Peak Prosperity - The Weaponization of Information and Digital Tools to Occupy and Derail Your Mind

Episode Date: December 24, 2024

Dr. Robert Malone discusses his book “Psywar,” exploring fifth-generation warfare, psychological operations, narrative control, societal impacts, and the challenges of discerning reality in a manipulated information landscape.

We can see the behavior, but we can't identify the perps. And then we have to remember that in fifth-generation warfare, we're not supposed to know who the perps are. The following is the audio version of a video released at peakprosperity.com. Visit peakprosperity.com to watch the video and to find other insightful content such as articles, discussion forums, and exclusive subscriber-only content. Hello, everyone. Welcome to this Peak Prosperity podcast. I'm your host, Chris Martinson. Very excited today to be talking with Robert Mal podcast. I'm your host, Chris Martinson. Very

excited today to be talking with Robert Malone. We're going to be talking about something really important, his latest book, Psywar, because, you know, we're looking for the theory of everything to explain what's going on. If you don't understand the fifth generation warfare, what's been happening psychologically, I think you're at a disadvantage. So, Robert, very excited to be talking with you about this today. Thanks a lot, Chris, and thanks for the opportunity to speak to you today on your broadcast and just acknowledge all the excellent work you've done in peak prosperity. Oh, thank you. I really appreciate that. Now, the first time I heard your name

was Pierre Corey, and he said he knew this guy who, because we were struggling really early on with what was happening with respect to ivermectin and things like that. There was a trial. Was it active, active six? Yeah, that was the first time I heard about you. So from that moment, where were you in that moment in time in terms of this conversation? So that's a very different origin story from what I usually get from people who often either will refer to the Brett Weinstein Dark Horse podcast or the Joe Rogan podcast in terms of their awareness.

At the time, there was a lot of moving parts going on i since the outset of the event that began in january of 2020 or really began in the fall of 2019 but i was alerted at the i think january 4th of 2020 by a he he's currently retired CIA operative, Michael Callahan, that there was a novel coronavirus on the loose in Wuhan that looked like a significant public health threat. And I should spin up my team and get ready to enable a response by that team to this novel coronavirus. And a lot of people find that rather odd. But this has been my specialty professionally for quite a while now, is building teams to solve complicated problems, often for the government.

And I had worked with Callahan previously during Zika and, among other things, built significant capability in drug rep threat assessment and kind of a survey of the landscape of what's known about coronaviruses and coronavirus, let's say, threat mitigation technology, which potentially could include vaccines, drugs, and other things, non-pharmaceutical interventions. And the literature was quite clear that the history of coronavirus vaccine development, and I was aware of it because of my role in the vaccine industry, that the history of coronavirus vaccine human vaccine development and a significant track record of candidate products that I used to talk about the vaccinologist's worst nightmare, which is that you come up with a vaccine product that actually makes the disease worse. This was historically the case with the respiratory syncytial virus vaccine, ACE1-notorious. And so by my threat assessment, it was highly unlikely that an effective and safe coronavirus vaccine could be developed for this novel agent. And the only way to respond effectively to prevent excess death or mitigate excess death was through pharmaceutical intervention, antivirals, etc. And once again, the history of developing pharmaceuticals for coronaviruses was poor. There was a number of candidates that were in the pipeline, and there was also the

prospect that there might be repurposed drug opportunities. So that's what I focused on, was drug repurposing, and I pulled together really a team of expertise because at the time, of course, there was so much fear. And it was a strong motivator for people to cooperate with each other. And we developed and deployed some of the latest technology involving high-throughput screening, computational docking, screening of massive libraries using computational methods, computational docking methods, developed x-ray crystallography models for some of the key proteins that were likely to be considered pharmaceutical targets, and proceeded to get

all of this funded by the Department of Defense and by Health and Human Services in various ways. And as that effort proceeded, what I encountered was something that I'd never experienced before in my professional experience, which is that it was exceedingly difficult to get anything published concerning drug repurposing for this particular virus. And so it was in that context that I found myself basically advocated with a group of others that were so frustrated that were international, a couple from Spain, et cetera, that we would set up a special edition of the Journal of Frontiers in Pharmacology for drug repurposing and would be designed to enable the publication of drug repurposing scientific studies. And as we got approval for that and began moving forward as editors for that initiative,

we were soliciting articles to go into this special edition. Corey had recently published a lay press summary of findings that related to ivermectin effectiveness for SARS-CoV-2. So I'd reached out to Pierre and suggested that he take this lay review article that he'd put out and restructure it as a formal peer-reviewed submission and provide it for consideration and publication in this new special edition of Frontiers in Pharmacology. So that's what brought me into his world, and I guess that's what brought me into your world was that initiative that went awry. That's a different story. Yeah. Well, it sure did. Now, I think in hindsight, it's a little clearer. But when did you start to realize that you weren't just up against the fog of war,

that there was maybe something... So it was actually very early, and it's another thing that's been weaponized against me. We got this call, I got this call at home from Callahan, who ostensibly, my understanding was that he was calling me from China, from Wuhan region. That's disputed by some subsequent articles from Brendan Burrell about him, published in National Geographic and others. But certainly Callahan had situational awareness of what was going on, though it was quite granular. And he was in Wuhan at least at a minimum shortly after that phone call. So in response to Michael's call that we take this threat seriously,

Jill and I put together, and it was Jill was the primary driver of it, a book on how to prepare and protect yourself from the novel coronavirus. Didn't have a name then. And what we did was summarize kind of standard knowledge about how to manage a viral infectious disease threat at a personal level. This is, you know, having been in the biodefense industry for decades, this was just common knowledge.

And Jill pulled together quite a large, it was 100 plus pages, highly referenced by a PhD, she's a PhD, and a MD, MS, and self-published it in Amazon. Our thinking was that with the Amazon self-publishing system, we could update it periodically and keep it fresh and contemporary rather than putting out a book early on. So we published this in the beginning of February, which is cited as evidence that we must have been working on it for months beforehand, but that's not the case. I think anybody that follows our Substack now knows that we're very prolific writers. And so we got that out on Amazon and we went through a couple of updates, particularly useful for people that were buying it on Kindle

because they could automatically then get the update of whatever the new information was. That was the kind of logic and business model. We priced it at what Amazon recommended, which was a modest price. We weren't there to make money. We'd written it kind of with our neighbors in mind. So that was the target audience. It was not a scientific audience, but we live in a rural area of Virginia and we kind of had our neighbors around us as

the exemplar for who we were writing it for. So it went along and it started getting more traction. And then in late February, we submitted another revision and it didn't publish. And so it was delayed again and again and again. We started calling into the Amazon self-publishing helplines. They couldn't give us an explanation why it was being held, why the revisions wouldn't come out. And then we were notified that it had been withdrawn. We would not be able to, allowed to publish it anymore. Amazon would not distribute it anymore. And again, we went through this cycle of asking questions, what had we done wrong? And the eventual answer that came out, I think it was in late, early,

late February, mid to late February, because I got infected in the end of February, was that we had violated community guidelines. And as we reviewed Amazon's community guidelines for publications, we couldn't find anything that was germane. We had no corn in there. There was nothing. We weren't attacking anybody, et cetera. And so then we started to dig into what may have transpired that would give rise to this. And we're able to document that there was a series of meetings that were covered in the Washington Post and kind of obscure articles, among others, that the White House, the Trump White House, had had meetings with Amazon, World Health Organization,

Google, a lot of the heavy hitters that we're now well familiar with, in which it was decided that there needed to be control of basically the narrative, any information having to do with SARS-CoV-2. And apparently we got caught in that net because we had had an independent assessment of the threat and what to be done about it. And that was apparently not to be allowed. So that was apparently what we violated, an unwritten rule that had just been decided in the White House after we had started the publication. At that point, I knew that I was not in Kansas anymore. This was something very different from any other of the many outbreaks that I've been at the forefront of. Okay. So you've just put something in context for me.

So January 23rd, 2020, I put out my first video, and I'm breathless. I'm buying the whole story, people falling over in the streets and 3.5% IFRs and posting on LinkedIn and Twitter back then. Yeah, I was on all of that. On February 12th, my wiki page is taken down. It is taken down by some anonymous editor who claimed that I was a non-notable person who was speaking well out of his lane about things. Because at that time, the Washington Post was running with, it's the flu, bro.

But I was starting to take it more seriously. So I was just out of cadence with the Washington Post narrative. And they took my wiki page down. It's still gone. Right. You know, and so that's fine. It'd been up for a dozen years. That might have a good side to it compared to what they've done to me on Wikipedia. Okay, yeah. But then it got replaced with a single paragraph. Noted conspiracy theorist, da-da-da-da-da-da.

Right. So that's who I am now. Just how it is. And they said, oh, he hasn't done any science lately. Like, true. You know, my papers are from the 90s, but first author on nature papers, toxicology, applied pharmacology. I had a record. But it wasn't recent enough for this unnamed editor

who may or may not have graduated high school. Yeah, a lot of that editing actually happened from MI6. So it would be interesting historically to go back and track who was doing that. Yeah. Because there is a sock puppet, literally, that had an image of a sock puppet as his avatar that was known to be MI6 and seems to have represented a team of people. So you may have got caught in that now. But the point was for me then, in the context of our story today,

it's unthinkable to me now that the narrative is novel virus comes out. We know nothing about it. All hands on deck. Let's figure this out. But they were already ready to squish dissenting voices within the opening weeks of this. Because they had modeled that that was what they were going to do, among other things, in event 201. That absolutely was pre-planned. No, you can't debate that, right? I mean, we can debate when did this thing actually escape from the lab? Was it August? Was it September?

But the fact that there was a planning exercise in the fall of 2019 that included granular planning on how to control information flow and censorship is indisputable. All right. So this brings us to psychological operations. Cywar, your book, what's it about? So it's easiest to describe it by talking about the genesis. How did this come about? And as you have experienced, we also have experienced an onslaught of a variety of different types of methods to delegitimize me in particular, because I'm the front man. It's a team of myself and my wife, but I'm essentially the face of that team. And so these efforts to delegitimize cast shade on my role in the origin of the technology, which seems to be what gave rise to a lot of the attention around me,

and a variety of other forms of information weaponry. And also similar was deployed against the likes of, we just heard Ron Johnson, here, Corey, you mentioned, and so many others, physicians, scientists, healthcare providers, patients that were expressing their observations about their own health post-receipt of various products, et cetera. And so it was clear that something was going on and that this something had certain features. And what took place was I started writing about this as part of our substack. We began our substack before the Joe Rogan event, uh, that was so transformational. Uh, and, uh, so I started writing essays about these observations and, uh, the nature of, uh, of the law as it relates to

crowd stalking and gang stalking and, uh, um, uh, defamation and slander and these kinds of things because I was experiencing it on a daily basis, and so I was trying to make sense out of it. And in so doing, in kind of looking into this, I encountered the literature around fifth-generation warfare. And just as when I first saw videos of Matthias Desmet talking about mass formation or mass formation psychosis, it was a moment where as I started reading that literature, I just said, oh, this makes sense out of this previously unexplained phenomena that I'd

been experiencing, that clearly had been deployed against me. And not just me, but so many other people. So there's this consistency. There was a global aspect to it. I was aware because I was traveling that these same methods, techniques, wording were being deployed, particularly throughout the Western nations. And so there was some kind of coordinating, harmonizing principle. And when I read about fifth-gen warfare and its emerging power and capabilities, then that started, that coalesced into sensemaking. And I gave a lecture in Stockholm about it that really just knocked people off their rocker.

And I knew that I had, as with what happened when I started talking about Matthias Desmet's theories, I could tell that I had touched something fundamental in the awareness of my audience and by their reactions to this information and how it was being presented. And so we continued to write about that in many other topic areas for the next couple of years. And then after the Lies My Government Told Me book came out, then the question was, where do we turn to next? And Jill, we always debate this, what's the next book? structure them, build an initial outline of how they might all fit together, and then let's throw the spaghetti on the wall, see what sticks and what fits in what seems to be superfluous, and then rewrite the chapters to bring them up to the present.

So that was the origin. The purpose of the book is to share what we've learned. Perhaps, let's hope not the naive notion, that by helping people to better understand the nature of the tech and who's doing it and why, then we could help a general audience to be better prepared and less susceptible to the tech. Does it provide immunity to know what's being done to you? Immunity is a good metaphor, a common one right now.

It helps with the pain. Does it provide immunity? I think it's always, and the tech is always changing. It's very much in flux. It's very much evolving. But in my own experience, maybe it's just how I'm wired, having an understanding of what and why and how makes it a lot easier for me to cope psychologically with the fundamental unfairness of it. And also to come to terms with what I'm experiencing in a way that causes me a lot less angst by knowing that this is not something that's personal, but rather it's a system,

it's a process, it's a portfolio that is being deployed for a purpose in which I am just a, I am an actor which needs to be neutralized. It's nothing personal. Well, it is personal. I mean, there's the fear, which is this sort of broad blanket carrier wave that allows the impact to have its impact, right? But it's personal because I've had people actually call me and say, hey, Chris, Robert Malone, is he controlled opposition? So the controlled opposition thread is one that has absolutely been weaponized, and there are chaos agents that promote these divisive strategies. What's a chaos agent? There are a number of people I could name names that appear to be functioning either in intelligence gathering or in disrupting communities within this nascent protest movement.

We could call it a resistance that seems a little grandiose. And these people ride in and just cause chaos, right? The creation of chaos is one of the operational strategies. The actual introduction of this term, controlled opposition, was first deployed to, if you go back into the literature and the record, it was first deployed by the FBI, particularly during the Indian protest movement in the 60s. So it's specifically tied to that, and it has a slang term associated with it. It's called bad jacketing. So bad jacketing is a known FBI technique to create dissent and paranoia within dissident communities by seeding this idea that this person or that person or the other person is, whether knowingly or unknowinglyingly acting as an agent on behalf of that which they ostensibly appear to be opposing.

You know, so that's akin to the injection of the terminology conspiracy theory. It's tied to the CIA disinformation program after the assassination of John F. Kennedy. So there are these, you know, it's as if they have a playbook. And they go back to that playbook again and again and again in these times of civil unrest or stress, and they have expanded the playbook. There's a lot more literature and knowledge in modern psychology that they're tapping into to use, such as neuro-linguistic programming as a strategy and technology that's evolved since the

60s. But a lot of this goes back to core roots that really can be traced all the way back to Sun Tzu in many cases. It's just that they've gotten better at it and they have this suite of digital tech now that makes it so much more powerful and so much easier to distribute globally with just the push of a button. So this bad jacketing, they have a variety of tactics that they're using. I'm pretty sure I know who some of those names are. Because once you can see... We're both in the same space. Yeah. And once you know the tactics and you see who's spreading this repeatedly. Yeah. So one of those agents, for instance, that I filed a lawsuit against for defamation, and that was thrown out based on venue, by the way. I would have had to sue this person in the state of Florida, their residence, rather than my state,

Virginia, which I was on the receiving end of this, but that was the determination that was made. That person has repeatedly transferred their focus to other aspects, other individuals, using the same techniques, a lot of the same language, similar graphics, and recently is transferring their ire, their targeting, to John F. Kennedy Jr. Well, sure. I saw an opening monologue on Late Night, which I never watch except to find out what I think the CIA wants me to know. Right? I think they're scriptwriters now. And they're kind of lame at it because it's not funny.

So Operation Mockingbird is the point that we should mention. Yeah. But they mentioned for R.F.K. Jr. that he had put a bear in his trunk, that he had a whale head on his roof, and that he had a worm in his brain. That's all they could come up with, right, were these character assassination elements. So that's fascinating. I once, long ago, people are often not aware that this is my first rodeo as a whistleblower in the health space. And the prior one, particularly, that kind of destroyed my academic career was I spoke up about the gene therapy death of Jesse Gelsinger at the hands of Jim Wilson of UPenn. UPenn is kind of a recurring theme.

We'll park that. But in that, I was advised by the person teaching me bioethics that I had an obligation to share with the media what I knew about the situation. And so among others, I connected with a New York Times writer, a young New York Times up and coming named Cheryl Gay Stolberg. And in some ways, the information I shared in her subsequent publications really boosted her career. And so I was very disappointed when Cheryl Gay Stolberg came out with her initial salvo against RFK Jr. that was exactly as you're saying, just a recitation almost sentence after sentence after sentence

of these various kind of defamatory, intended to discredit themes, narratives that have been promoted around RFK Jr. And, you know, I read this and I was just like, Cheryl, you've got to be better than this. Yeah. Just, you know, you didn't add any content at all. All you did was just recite these tired tropes. And it sounds like you got a dose of that in the late night comedy. Yeah, and I had to get it off of Twitter because I don't watch TV at all.

In no small measure, because I was talking with somebody who said, hey, Chris, do you know the first television program that sat a focus group down and tracked eye movements, respiration, brainwave activity, looking for things that they could hook and then tune their program specifically to make sure that their audience was hooked. This was in 1969. And? It's Sesame Street.

Wow. Fascinating. So if you've ever seen a three-year-old, you know, just slack-gauzed in trance, like, that's a science, right? I was 69, so when you watch Sesame Street today, it is, like, dialed in. They know how to lock a three-year-old brain fadeaway, you know, structure in, right? Wow. With the colors and everything else. The cadence, the amplitude, the pacing, all of it.

Wow. And it's gotten really sophisticated, so that's why, you know, when I go into an airport and I see CNN and it's enforced adult ADHD on a screen, you know, banners, scrawlers, like, I think I'm actually looking at something that's very sophisticated in terms of what it's intending to do, which is, I think, to program me. Or at least capture and hold my attention for some purpose. Maybe that's to sell me baby wipes. I don't know. Right. Well, that's a key point, is that this suite of technologies are an adjacency to marketing. And they have a lot of core similarities except for the boundaries. And this gets into the categorization, one of the classic categorizations of propaganda in white, gray, and black propaganda.

It has to do with the audience's ability to perceive the origin of the information and its veracity. And generally in marketing, you stay in the range of white propaganda. You're being told a message. You're being sold soap or whatever. And the person conveying the message is clear to you, see them on the television. They may not really be a patient. You know, it's an actor portraying whatever the thing is, but they're generally open in disclosing what the origin of the information is. In gray propaganda, you can pick that out all the time. When you read in the Washington Post, an unnamed source said, as soon as you see that line, that is gray propaganda.

Unattributed source, or they give some anonymizing characterization. In black propaganda, the source is usually attributed to somebody. You could think of it as a false flag operation in black propaganda. You're receiving information and it's being conveyed to you that the information is coming from this source that you might trust when in fact it's actually coming from that source and they're masking their true initiative origin and intent by using some other surreptitious source yeah and so generally marketing doesn't do that but what you're identifying is is that this is really truly all a continuum and the tech is really powerful a lot of money has gone behind it. And to further kind of illustrate the point, in the chapter in the book in which we talk about the 77th Brigade, which is the British Army military unit that had as its civilian arm a group called the Mutton

Brigade. Swaledale Mutton. I ran afoul of them many times okay as as have uh so say we all especially anybody that's spent any time in the uk and spoken out uh and so the 77th brigade explicitly was comprised of uh people that the british military brought in from marketing which they have very powerful capabilities in marketing in London, et cetera, together with the PSYOPs units that existed in a scattered fashion throughout the British military, they just consolidated it all in that, I think it's in that fancy building that kind of looks like the Apple campus that's circular. Oh, and that's the 77th. That's where, okay, I'm glad to know the spot. They exist in the spot now. Yeah, and so we, I relied on that from reporting in Wired Magazine,

which seems to be historically aligned with the intelligence community and some other sources that really, by going back in time to the origins of the 77th Brigade, I was able to kind of document exactly what the capabilities were, how they assembled it, and what the intention was. And through recent FOIA actions in the UK, it's been disclosed that the 77th itself, not just the mutton crew, but the 77th Brigade deployed armed forces personnel, British armed forces personnel, throughout Britain who were embedded and acted surreptitiously as if they were civilians in promoting these various propaganda tropes and strategies that, you know, span the range from pushing information to slander, defamation, through to censorship.

Now, just let's set the stage for everybody who maybe doesn't know. So, first, second, third, fourth generation war, we're still basically clubbing and stabbing and blowing people up, right? But fifth generation war, if I understand it right, it's here. It's the cognitive landscape is what they're targeting. So there's two, the way I like to think about it is there's two key characteristics that differentiate fifth from prior and fourth is kind of a transitional. So what's your technical term that you're kind of touching on is kinetic warfare, as opposed to psychological warfare. And so kinetic can be swords and horses. It can be cannon and gapling guns. The Civil War was a kind of a threshold from second to third. But another one of the key characteristics is the centralization of command authority.

And it's important because it helps make sense out of what one experiences in this modern battleground of fifth gen that is in which the battleground is your mind. The goal is to control your thoughts, emotions, beliefs, and all information that you're gaining access to, because this now can be done through the internet and other things, through the algorithms, the AI that controls what Google pushes to you, etc. So in earlier phases of warfare, there's kind of a gradient from centralized command down through, you can think of the Blitzkrieg and the German tank divisions as pushing operational control down to local battlefield commanders. So decentralization of a decision-making, war for decision-making authority down to local commanders is kind of the arc of that from a centralized king or whomever, right? In fifth gen, if it's being appropriately deployed, you're never able to know as the person experiencing it, you're never able to know who is propagating this

onto you, who is shaping your battlefield environment. And if you do know, then somebody is screwed up, basically. Okay, so it's those things in the suite of tech that is able to do these things, control the stream of emotion that you, I'm sorry, of information that you encounter, the emotions that you experience, et cetera, and it's done through a variety of ways. One of them, you know, there's very simple examples that I cite. Nudge technology is kind of the easiest thing to understand. And the nudge, the simplest embodiment of nudge tech that I can come up with is an example from Schiphol Airport in Amsterdam, where they had a problem. It gets a little bit crude. They had a problem with men's urinals and men not being too rigorous about urination.

And so this was causing an accuracy problem and a caring problem, a motivation problem. And so this was causing excess expense to Schiphol Airport and their management to keep these restrooms clean. And so someone, some bright bulb came up with the idea that we're going to make a little sticker of a fly and we're going to put it inside the men's urinal. And suddenly their cleanup costs dropped dramatically. OK, so that's that's and we can all say, and suddenly their cleanup costs dropped dramatically. Okay? So that's, and we can all say, well, that's a good thing. And then it moves through the campaigns that are even more highly developed, say, in Britain,

about smoking. And we can all agree that smoking is not good for public health, it has various consequences, and that it's okay for a government to intervene in public behavior through using nudge technology to suppress the use of tobacco products in the interest of public health. And then we progress from that to, just to give an example, the modern embodiment that many people gripe about with Disney and Netflix, where everything is woke. And you have a, let's say, gently an over-representation of certain social or ethnic groups that have historically been underrepresented, and now they're being overrepresented, whether it has to do with color, race, gender, sexual orientation, political affiliation, whatever the thing is, this is now being pushed at us constantly. The BBC is notorious for this, and they have, you know, and anybody that follows, say, Doctor Who is aware of the changes in, because

Doctor Who is such a long-running series, you can see the influence of the BBC, Censor Board, and Nudge People in the composition of the characters in various versions of Doctor Who. So it's out there. It's used all the time. It was largely pioneered in the UK. And then there was a nudge unit built by Obama that operates in the United States. And that's just the simplest of these types of technologies. It's kind of the entry level if you want to start to understand how you're being manipulated. So June of 2020, I came across a Yale study that had been published where they were running randomized controlled trials. Very familiar with that study.

Testing different things. Messaging. Messaging, right. And they put it along emotional axes, like how upset would you be? Would you be ashamed? Shame was a good lever. Would you feel ostracized, lonely, like all that, with things like, and they tested stuff, like kill grandma, you know, don't kill grandma, or you wouldn't want to be seen as a dumb person.

That's what the common messaging originated from that was then promoted through this billion-dollar contract that CDC managed. Did that study lead to those? Because I thought I saw those all in the file. A lot of the same messaging is used in what was promoted with that, but there's over 7,000 PubMed peer-reviewed publications on overcoming vaccine hesitance, of which that was just one, randomized clinical trials. I was very prescient of them to try all those messages out in June of 2020. Well, before we even knew if Warp Speed was going to be good or not.

So for instance, the Trusted News Initiative, another UK organizational structure that was put in place to tie together kind of the one ring to bind them all for the advertising industry. I'm sorry, not advertising, for news publications. So AFP, Reuters, all of the UPI, all of them belong to Washington Post, New York Times, all belong to the Trusted News Initiative, which was set up by the British government, and in particular managed by the BBC, and was set up to create structures to resist incursion of Russian disinformation. And then before the fall of 2019, this was then reoriented to managing and overcoming the spread of disinformation regarding vaccines. In 2019? Yeah. So that BBC transformed the Trusted News Initiative to this agenda of suppressing disinformation about vaccines.

And then conveniently, that rolled straight into the COVID crisis and a lot of this information control. 2019, though, think of the odds. So an alert reader of mine pointed out in the summer of 2019, the front page of Reddit was full of anti-antivax stuff, right? You know, graveyards full of kids and anti-Vax kid convention, whatever, right? So he was noticing all these memes.

There was a huge meme war on Reddit, which I consider hive mind central. And he was puzzling about it the whole way through. He's like, what is this? What is this? What's coming? Why is this pushed? Yes, and then this thing gets recast in the fall of 2019.

We have our event 201, and then boom. It feels a little... A lot of coincidences. Yeah, yeah. So, yes, so... So psychological warfare. The control of narrative, the control of information. And another thread...

So I was... Another thing that I don't talk about, I've talked about a little bit and I wrote a post about this, Twitter was conceived of as a weapon. And I know this because I used to have a client that I would support called Behavior Matrix for years. Behavior Matrix eventually got sold and absorbed into the Silicon Valley blob. But what triggered me to talk about it was that you were mentioning in the Yale study the categories of emotions. So it was the Behavior Matrix team that developed the statistical tools at the intersection with modern psychology to be able to validate the relationship between certain words or language and corresponding emotions. So then this allowed language processing, and it eventually became multilingual, that would be able to of emotional content and linkage of that emotional content in what the person was messaging to an individual. And then that individual is mapped

in a cloud of influence. We all have a cloud of influence, particularly those of us that are online. And some of us have a bigger cloud and some of us have a smaller cloud. And some of us are acting as reinforcers. Some of us are acting as thought leaders. Some of us are out on the fringes of that cloud of influence, pushing certain ideas, maybe pushing radical ideas, ideas that might be useful if you wanted to have a color revolution in an Arab state. For instance.

And so all this information then was cataloged, categorized, identified. When you're using a cellular device in any environment where there's at least two cell towers, let alone three, you can be precisely triangulated in space. And that can then, it's a data fusion problem. That can be then integrated with Gorgon's stare. And you have a physical image of the individual who they're associating with, what their truck license plate is. Gorgon's stare is a high-resolution satellite system that's deployed by the Department of Defense. That allows, you know, is movable,

so they can direct it wherever they want. And this is the modern embodiment of the SR-71 and U-2 and all those old spy planes, only now it's gone satellite. And high resolution, you can look up Gorgon's stare, Gorgon being a single eye. And so all of this then begins integrated. We have positional information. We have visual information. We have emotional content. And that was actively deployed, particularly with Twitter, in Arab Spring, very effectively. So the Arab Spring and those color revolutions were intentionally developed and advanced using social media managed by our intelligence community

because it was necessary to overturn Arab regimes that were not friendly to U.S. interests in the Middle East. And of course, this is the slippery slope I also talk about in the book of kind of the rationalization of how the United States and its allies behave globally is it's kind of positioned as if we didn't do it, somebody else would. And we are the, you know, this is wrapped around American exceptionalism, that we're the good guys. And so, of course, we have to do it so the Russians don't do it,

the Chinese don't, or fill in the blank, bad guy. Al-Qaeda doesn't do it or whatever. And so that's why we believe that it's okay for our intelligence community to manipulate election outcomes using this powerful technology throughout the world. And it was only inevitable before that came home, I guess. My wake-up moment, three years ago, I was talking and kvetching about a lot of my experience with this stuff to a Guatemalan. And he said, oh, congratulations. You're experiencing what we've been living with for decades. Right. Right. So I've had, when I lecture on psychological warfare, I've had

multiple colonels, you know, retired because it's kind of you're up or out at that point, come to me that had been within the Cywar units in the U.S. military expressing deep anger over the deployment of the technology and capabilities that they had spent a large part of their career developing for offshore combat and deploying those against the citizenry of the United States, which was supposed to be forbidden. Right. And I gave the example of the United States was supposed to be forbidden. Right. And I gave the example of the 77th Brigade, the Fort Bragg Cywar unit, which is kind of the mothership.

It traces back to VJ Day and the Ghost Army in France with the inflatable tanks and all that kind of stuff. That's its kind of origins as a division within the U.S. Army. But it's now so much larger. A lot of the divisions are in Army Reserve, and there's a very big operation, you know, guess where? Silicon Valley, Moffett Field. So that's kind of what's happened is that under the excuse or the rationalization that we had this very substantial existential threat of 3.4% case fatality rate, it all lies, right? All based on faulty modeling, that it was justified to deploy this tech against citizens in order to overcome vaccine hesitancy and ensure that we have a widely deployed, safe and effective vaccine., of course, that was the mantra,

that it was safe and effective. And that's another example of neuro-linguistic programming, the repeated use of the term safe and effective, safe and effective, safe and effective, without any context. How is it safe? What are the parameters around its safety? How is it effective?

Effective against what? We're never told that. We're just repeated these words again and again and again, which goes straight into our subconscious. So two important questions. We're at the heart of it now. The first is going to be around how much of what we're experiencing today is just organic. Hey, you know, things happen and political campaigns emerge and people fracture versus non-organic, this sort of disharmony we see in our country socially. And the second would be around the power of these tools, because one of my observations has been that the more educated somebody is, the more they seem to have been subject to really falling. So that, or let's just take a second one first the second one's easier the data show that the highly educated are among the most susceptible and it kind of makes sense if you think it through

those that have been through like for myself i've had a stupid amount of upper division education you know beyond uh high school and then a bachelor's degree and then a medical degree and then the training as a scientist and then the postgraduate training, multiple fellowships, etc. And as you go through that process, you're basically being trained to accept a narrative that is being promoted by authority figures. You know, especially the MD teaches you to regurgitate what your attending physician tells you is truth and to become very adroit at accepting that, integrating it into your mind, into your very soul, and being able to act on short notice without even thinking about it, right? And so these are people that, as a consequence of that process, they are highly trained or selected or both to be people that are very susceptible to

authority messaging. Now, I had the advantage because I was selected for the special MD-PhD program in which the government and National Academy of Sciences, NIH recognized they had a problem. Physicians don't think very much. And so as a consequence, the evolution of science and medicine, in particular medical science, was stalling because of how MDs are trained. And so they wanted to train a little subset of MDs to ask questions and to be more wary about simple explanations. But for most of the docs, you know, the ones that you're seeing on CNN, et cetera, they were selected to be this highly suggestive. The, the ones that seem to be most resistant to this are paradoxically,

uh, folks that live in the physical world, uh, that, that do stuff. Uh, so this is my neighbors in Madison that are ranchers and ranch hands and plumbers and HVAC people, et cetera. These are people that are out in the real world and they recognize that there is real tangible truth. The virtuals, which is another chapter we talk about, the physicals, virtuals, machines, and overlords, this new caste structure, the virtuals, which are the folks that live in the world of economics, journalism, academia to a significant extent, these people that are the new information industry folks, particularly the programmers, live in a world in which reality is very subjective. And so it's no wonder that from that springs the logic of things like transhumanism, transsexualism, gender fluidity, a lot of these things in which reality is entirely

subjective. And these are the people that seem to be the most susceptible another key characteristic of the ones that are most susceptible are the ones that are socially isolated of course there's if you're going to draw a Venn diagram there's a big overlap between let's say gently programmers and social isolation and so it's this social isolation and fragmentation in which you are disconnected from the rest of humanity to a significant extent, you become very susceptible to external messaging, including messaging that suggests that I feel your pain, I know, because we have psychological pain from being isolated, We have this fundamental need to be connected with each other. And so in the absence of that, it's as if our souls or our minds or whatever it is are seeking some connectivity.

And so a third party can come in from some source and say, I feel your pain and I have your solution. You just need to follow and believe me. Of course, the exemplar that illustrates the point really clearly is Tony Fauci and the magic jab. Just checks all the boxes for that. So these people, you talk about the predicators. There's a number of them. Now, you also talked about the puppet masters. And is this really coordinated or is it organic? And my answer is all the above, that it doesn't have to be an either or. It doesn't have to be a binary. I think that there's, for instance, a lot of evidence that there was opportunism, the famous statement, don't let a good crisis go to waste. Sure. Particularly in the financial community, was this engineered prospectively as a way to enable certain financial objectives?

I don't have the documents to show that. Was it engineered as a way to enable depopulation? Well, I now have the documents to show that there is a depopulation agenda. It is part of U.S. national policy, but I can't draw the connection. I don't have the artifacts to say the people that were in the room making decisions about the deployment of this vaccine and the mandates were referencing the depopulation agenda. So I can't say that. Which document is that? Oh, the Kissinger Report is very overt.

Kissinger Report. Okay, Kissinger Report was developed under Nixon and then became formal U.S. policy under Ford and then was declassified. So you can find it. It's still operating. It is still State Department and U.S. National Policy. And if you read it, that was kind of the moment when the light went off in my head of, oh, we're not necessarily the good guys, which I'd always believed, right? That's part of the propaganda that I was always taught. Are we the baddies? A strong case can be made that we are absolutely not the good guys,

depending on your moral structure. But the argument for American exceptionalism that we're better than other nation states, I think, runs aground. I like to say we all live in Kissinger's brain now, whether or not we recognize it. It ran aground on real politic, if not on Ford. So when I say organic versus inorganic, I think you can have a nudge that was inorganic. Somebody intended it and pushed a button. But what happens next is sort of the... Precisely. So unintended consequences of complex systems. Yes.

And that is certainly one. And I wrote a substack in which I pulled a Venn diagram together around this. And the center of the Venn diagram was based on Hanna-Arndt's banality of evil. That there's a lot of contributors to the banality of evil, and that you can have malicious actors. You can also have corruption in a variety of forms, and you can have kind of organic systems phenomena like siloing that we've been talking about and other things that gives rise to an interaction that's unpredictable. At each of those, you have interfaces of things that we generally consider to be undesirable. And so I don't, this tendency of everybody to say, ah, it was Klaus Schwab or it it was Tony Fauci, or it was the Rothschilds, or whatever the boogeyman is that you want to use to scare everybody. But yeah, it's very convenient.

But I think, so as we were just discussing here a moment ago, here at Brownstone, the Brownstone Retreat, there's a lot of complexity, a lot of actors, and a lot of agendas that cluster around, in my opinion, two major factors. One wasn't covered so much in that prior lecture. The two major factors, I believe, are the intelligence community broadly writ, which has kind of grown to be a wolf, a giant wolf, from its original intent as a specialist army of the president. That was the origin of that. Keep the country safe. They had a vision. Right. And big finance. I'm absolutely convinced that if there is a mega predator in this hierarchy, a summit predator, it is big money, big finance. And in particular, the evidence I see with Liz Truss, with the Malonification, term used in the European Union, of Giorgio Maloney,

that what we see is the influence of the bond markets and those that control the bond markets are now in a position where they basically can set the agenda globally. And they have, there's a structure that has been created in large part by the CIA and Henry Kissinger that we call the World Economic Forum Forum that serves as a hub for collusion, amalgamation, a bunch of euphemisms we could use to facilitate planning and implementation. The WEF actually posits that it is the new world government together with the United Nations. So that's, when I talk about this and we talk about in the book, you know, the byline, the subtext of the book is enforcing the new world order, side war enforcing the new world order. Well, who's propagating the new world order? Who's doing the enforcement? to my assessment, the operational bureaucratic level is the artifacts, in particular

the treaty that exists between the World Economic Forum, a non-state actor, and the United Nations, a non-state actor. These are both supra-state, right? And the structure, political structure and bureaucratic structure that is the predicate for that new corporatism, socialism fusion, because the UN is intrinsically socialist, headed up by the former head of the Socialist International, and World Economic Forum, which is intrinsically corporatist. head up headed up by the former head of the socialist international and world economic forum which is intrinsically corporate test it's basically a trade union of thousand largest

transnational companies in the world they have formed an alliance and they are the ones propagating a lot of these globalized structures using the organizational model of the European Union. So the EU is the political predicate for the new global organizational structure that's being proposed. Both the United Nations and the WEF self-proclaimed that they represent the new world government. So they're not hiding it, like a lot of these things. It's out in the open. You can look in their literature. And they use terms like, we have the best plans. This is a phrase that was used in the context of the recently approved,

what do they call it? It's the extension of Agenda 2030 that was just approved. It's something like a plan for the future. I forget what the words are. But they posit that they have come up with the best plans explicitly. Those plans have never been pressure tested. There's never been any kind of... Yeah, but they assert that these are the good

best plans, such as the plans around DEI and ESG are examples of the best plans that were not tested previously, but then upon deployment turned out to be abject failures and destroy companies. But that's kind of how they roll, is they take a very unilateral, or one might say authoritarian, position. Here's a thing that I've observed late, all the way down here in the trenches, is that people are more fractured than ever. You know, the Venn diagram overlaps between MAGA people and, you know, the Democrat, just there's this balkanization of people. And my model for that is the shock-induced aggression models tested way back in the 40s, right? You put a rat in a cage.

You shock that rat, give it no escape. It's a miserable rat. But if you put a second rat in and shock them both, well, now they have somebody to direct their eye at. Hey, you. And so they fight. You must have caused them a shock. Must have. And so then they fight. And so this is the balkanization. It's Sykes-Picot. It's putting 12 warring tribes in Pallet, Libya. It's that. But I think I'm seeing that same model being run now where different groups are being set against each other on purpose. And while we're busy fighting, these agendas are being, you know. Yeah, so James Lindsay would argue that that represents a fundamental Marxist, well-known Marxist strategy that's being deployed. And once again, the problem there, we can see the artifact. It has certain characteristics. Yeah.

We can see the behavior, but we can't identify the perps. And then we have to remember that in fifth generation warfare, we're not supposed to know who the perps are. Right. And so we're left,

this illustrates, if you'll allow me, one of the core thing characteristics of a fifth generation warfare battlescape being your mind which is that i i refer to it as a uh surrealist salvador dali painting you remember the one with time time, in which everything is fluid and morphing and changing, and you have no sense of what is truth and what is falsehood. And furthermore, you have no way to really know, we were speaking earlier about the accusations of controlled opposition, bad jacketing, and these other strategies. You have no way, and in chaos agents, et cetera, you have no way of empirically

ascertaining who is friend and who is foe. And so the person that's experiencing this environment is, which is any of us that are entering into any media landscape now, because it is all Cywar 24-7. Okay. You know, even if you're doing it subconsciously with your memes, you're still doing it. We're all doing it. It surrounds us. We're immersed in it. There's no longer an objective reality, only subjective realities and perceptions and emotions. And so this gets to how much of this is intentional and how much of it is organic. In this environment, we can never be confident of anything around us. And furthermore, the one thing we can be confident of is that what you think you're thinking, you believe these thoughts are originating in your own mind.

You have to constantly second guess yourself. I mean, this is Kafkaesque, right? It is like we're all in Kafka's brain now, too, where we don't know what's real and what isn't real, what's fantasy, what's paranoia, what's a fabrication. And so we generate as human beings, we generate all these hypotheses, those of us that aren't caught up in the narrative and hypnotized, we're generating all these hypotheses to explain what we're experiencing, and there's no easy empirical way to test and differentiate between those hypotheses. We just know that something's happening, and we don't really understand what it is. And here's a derivative of that, if you'll allow me.

We were saying earlier that governments have decided to deploy this tech designed for the likes of Al-Qaeda and the Taliban against their own citizens. And the moment that they decide that it is morally acceptable to deploy psychological warfare technology against their own citizenry, then the concepts of free agency, sovereignty, consent to the governed, all of that that underpins nationalism, that underpins democracy, this idea's ability to deploy it, particularly with the collusion with the social media companies, that once again, you can have no confidence that your political opinions actually reflect your own thinking rather than that which is being deployed into you. And we see evidence of this all the time. Personally, from my political point of view, the sudden abrupt rise of Kamala Harris provided a case study in how powerful that is for a large fraction of the population. Probably one of the least organic political campaigns on record, and yet came close to winning. And it was, in a way, I think they deployed her too soon.

I think that if they had had a shorter time interval between deployment, yeah, people would have had less of a chance to cotton on to what was going on and to cotton on to the fraud that was going on in terms of the lies that were being promoted. Yeah. And she might have got across the finish line if they had timed it better. Well, I'm glad they make some errors. But the power of this then, right? I call it, I don't want to beat on one person, but it's the Sam Harris effect, right? I watched this guy go from a leading intellectual, he's got an entire ethos and brand built around being a thoughtful person. And then he slipped into the TDS, the Trump Derangement Syndrome hole, in such a comprehensive way that at one

point he was caught on tape saying, I don't care if Biden has dead kids in his basement, right? That's how much I hate Trump, right? But he could never, when cornered, he could never articulate exactly what was so awful about Trump. There was no there there. Many people like that. Yeah. He's just an exemplar. Exactly. So I've seen this over and over again with the vaccine. People are like, oh, it's safe and effective. And you say, well, how do you know? Because the tech is really powerful. You scratch at that, you hit primer right away, they get outraged while they run. Right, right, right.

Because what you trigger when you do that is another psychological phenomenon, cognitive dissonance. And a case can be made that cognitive dissonance is holding two conflicting ideas simultaneously in your conscious mind. And that is one of the major sources of psychological pain. So cognitive dissonance equals pain. And so if you are confronting someone with a reality that's different from that which they have assimilated, they experience, if they allow you, allow your little earworm into their mind, they start to experience pain. And the reaction is to reject you, not to objectively assess the validity of your information, but just to alleviate the pain. You want to get away from the pain. And the easiest way to get away from the pain is to deny

the truth of whatever it is you're sharing. And so you can talk truth until you're blue in the face to these folks that are in the fraction of the population that has been hypnotized functionally. And you will go nowhere, which the derivative of that is don't even bother trying to change the mind of those that are hypnotized. You're pissing in the wind. Okay. The only, and these are numbers that come out again and again and again. Aldous Huxley talked about this in the early 60s. It was about 20% of people are readily hypnotized and readily accept whatever the promoted narrative of the government is. 20% that are highly resistant to it and skeptical. And the other 60% are in a range in between and generally follow

whoever seems to be most dominant in the conversation at the particular time. And so, you know, and Aldous Huxley argues this is absolutely essential in human society that you have these categories because otherwise humans could never be governed as a group if you don't have that 20% that is readily convinced of whatever the dominant narrative is as promoted by an authority figure. And you also will become extinct as a society if you don't have the dissident groups because they're the ones that protect you from the overreach

from the authoritarian leader that is convincing the top 20. And so the battleground in information warfare over all this is over the 60% in the middle. And the 60% in the middle, as soon as they hear you saying stuff that is too far off the spectrum of what they currently accept, they will immediately reject your message and you'll be completely ineffective. effect in relationships and things like the vaccine was intended as a bioweapon without having the clear documentation for that. What they do is they delegitimize all of those that are in the spectrum around that narrative, so we could say the resistance, which is why that is another one of the chaos agent strategies, is to come in and talk about snake venom. I love that one hard. Yeah, and these other, whether knowingly or not, whether that's something that's been implanted in them and they've run with it, whatever, these narratives that are out on the fringes are absolutely counterproductive

if your goal is to actually convince the population of an alternative narrative other than the one that's being aggressively promoted using this technology. Yeah. Well, that would be one of the gambits of deception then would be to throw some of those things out like snake venom and hope people bite and repeatedly reinforce it and put good production qualities around it. You know, productions that are far better than you would think would be justified by the audience of the person, the audience size, the follower size of the person promoting that narrative, when you see that anomaly of high production quality in a promoted alternative narrative that seems a little

bit wackadoodle from somebody who has 20, 30,000 followers on Twitter, you got to ask yourself, who's bankrolling that? Mm-hmm. Yeah. Yeah. And we, well, and I do. So, but is it, I'm worried that we're almost at the end of history in the sense that if these people with their information warfare win, right, and so they get the system, you got your AI bots, you have a bot, you have a... Not to mention drones. Drones, right, not to mention drones, which are flying all over the East Coast as we talk right now. That's a PSYOP, I'm sure. But if they can keep that 20% just like permanently in power,

who are controllable, and the dissidents can never really get together or band together or do anything. Because it's, as Nigel Farage said to me when he was talking about the creation of Brexit and UKIP, he said, the problem we faced was we're all libertarians, and by nature, we don't work well together. Yes. Bunch of cats't work well together. Yes. Bunch of cats. Hard to hurt. Yeah. So that is a feature of the dissident group anyway, but it's getting harder and harder to really organize.

So I've seen several big fracture events, right? 10-7 was a huge fracture event in my COVID community. Okay. Right? So it happens. So this whole Hamas thing, whether you think about, Oh, absolutely. You know, was it allowed to happen? We have an interruption. What? Okay. Sorry. So, so the, the surprise Hamas attack, which is surprising. It's debatable how

surprising. Correct. Didn't matter. It dropped like a bomb in the COVID community and broke it, at least several big chunks fractured. It broke. We're here at the Brownstone retreat. It fractured key contributors to Brownstone. Yeah. So yeah, how to maintain cohesion and resistance. And I saw that as an extraordinary psyop because for the next 72 hours, my Twitter feed was atrocity porn. It was rapes and babies and beheadings and just horrifying stuff, right? And then it all went over and over and over. Yeah, then it just went away. Yeah. Yeah.

Yeah, absolutely. It was emotional content designed to just smash. So early on, as I saw this developing, and I made some comments early on, one of the interesting things about being on multiple social media platforms is they each have their own flavor. And Gab, in particular, has a strong anti-Semite community. Just does. And I was getting hit with, because of some of the comments that I made about the conflict very early on, I was getting hit with, you're just a Zionist tool versions of the narrative.

And many things that were much uglier than that. And I posted, that triggered me to make a statement across all of my social media accounts in which I said, if you're going to post anti-Jewish and anti-Zionist statements on a thread that I control, I will delete you and I will block you. Of course, that then triggered further hate. But that, and then I took that position and I kind of backed off.

I was also really early out of the box on the Ukraine conflict and had documentation about the biolabs, where they were, along the border, you know, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. And then it just got so heated as a sidewire operation, and it was off my core focus, kind of my mission space, self-defined mission space, that I just decided to stay out of it. And that was also a conscious decision. Maybe that's weaning out. But what I saw developing early on in the Gaza conflict was the way I saw it was it was a, it exemplified two highly developed psychological warfare battle units slugging it out on the world stage. And as soon as that became transparent to me that that was what was going on, then I knew that nothing that you're encountering could be relied on as factual.

And the only thing you could do is stand back as a responsible adult, is stand back and watch the two duke it out and learn from it, hopefully. I just ran away to Telegram and watched first person video drone attacks and figured out what was happening imperfectly you know right which which touches on uh the problem you know why telegram is being so aggressively vilified yeah is because it's turned into the only portal through which uh frontline battle information is being transmitted across the world because it's blocked everywhere else it's like looking through a straw for me, but if you look long enough, you can get a sort of a sense of the landscape. So, Robert, final question. What does this cost you? Oh, personal? Yeah. So that gets a little complicated. It's destroyed my consulting

business. Strangely, the other day I received an email from NIH soliciting my participation in a study section for a large contract. Okay. First time in four years. I used to do this all the time. So I don't know if that has to do with the election or who knows what. Or am I being rehabilitated? And I've had a couple of people come to me asking my assistance in the core competency that I used to practice in, which is this kind of business development, regulatory affairs, clinical research, focusing on small

to mid-sized innovator companies. So has my consulting business been completely destroyed? Maybe, maybe not. But the truth is that this psychological pain associated with a lot of what I've been subjected to and the things that I continue to be subjected to. There was a Substack post out there for an anonymous source called Fuck Malone that had a paragraph and then Fuck Malone, another paragraph and then Fuck Malone,

and then the usual cast of my hater clique all jumping on that and amplifying it even further about what a bad guy I am. And so that, in this case, one of those people started attacking my wife. So that's a new wrinkle. This does cause psychological pain. And I think one of the characteristics of these kind of people that do this kind of trollery is a lack of empathy. I can't imagine how they can have empathy and still practice in this way. But it is what it is. So, yeah, there's stress, pain, the Wikipedia, the series of coordinated attacks in corporate media that still live on. If you search my name, the top hit on

Google is the New York Times hit piece written by Davy Alba, who was paid for, has apparently deep CIA ties as a journalist, you know, key Mockingbird, modern Mockingbird person, was fired from the New York Times after that article. That's what comes up on the top. So, yeah, all that is painful. And there's absolutely been a concerted effort to try to destroy my reputation, deny what I did as a graduate student, et cetera, et cetera, despite all the documentation and evidence that I've made available to the contrary, and not to mention all the patents. And so all of that is destructive. It degrades

my ability to earn a living. But fortunately, Jill and I had an epiphany early on that if this is the way the game was going to be played and they're going to weaponize corporate media against me, that I was going to go to, I was going to follow Brett Weinstein down the rabbit hole into the world of alternative media. And at the advocacy of Steve Kirsch, I got on Substack very early on.

And then this cascade of events of being deplatformed the Joe Rogan hit etc and being deplatformed on Twitter and LinkedIn and then having people seek me out caused the Substack subscriptions to explode

then Joe and then we took the attitude okay this is going to be our new life. We've always been writers. It was grants and contracts and things like that before. Now we're going to write for a broader, more popular audience. And then it was a cascade of getting asked by Glenn Beck to do a series of interviews that were unprecedented. Steve Bannon, Peter Navarro, of course, and others kind of sucked me into the world of conservative media. And I took the same attitude that Bobby did. I'll talk to anybody except Alex Jones. And now I talk

to Alex Jones too. I thought that was the bright line there. That was a bridge too far. But, you know, my standards have changed over time. And so we just decided we need to embrace this. And we did. And how to say this? uh we are far more financially secure now than we were uh running a uh boutique uh consulting business in biotech so in in my wife has flourished uh she's i can't believe all the personal growth she's had uh i've become much better as a public speaker, more confident in these various forums, traveled the world. I mean, there's a lot. I think you have to kind of, you can wallow.

I made a decision about a year and a half ago to consciously not define myself as a victim, to refuse to be a victim, and embrace that. And that, I think, has been really helpful. And these books are cathartic. We don't really make any money on the books, but it's the nature of publishing these days. And very expensive business cards we write. Yeah, that's right. And we convince a publisher to put them out. Yes.

So all in all, I have almost no debt. I have a lovely farm. My wife is happy. We're still in love after 45 years of marriage. Congratulations. And it did cause divisions within our sons. They don't want me to talk about things on podcasts, but we basically got divorced by our younger son for some of the things we wrote on Substack. But our older son and his wife are still friends. The grandkids come and visit.

So all in all, I think we certainly have a lot to be thankful for and to celebrate. Faith is a larger part of our world. We have a whole new cast of friends and colleagues, members of organizations like Council on National Policy. And so how has it impacted? It's transformed us, and it could have gone really ugly if we had accepted the role of victim, which was actively promoted for us, and instead chose not to.

I think there's a lesson for all of us in that. I like to say we all create our own heaven, our own hell on earth. And we've consciously made a series of decisions as we've gone through this that have now put us in a place where my wife and I are well-adjusted, happy, and have as much security as we ever have. You know, we don't have a retirement pension, but who does? Who does? Well, that's beautifully said.

Thank you so much for your time today. Robert Malone. Thanks, Chris. Thank you so much for your work in this world. Likewise. One day at a time. Thank you.