.
Something like speaking in the spirit of cooperation and mutual benefit. And I couldnt see that as being a bad thing and so I am going to leave it there and thank you again for taking the time to chat here about these things which we agree are so important. I will think about these things and return with my thoughts.
Oh good, Dan, I was just going to look for your comment on Meryl to link my post.
Since I got an entire post to express my views, I'm happy to give you the last word. We don't need to agree but I appreciate you reading my thoughts in such detail.
thanks for linking to the nagase piece. that is fire.
global search-and-replace "malone" with "hotshot conspiracy substacker" and suddenly a lot makes sense
your man dan is thoughtful but my rule of thumb is start with cui bono and then work backwards and watch how words and deeds unravel.
on one hand there's no shame in welcoming and capitalizing on any positive development, even if the source is ultimately malign. on the other, that tends to put us in a smallball mindset. am i the only one whose patience is wearing thin? where is the drive to be as utopian as the evil ones are dystopian?
Excellent point, nymd. My experience is that, even if good intentions don't have good results in the short term, they'll always win out. And that good results from covert intentions are just a set-back in disguise. Sooner or later, they'll lead to worse outcomes than before and you'll have to do the additional work of sorting out the deception before you can deal with them. The 'lesson' you'll have learned from the last time will be a false one so you have to go back and unlearn it in order to move forward on the next crisis.
Thought provoking. Thank you.
Hi Tereza, So isn't the DNA altering one of the reasons we don't want the vax. Of course there are other reasons but I thought it was common knowledge or at the very least a possibility? Interesting about him leaving the call for 10 minutes. Also the funding of the Pepcid studies was news to me. So is Malone following you now, that's a tell. Thank you for being such a good detective.
Yes, that's exactly what Daniel was trying to alert Malone to, when he told Daniel to stick to the messaging. This was back in Nov 2021 so maybe it was common knowledge but at least a strong suspicion. Since then Daniel has pointed to evidence that the alarm he was raising was justified. Daniel's articles are very interesting and methodical. He goes through many possibilities for why Malone wouldn't have wanted to draw attention to the RNA affecting DNA. His final one, after eliminating all the others, is the one I posted.
I linked the Breggins column on could this man have saved lives to A Midwestern Doctor substack amid a litany of oohs and aahs over how great Robert Malone is. I also linked the incredibly informative Housatonic podcast on Malone. Crickets. Again. Anytime I try to offer anything that goes against a certain paradigm, not the 3rd:-), I get totally ignored.
I saw that Cynthia! I thought about adding on but realized what a superlative job you'd done as a naive but curious commenter. I'm waiting to see if s/he answers my last question but I've saved the thread to post. Here's our last exchange:
Midwestern Doctor: One thing I will add is that he was one of the early people who was pushing forward research Ivermectin and HCQ, which I know directly from people who worked with him. I also must respectfully decline your request; my policy has been to not get involved in this topic, I don't have enough time to cover most of what I want to cover and I can't see anything positive coming from doing a deep dive on it.
Tereza Coraggio: Exactly, which is why there is a discrepancy btw his words and actions. In April 2020 he had $21M to do clinical trials showing that IVM or HCQ worked, making the vaccine unable to get EUA. That's not coming from a 'conspiracy theory,' that's from Branden Borrell and RM's own CV. His technology, DOMANE, is designed to select repurposed drugs. If he had run trials of either, not one of those vaccine injuries or deaths would have happened.
I understand if you don't want to do a deep dive on it but can you tell me where either my facts or logic are wrong on this point?
Also Tereza, George Webb posted a photo he credits to Malone in which Malone says ‘I only drink DOMANE.’ fashioning himself as the Dos Equis most interesting man in the world.
Talk about in your face arrogance, and a bunch of other adjectives.
Not only that, if Robert Malone claims are true that he was possibly patient zero (😂) for Americans getting ‘Covid,’ seems he could have made an eloquent and fervent argument on behalf of natural immunity.
And I don't know if you saw, but I was praising your deftness on Sage Hana's Sub:
"This is the thread: https://amidwesterndoctor.substack.com/p/the-downward-slide-of-americas-healthcare/comment/13963831
"In it, Cynthia Bowers did a masterful job of asking an innocent question, "Did Malone try to help the mess? This is a confusing topic and one that is widely debated in a number of substacks." She then slips in the Breggins, the lawsuit, Mark Kulacz, Joe Rogan asking about ADE, and links to the Breggins and Mark. She then ends, "Don't shoot the messenger!" That's my girl!"
I’m honored to be ‘your girl.’ Lol.
I had to think about whether it was overly familiar or possessive to put that in, but then decided to go for it. Glad it landed right ;-)
the intro remarks about the new testament and sovereignty gave me a huge smile. brilliantly spoken, without offending anyone.
Well well, maybe some of the texts have been written and inserted by a ruling family dynasty im Rome in order to save their power. So some that didn't question the empire and accepted the new religion could be saved in heaven, while the "barbarians", Jews and Muslims would not be spared from destruction.
Maybe much of the misunderstanding and hatred between humans in the west stems from a very twisted mythology or "religious innovation" that did abandon the concept of sovereignty in favor of the divide into the good and the evil of mankind. people where betrayed some 1900+ years ago and most are unaware of it.
If only the library of the Vatican would be digital for anyone to access. The ultimate way-back machine for peace and prosperity for all.
Thank you, DaCon! I don't know if you've seen my other episodes on the NT: https://thirdparadigm.substack.com/p/jesus-is-the-og-psy-ops and the OT: https://thirdparadigm.substack.com/p/the-devil-and-naomi-wolf.
There's a different version of Judeo-Christianity that emerged at the turn of the millenia: the zealots who were militantly anti-imperial and kicked out Rome under the leadership of Judas the Sicariot and Zadok the Pharisee. This version that's been buried by the empire is the one we need to unearth.
I’m sure you saw Naomi is now discovering the Geneva bible. Thoughts?
I know nothing about that. The Geneva bible? Links please!
https://naomiwolf.substack.com/p/my-mind-blown-by-1560-geneva-bible
This is a Bible translation to English from Hebrew that didn’t meet the ‘standards’ of King James. It was banned by the British monarch (who was widely believed to be gay, fwiw). And voila we get the revered KJV.
Interesting she wants to read aloud from it after suggesting that she can understand the English because of her scholastic background and therefore we should listen to her read aloud. Link included.
I had to guffaw because the entire story of the Geneva Bible, which Naomi points out, is the translation suggests man doesn’t need any intermediaries or middle men to get to know, understand, and love God and yet she offers herself as an intermediary. 🙄
You'll understand, when I leave on my caps lock, that I'm not shouting at you:
THERE IS NO WRITTEN HEBREW VERSION OF THE GOSPELS!
International Bible scholars ALL agree on this. Never been found. In addition, the speculative hypothetical Aramaic spoken version has been debunked. The tropes in the parables, supposedly Jesus' own words, don't work in Aramaic. They're plays on words that only have meaning in Greek. So either 'Jesus' was speaking in Greek to other elite Hebrews, or the whole thing's a fabrication by Greek-speaking Hellenic Hebrews for other elite Roman-sympathizers--if not Rome and Caesar himself.
I can see another Wolf post a-brewin'
Why couldn't it be that what Jesus said was just originally written in Greek? Obviously He Himself spoke Hebrew, but it was written in Greek after He died, so that more people could understand/read what He said? It would make perfect sense to write the New Testament in Greek and not in Hebrew, when you're trying to bring the gospel to the rest of the world.
Well ironically I thought I understood the Geneva bible to have been translated from Greek and even said so to my husband and then I read Naomi and I thought well…I’m sure she knows more about it than I do!
Have you commented to her yet?
thx, will read.