Democrat, Republican, left, middle, or right, these are just ideological containers which divide us allowing us to be controlled. But I don’t fit into one of those boxes and I don’t think most people do either. So join me as I overlook those arbitrary barriers and explore issues that matter to us all, and propose solutions for a better future.

My Time with Peter (Hotez)

Posted on by Leslie Manookian

In the glorious aftermath of Robert Kennedy Jr. red-pilling Joe Rogan about vaccines; other toxic but government approved products like glyphosate, atrazine, and PFOAs; and the malfeasance of government agencies, vaccine developer Dr. Peter Hotez seriously miscalculated or suffered an unfortunate lapse of judgement when he accused Kennedy of spreading misinformation. He thus unleashed a storm of criticism he surely never expected. Rogan publicly offered Hotez $100,000 donated to the charity of his choice if he would come on the show to debate Kennedy. Other onlookers chipped in and the donation promise mounted. Last I looked, the offer stood at $2.6 million but Hotez is not taking it!

Never before has the refusal of vaccine apologists to debate vaccine critics spoken louder of their ties to big pharma, big media, big government, and big academia.

Observing the last few years, millions have not just awoken to the reality of conflicts of interest and captured media, industry, and government, but also to true authoritarian censorship. Unfortunately, while millions may be forgiven for believing this is a recent development, the reality is far different.

I’ve been smeared by media outlets like the New York Times and CBS. Congressman Adam Schiff wrote to big tech and had my movie The Greater Good and the movies and books of many others removed from big tech platforms. Those of us working on vaccine safety awareness and health freedom issues know this is nothing new and has, instead, been standard practice for decades.

And Peter Hotez has acted as a loyal foot soldier to the big pharma lobby in their condemnable battle against honest citizens who’ve witnessed vaccine injury close up. His dishonesty is now on full display for all to see – but again, it’s not new.

In 2021, Hotez tweeted false claims about investigative reporter Sharyl Attkisson alleging she had endorsed an article comparing him to Joseph Mengele, placed him in harm’s way through “dangerous and hurtful” conduct, and called for his doxing. He even suggested she was connected to white nationalists and was sending him images of Nuremberg. To call Hotez a liar is an understatement. Hotez exhibits a particularity dangerous and pathological behavior in that he is not merely dishonest but a fabricator of falsehoods intended to destroy those with different opinions.

Unfortunately, I have had my own experience with Hotez.

On October 2, 2019, a pediatrician, the Idaho State Health and Welfare epidemiologist, Hotez, and I, were guests on the NPR/Boise Public Radio show Idaho Matters. Some might argue 2019 was a prelude to what was to come in 2020 as the relatively small increase in measles cases was being hyped worldwide and weaponized against those demanding bodily autonomy and truth in science. Hotez’ conduct on the show illustrates perfectly the kind of person we’re now seeing unmasked – and it’s not a very flattering image.

Hotez employs slurs, ad hominem attacks, and falsehoods to smear his challengers from the vaccine safety awareness community. Again, this kind of treatment is not new. During the radio show, Hotez made the following statements:

1) that there is an “aggressive anti-vaccine lobby”

2) that I repeated “anti-vaccine tropes”

3) that I compared the measles cases in NY to the national population to “deliberately mislead”

4) that the concept of health and medical freedom is a “phony concept”

5) that I and other parents “download vaccine misinformation” from the internet

6) that the “anti-vaccine lobby is a media empire” with over 480 “misinformation websites”

7) that parents can’t put children in harm’s way because of “misinformation”

8) that I stated 89,000 vaccine “injuries” have been reported to VAERS after MMR

9) that Hotez is going to “correct the misinformation” I gave and give the “real information”

Additionally, Hotez insinuated I was lying when I stated that a local woman developed MS from a vaccine by saying there is no evidence of that. The young woman in question had to leave our community with her three children as she was no longer able to care for her family. She spent time on a neurological ward at a hospital in Salt Lake City, UT and there were many others suffering neurological complications from flu vaccines.

So, let’s address his claims:

1) There is a genuine grassroots effort of vaccine injured families raising awareness about the lack of quality science on vaccines. Specific problems with vaccine safety studies are the lack of genuine placebos (mercury, aluminum or another vaccine is used), short duration (studies can last as few as 3 days), lack of comparison to completely unvaccinated populations, lack of studies evaluating all the combinations in which vaccines are given, lack of studies evaluating health outcomes of the vaccination schedule. There are a couple of studies comparing health outcomes of vaccinated versus unvaccinated children and they overwhelmingly show the health of unvaccinated children is superior. The truth is that big pharma, which includes the vaccine industry, is the largest lobby group in the US shelling out $250 million each year, spends $35 billion on ads annually thereby “owning” the media, pays more than half the drug approvers’ salaries at FDA, and controls the medical journals through the purchase of glossy reprints.

2) Everything I stated was based on official data from US agencies or data from peer-reviewed published studies. It’s there for anyone to see – you just have to dig a little deeper than the mainstream media. In fact, these days, you may have to employ an independent search engine because google rigs its results to downplay anything that challenges officialdom. I don’t repeat tropes, I know the science and would gladly debate Hotez or any other vaccine pusher about the true science of vaccines, including all we don’t know.

3) I did not compare measles cases in NY to the national population. I compared the total amount of measles cases according to CDC to the total US population. To understand how the public has been misled about the dangers of measles, the cases, and the role of vaccines, check out these articles at Children’s Health Defense.

4) Health and medical freedom are not a “phony” concept. Children have been kidnapped by hospitals and CPS for refusing the Hep B shot at birth or deciding a fever has passed and there’s no need for medical attention. There is nothing phony about parents having their children stolen from them because they’ve done what they think is best for their children. Millions have been injured by vaccines and there is a mountain of science documenting the risks and shortcomings of vaccines. To suggest otherwise is not only dishonest, it’s immoral.

5) All the information I give in all forums is, to the best of my knowledge, accurate and derived from published peer-reviewed research or US government data. It is not misinformation in any way, shape or form, no matter how often or loudly Hotez or other vaccine industry stakeholders shout about it. (Notice, Hotez and his ilk were calling us misinformation spreaders years ago – it’s not a new derision.) Rather, parents like me have advanced degrees and are highly educated. We can read science and discern when we’re being misled. We understand when an issue is being whitewashed. We understand experts can be bought and we’re smart enough, strong enough, and well-educated enough to call them out – we’re just not usually given the chance.

6) The vaccine awareness safety movement is largely not “anti-vaccine.” Rather, it is comprised primarily of ex-vaccinators who’ve witnessed the dangers of vaccines first hand. Would you call them anti-car seat for wanting safe car seats for their children? If someone chooses to only eat organic food, does that make them anti-food? If someone chooses filtered water based on the science related to a specific filter does that make them anti-water? If someone chooses to live in the countryside does that make them anti-city? This slur has been weaponized to smear and dehumanize individuals and their choices rather than address the damage sustained by them or their children from government approved products. It’s a ridiculous leap that has been normalized and is the go-to rhetoric for dismissing well-educated, well-researched individuals as loony dissenters. Many parents who once enthusiastically embraced vaccinations have now adjusted their posture choosing not to vaccinate and challenging the official narrative, but that results from personal negative experience, not some words they read on the internet.

7) Parents are protecting their children and themselves from the injection of known toxins that can damage the neurological system, the immune system, the gastrointestinal system, and more. Vaccines contain myriad toxins which have never been tested singly or in combination for toxicity, yet they are readily injected into our tiny, newborn babies as though no possible downside exists. This is prima facie not just wrong, but indisputably unethical.

8) I stated correctly that there have been 89,000 reports of adverse reactions to measles vaccines.  Hotez’ number of 221 is the number who actually received compensation from the impossibly corrupted Vaccine Compensation Program.

But Hotez didn’t just tell fibs about me, he told his own. He claimed that Dr. Greg Poland’s work shows 2 doses of the measles vaccine causes protection in 97% of recipients. Unfortunately for Hotez, Poland wrote in his January 2014 article The Re-Emergence of Measles in Developed Countries: Time to Develop the Next-Generation Measles Vaccines?:

“While the current vaccine is acknowledged as a good vaccine, we and others have demonstrated that the immune response to measles vaccine varies substantially in actual field use. Multiple studies demonstrate that 2–10% of those immunized with two doses of measles vaccine fail to develop protective antibody levels, and that immunity can wane over time and result in infection (so-called secondary vaccine failure) when the individual is exposed to measles. For example, during the 1989–1991 U.S. measles outbreaks 20–40% of the individuals affected had been previously immunized with one to two doses of vaccine. In an October 2011 outbreak in Canada, over 50% of the 98 individuals had received two doses of measles vaccine. The Table shows that this phenomenon continues to play a role in measles outbreaks. Thus, measles outbreaks also occur even among highly vaccinated populations because of primary and secondary vaccine failure, which results in gradually larger pools of susceptible persons and outbreaks once measles is introduced [8]. This leads to a paradoxical situation whereby measles in highly immunized societies occurs primarily among those previously immunized [8].”

Call me a lay person, but it does not take a scientist to understand words like “primary and secondary vaccine failure” or the “paradoxical situation of highly vaccinated groups being more susceptible.” Hmmm. When have I heard about vaccines undermining the immune system and rendering vaccinees more susceptible to illness?

While it wasn’t Hotez who made the absurd claim that vaccines are one of the best tested medicines available, I feel I’d be remiss by not correcting that whopper. The truth is vaccine safety studies do not use genuine placebos, they instead utilize another vaccine or solution containing mercury or aluminum as the placebo. Absent placebo-controlled studies, it is preposterous to claim that vaccines are well tested and one cannot make any claims about safety or efficacy without a proper placebo-controlled study. NONE. Not to mention that vaccine safety studies evaluate one vaccine but vaccines are administered in groups of as many as 8 doses of vaccines in a day. Nor are the health outcomes of vaccinated compared to those of the unvaccinated. To argue this is robust science is laughable. To understand the shortcomings of vaccine science, watch my movie, The Greater Good.

Hotez has deep ties to the pharmaceutical industry, spent his career developing vaccines and holds patents on vaccines, rendering him a seriously conflicted participant in any debate about vaccines. One would never ask someone from the coal industry about the safety of coal-fired power plants but when it comes to vaccine-connected physicians and scientists, we somehow give them a free pass. Perhaps worse still is the glaring lack of disclosure made by media when media presents these so-called experts with vested interests. Nary a word was mentioned about Hotez’ background in his introduction on the show.  

In addition, Hotez makes disparaging remarks about those who deviate from the official orthodoxy of vaccines dispensed by the pharmaceutical industry and the health agencies that receive vast sums from that industry without any consequence or challenge from the compliant media.

As I wrap things up, let me share one last tidbit which illustrates the type of sick individual Hotez is; I did not have time to mention this during the show, but he has stated that the parents of vaccine injured children “hate their children and are a hate group.” Seriously.

It beggars belief that Hotez has any credibility as an expert but the pharma-influenced media doesn’t bat an eye at such outrageous comments.

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. would do the world a service by debating Hotez but my experience speaks volumes about Hotez’ true colors – he’s not interested in an exchange of different views, respectable debate, or an examination of the body of science. You can hear it yourself in the show, all he does is disparage me and those who have concerns about the safety of vaccines likely in the hopes that others will dismiss our concerns without further investigation.

Hopefully, his latest antics will undermine any vestigial credibility he may have had.

For a deeper dive read this article by the HFDF team.

NOTE: This post has been edited to insert the correct link to the whole Idaho Matters show in 2019 as we inadvertently posted a synopsis. Once you navigate to the Idaho Matters show page, click on the link that says, “Listen – 27:36” to listen to the full show.

Captains of Pharma

Posted on by Leslie Manookian

Over the course of the last week or two, my husband and I have been watching the eight-part Hulu documentary series Dopesick exploring how Purdue Pharma, privately owned by the Sackler family, pushed its deadly narcotic OxyContin resulting in the addiction and deaths of tens of thousands of people. The Sacklers and Purdue deployed a specious propaganda campaign mendaciously touting OxyContin as less addictive than other opioids and claiming an addiction rate of less than 1% for patients.

You have to watch Dopesick or read the book upon which the series is based to really understand how evil these people are and how far they went to ensure their family made billions at the expense of innocent human beings.

In addition to claiming Oxy was less addictive, the Sacklers/Purdue dishonestly portrayed their drug as not suffering from the normal spikes in blood concentrations common to other opioids which result in euphoria and the crash that follows leaving patients begging for more. They claimed the time release coating on pills of Oxy eliminated those spikes. They manipulated the scale on the graphs in their promotional materials to mislead salespeople and doctors into believing the lie that Oxy did not result in the peaks and valleys which lead to addiction.

Purdue funded and organized Astroturf expert groups on pain management that extolled the virtues of Oxy and its ability to manage moderate pain, paid doctors to push the drug, and incentivized salespeople with volume-driven bonuses. They funded Astroturf citizens groups to control the conversation in the communities that were devastated by the drug and when that failed, they attempted to buy their silence.

When we finished the docu-series I was left feeling quite demoralized because not one of the executives nor one member of the Sackler family that led the company ever went to jail – which is exactly where they belong. No individual was even charged with a felony despite all their lies and deception. Yes, the company filed for bankruptcy, yes, the Sacklers lost the company, and yes, the company paid billions in fines but the family still enjoys extraordinary wealth despite the carnage of their deceptive OxyContin campaign.

If you or I committed the crimes they committed we certainly would have been charged with a felony and landed in prison for a lengthy term but the Sacklers and their underlings are part of the ruling class who seem to inhabit a sphere above our laws.

They are part of the revolving door between government and industry. Top brass at federal health agencies regularly complete government appointments then transition to high paying positions at the very corporations they once regulated. Perhaps this is just the way the world works but a more cynical interpretation is this is how industry rewards those who “carry their water” – and buy their silence.

It is no secret that former CDC head Dr. Julie Gerberding went to a cushy job at Merck vaccines a year after leaving her position. More recently, former FDA Commissioner Scott Gotlieb conveniently landed at Pfizer where he serves on the board earning a six-figure salary only a couple months after departing FDA.  In the case of Purdue, Curtis Wright, a director at FDA who led the agency’s approval of OxyContin took a cushy job at Purdue with a starting salary of $400,000 a year after his departure.

To a large extent, due to the Prescription Drug User Fee Act, the pharmaceutical industry effectively controls FDA via the “user fees” it pays directly to the agency amounting to $2.8 billion in 2021. FDA is, for all intents and purposes, a captured agency as user fees amount to roughly 65% of the drug approvers salaries for human drugs and 45% of FDA’s total budget.

But it’s not only federal agencies that suffer from conflicts of interest, as the series makes clear, our justice system is also plagued by a revolving door with industry.

Watching Dopesick left me feeling sad, depressed, helpless, angry, and perhaps worst of all, despairing because the Sackler family and Purdue Pharma story are not unique. They are not an isolated incident in the vast landscape of American medicine, drugs, and politics.

Rather, the Purdue Pharma story is par for the course.

I have firsthand experience of this modus operandi from my days on Wall Street. When the management team of one of the biggest drug companies in the world came to reassure us as one of their largest investors about the blockbuster drug in their pipeline, the CEO explained how despite a “Black Box Warning” on the packaging as ordered by FDA in response to some patients on the phase III clinical trials dying, he still thought the company would rake in billions of dollars in revenue and profits. He knew innocent and trusting but naïve people would die, but that was not part of the equation.

Through years of research, I later came to realize that injury and loss of life are a part of the equation, but not in the way a heartfelt human would imagine. Instead, these companies calculate the injuries and loss of life in terms of the cost of any lawsuits, penalties, and fines they’ll have to shoulder for harm caused as simply a cost of doing business. As the damages-related costs are dwarfed by the mountains of expected profits, the unfortunate human and financial damage are just a write-off.

According to the consumer watchdog Public Citizen, the drug industry has defrauded the federal government more than any other industry and paid $38.6 billion in settlements, fines, and penalties for hundreds of lawsuits including marketing fraud and other offenses. But for an industry that raked in $1.42 trillion in global revenues in 2021, a few billion in fines over 27 years is small potatoes.

Perhaps one of the most shocking and damaging aspects of the status quo in pharma is the admittedly risky standard vaccine program (apart from the Covid shots).

The whole system is set up against parents and Americans in general. The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 (NCVIA) was intended to protect grieving families from the nightmare of suing over vaccine injury. NCVIA created a National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (NVCP) which was supposed to guarantee applicants with a “swift, flexible, and less adversarial alternative” to civil litigation. In exchange, the vaccine industry was bestowed with a financial and legal liability shield other industries can only dream about. In laymen’s terms, this means it is near impossible to sue the vaccine industry.

The NCVIA/NVCP acknowledged that vaccines injure and kill some recipients and set up a no-fault compensation program with a Vaccine Injury Table of recognized side-effects compensable through the trust fund established under the NVCP. Unfortunately, the Vaccine Injury Table has been gutted in the ensuing 35 years to the point that seeking justice in the purportedly quick, simple, no-fault program is a second nightmare for families who apply to it.

The Vaccine Injury Compensation Trust Fund pays out settlements to those who apply successfully to the program. The program is funded by a 75-cent tax on all CDC recommended vaccines and has paid out over $4.5 billion to victims since program inception despite only a small portion of applicants succeeding. As the vaccine makers have no liability and no role in funding the compensation program, they have no incentive to make safer products.

Vaccine claims are heard by the Office of Special Masters within the US Court of Federal Claims, a special court run by government-funded lawyers, administering a government program lacking due process or discovery.

It’s hard not see the system as a racket given the following facts: The CDC recommends the shots; the States mandate them; the federal government acts as the largest purchaser of vaccines in the nation through the Vaccines for Children Program; CDC both promotes vaccines and ensures their safety; vaccine recipients pay to compensate those who are injured, and the government protects the vaccine makers from liability.

The US vaccine programs constitute a convoluted and inherently conflicted mess over which Congress has failed to exercise oversight since the NCVIA program’s inception.

Unfortunately, this is just the status quo of the world we inhabit. Arthur Sackler testified to Congress in the 1960s that modern pharmaceuticals were the way of the future. We have experienced the impact of that prescient statement in recent decades – and the past 3 years.

Hard as it may be to stomach, it seems that the captains of the pharmaceutical industry possess a cavalier attitude regarding the tradeoff between people’s health and well-being on the one hand, and their corporate power and profits on the other.

As I sat contemplating this institutionalized hustle, I felt plainly dejected as I simply cannot comprehend that human beings can be so dishonest, so heartless, so craven, weak, greedy, and ambitious – to literally sacrifice their fellow brothers and sisters for their own advancement.

How is it that these people have come to this place? How is it that so many will simply turn a blind eye? How is it that so many purported servants of the public play a role in this whole game?

The conclusion I’ve come to is that they lack a moral compass because they don’t believe in God or a higher power. They have no faith in anything bigger than themselves which not only provides guide rails to living a good and moral life but also some meaning.

What we truly face is a battle between nihilism and spirituality. These people are focused on the material world and believe that that is all there is and if that is all there is then who gives a damn how they behave?

Some folks are blessed with an internal compass without a belief in God but in my experience, they are the exception. Though I believe in God, I also just believe in being good.

For most of us, faith in something bigger than ourselves with the accompanying appreciation for right and wrong, inspires us to be good, honest, decent, and principled human beings.

Although I have not always had faith in God, I do now and it gives me meaning, hope, and joy even if I don’t fully understand this experience we call life – and even if I don’t understand why it is so painful or why it has to be the way it is with so many horrible humans sacrificing their own brothers and sisters in service to their agendas.

I choose to believe it’s because there is some kind of a grand plan, that we are here in a sort of school for the soul to learn how not to live – and to learn how much it fills our hearts to be good, and kind, and honest, and decent.

Perhaps part of the origin of true happiness flows from the immense sense of wellbeing that comes from knowing one at least tries to be a beacon of light in a world of dark.

I have a son and I would do anything for him and he is in fact part of the reason I do the work I do but it’s also because I want to be a good, thoughtful, and conscious person.

I want to learn and grow as a human being. I want to be a better person. I want to be a benefit to humanity and my community – even if that means standing up and saying things and doing things that others don’t understand or even despise or condemn (like suing our school board and a local town over their mask mandates).

I just try to do good each and every day and to make a difference in my little piece of life. That gives me meaning and also reassures me in my own mind and heart that I am on the right path. No matter how painful life may be, at least I know that I am trying to be a work and force for the better.

Thankfully there are many other warriors for good and they inspire me as well. I honestly don’t know what I would do without them encouraging me and inspiring me to reach higher, dig deeper when I’m down, and continue on a path for good.

What I Used to Believe

Posted on by Leslie Manookian

I used to believe that the root cause of all problems in the world stemmed from government not having enough money.

I used to believe that if I and all the other high earners just paid more in taxes – what I thought was our fair share, even though I already paid 50% of my earnings to government – the circumstances of our world would improve because government would have the funding it needed to put everything right.

I used to believe the only thing wrong in the world was George W. Bush and if we just got rid of him and elected a nice and decent person – a democrat – everything would change for the better.

I used to believe democrats were the good, kind, caring politicians and the virtuous members of society.

I used to believe republicans and conservatives were coldhearted, big corporation-backing, corrupt politicians and ignorant people.

I used to believe the two major American political parties stood for and pursued vastly different policies in service to what is best for the American people.

I used to believe newspapers, radio and TV news stations existed to report, in an unbiased fashion, the most important news of the day. 

I used to believe modern medicine was about human health.

I used to believe science was about truth and that the broad collection of medical/scientific associations, journals, and professionals pursued truth above all else for the benefit of humanity – not profit.

I used to believe vaccines were not only safe and effective but the greatest invention of mankind.

I used to believe that New York city, the Netherlands, and many island nations would be underwater by 2013 due to global warming.

I used to believe that government told the truth about global warming, climate change, vaccines, modern medicine, cancer treatments, pesticides, GMOs, wireless technology, EMFs, fluoride, autism, etc. and that government institutions were THE unalloyed source of trustworthy information.

I used to believe homeopathy, herbs, chiropractic, acupuncture, essential oils, midwifery, and other ancient healing modalities were unscientific quackery.

I used to believe the law was the law and did not depend on who occupied the White House or held the majority in Congress.

I used to believe judges were impartial, nonpartisan, wise researchers and interpreters of the law endeavoring to apply it in order to resolve disputes.

I used to believe judges were committed to the ideals which underpin our nation. I used to believe they were focused on defending the Constitution.

I used to believe strict gun laws would keep us safe and that guns are for criminals.

I used to believe in open borders because I didn’t think it was fair that I lived in a rich country while others, merely by virtue of their place of birth, were consigned to a life of deprivation.

I used to believe Americans all cherished the basic American ideals of free speech, freedom of assembly, freedom of religion, bodily autonomy and self-determination -basic freedoms – that underpin the fabric of our society.

I used to believe America was a force for good in the global arena and only intervened when exigencies demanded in order to aid countries and people in need.

I used to believe government was good.

I used to believe so many things, but thankfully I’m no longer so naïve.

Taxes

At some point I woke up or maybe grew up or perhaps got educated and realized that our problems are not fiscal, there is no amount of money that will satisfy government, and government is not the best vehicle to direct the flow of our resources, except in very limited circumstances and for very limited purposes.

To wit, the federal government gave tens of billions to the COVID-19 vaccine manufactures allegedly to address the crisis but the upshot was that government, media, and those vaccine makers colluded to rush a product to market, destroy the clinical trial data by unblinding the trials mere months into the trial, censor and denounce anyone who sounded the alarm or suggested a different approach, suppress therapeutic treatments, and reap extraordinary levels of profit. The federal government oversaw and directed the transfer of immense wealth to these corporations, while their putative life-saving injections likely resulted in hundreds of thousands of excess deaths and multiples more disabilities.

This government sponsored boondoggle not only gifted billions to private industry, it enabled the vaccine makers to profit without liability and profit they did.

Such an exercise is not about serving the public but lining the pockets of cronies.

I never considered that government, like any household, must live within its means or that by spending beyond our budget, government risked the wellbeing of everyone, as is the case today.

I didn’t understand that every dollar the government takes from us in taxes is a dollar out of the local economy which reduces the prospects for all.

Parties

When it came to politics, I used to quip that I was the only socialist on Wall Street and felt I was virtuous for paying a large amount in taxes. I thought I cared more about the poor, the underprivileged, minorities, immigrants and those from other countries than those mean and stingy conservatives.

I didn’t realize that conservatives and people of faith donate more time and money to help those in need than progressives.

If Democrats are good and Republicans are bad, how can this be?

Nor did I consider that private organizations, churches, and charities might be a better method of providing aid to the needy than the public sector.

But if the political parties truly represent vastly divergent agendas and the majority in Congress and occupant of the White House really matter, why have presidents of both parties in recent decades pursued virtually identical policies of globalism, corporatism, and war?

Bush dropped 70,000 bombs in 8 years, Obama dropped 100,000 in 8 years, and Trump dropped 72,000 in a mere 3 years – all on foreign countries largely populated by people of color.  Is this the change Obama spoke of?

Bush junior was roundly condemned as an isolationist with scant knowledge of international affairs. He proceeded to start war in Iraq and Afghanistan. He was touted as a fiscal conservative committed to serving the Constitution but he ballooned the budget while bailing out those too big to fail and signed the anti-American Patriot Act and PREP Act condemning Americans to glaringly unconstitutional surveillance, violations of our basic rights, and gifting liability-free profits to corporate pals.

For his part, Obama promised openness but rarely met with the media. He promised change and transparency but was acknowledged as the most secretive president in US history.  He signed more Executive Orders and Executive Memoranda than any president in nearly 70 years.

While campaigning for President, he vowed to close Guantanamo Bay, exit Iraq and Afghanistan, and recognize the Armenian Genocide but did none of these things once in the Oval Office.

He repealed the 20-year moratorium on offshore drilling and the media barely noticed – an act that would have been unthinkable when Bush was in the White House.

He signed the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) of 2011 removing the writ of habeas corpus and the right to a lawyer – at the mere command of the President.

While Democrats continually pay lip service to helping the indigent, those groups have only fallen further behind since welfare was implemented decades ago and have fared even worse more recently as Dems pushed lockdowns and school closures.

While many conservatives applaud Trump for withdrawing from the WHO and the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), he negotiated a new agreement, the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) which by many measures is worse than the TPP.

And, I can’t discuss Trump without mentioning it was he who placed the military in charge of Operation Warp Speed – rushing a COVID vaccine through approval which by many measures is an unmitigated disaster, yet he still lauds his accomplishment.

Can you imagine the outrage amongst Trumpers had Obama enlisted the military to conduct an initiative like Operation Warp Speed?

From where I sit it’s pretty hard to tell these two parties apart despite all the rhetoric and fluff. While we’re listening to them promising the world and pandering to their bases, they’re busy cooking up deals in the back room to further the globalist agenda which in a nutshell means they have more, you have less, and you live in a digital prison.

Righteous Certitude

Posted on by Leslie Manookian

The weekend before last, I had the immense pleasure and honor of participating in the Brownstone Institute’s conference, The Great Restoration, which focused on the COVID crisis and solutions in the aftermath of the crisis. You can watch the conference here.

Jeffrey Tucker, Brownstone Institute founder and president, brought together some of the most courageous, thoughtful and committed leaders of team reality to discuss the shoddy policies and failures of the public health response, how we got to a place that facilitated those failures, and how we might forge a way forward.

The weekend exhilarated us as we broke bread and shared thoughts and insights – and in many cases challenged one another’s sometimes long-held perspectives.

I barely slept but departed Miami at the crack of dawn on Sunday morning – absolutely elated, if not a bit sad to leave all my friends.

It was in this state of blissful fatigue that I landed in Salt Lake City to catch my flight home to Idaho. I boarded the plane and took my aisle seat.

A few minutes later, a woman approached and asked me to get up as she had the window seat next to me.

While this all seems fairly routine, this woman whom I’ll call B, used to be a friend. She reviewed my documentary on vaccines, The Greater Good, before release and chose not to vaccinate her children with the Gardasil vaccine after watching the film and learning of the dearth of rigorous science relating to Gardasil. (She posted this on her own public Facebook page so I’m not sharing inappropriately.)

B and I had been friends for about 15 years until the nonprofit I founded and head, Health Freedom Defense Fund, sued the City of Hailey, Idaho, the town in which she lives and which is part of my general community, challenging the City’s mask mandate.

The local rag, which masquerades as a newspaper, wrote a sensationally dishonest article about our lawsuit falsely stating the lawsuit claimed that “Hailey’s mask policy constituted “a grand medical experiment” analogous to “the barbaric medical experiments performed on unwilling victims of Nazi’s [sic] Germany’s concentration camps.””

But that’s yellow journalism as that is not what we claimed in our lawsuit. Rather, we argued that as masks are not FDA approved, only granted Emergency Use Authorization (EUA), they are, by definition, experimental. Further, we noted that federal law requires that individuals being administered EUA products have the right to refuse them. Finally, as should be obvious to anyone, the ethical principle of voluntary informed consent enshrined in the Nuremburg Code, Declaration of Helsinki, US Code of Federal Regulations, and UNESCO’s Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights constitutes a judicial norm universally agreed and acknowledged and forced medical interventions are thus illegal.

Domestic and international agreements and statutes aside, mass use of masks is not rooted in sound science. On the contrary, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the efficacy of masks in preventing respiratory disease transmission is conspicuously absent while the extant RCTs demonstrate that masks do NOT stop spread of respiratory diseases. See here. 

To wit, CDC’s own study (published in MAY OF 2020 no less!), reviewed 14 randomized controlled trials and found no significant reduction of flu spread due to mask wearing, enhanced hand washing, and environmental sanitizing. The authors wrote, “In our systematic review, we identified 10 RCTs that reported estimates of the effectiveness of face masks in reducing laboratory-confirmed influenza virus infections in the community from literature published during 1946–July 27, 2018. In pooled analysis, we found no significant reduction in influenza transmission with the use of face masks.”

Any thinking person should be screaming, why did CDC and Dr. Fauci continue pushing masks when CDC’s own science in May of 2020 proved, quite clearly, that masks do not work – not even hand washing or sanitizing spaces works?!?

If that is not damning enough, bear in mind that masks aren’t just ineffective they are actually dangerous as they rapidly elevate CO2 levels in the brain and body causing a cascade of harm such as cognitive impairment.

While the body of science on the dangers of masks is certainly greater today than it was when we filed our lawsuit, there was adequate science demonstrating harm – not to mention that forced masking of anyone, let alone healthy people, represents gross violation of fundamental human rights and therefore unethical.

In February, 2020, on 60 Minutes Dr. Anthony Fauci had stated that while masks might make one feel better, they weren’t providing the protection believed. He also emailed a friend that month advising against masks and then confirmed that same opinion in another email on March 31, 2020.  Then, April 3rd, he did an about-face on masks and made a vigorous endorsement.

While it might be comfortable to believe that Dr. Fauci and public health authorities made that change in guidance based on new evidence, in his recent deposition for a lawsuit brought by the states of Iowa and Missouri, Dr. Fauci was unable to cite a single study supporting his flip-flopping guidance.

If Dr. Fauci IS SCIENCE, why can’t he remember THE SCIENCE?

Turning back to the shoddy journalism of my local rag, as has become disappointingly commonplace, the author of the fallacious article never reached out to provide me the journalistic courtesy of a comment on the lawsuit or the article.

This is the same newspaper that published a large article reviewing my documentary and also published my well-referenced op eds and letters to the editor about vaccines for years, before suddenly ceasing a few years ago – without explanation.

In a similar manner, B, my former friend and now seat-mate, rather than reaching out to hear my perspective, just blindly read the article, took the content at face value and sent me this text:

I was rather taken aback but replied to her with the following:

She then began posting negative comments about me on Facebook accusing me of being selfish and ignorant of the dangers and damage of COVID. She opined on the shortage of beds in the ICU’s with zero understanding that the reason there was a shortage was not due to lack of beds but because healthcare workers who did not want to submit to the COVID injectable had been fired. There was a staff shortage because of the mandate. I can personally verify this as I saw that most of the beds were empty when I visited the COVID wing at St. Luke’s Magic Valley in early September of 2021. To be generous, the hospitals were being economical with the truth.

Then she blocked me so that I could not respond or share my perspective – so I posted this on my Facebook page:

Unsurprisingly, I never heard back from her.

SHE WAS COMMITTED TO HER WORLD VIEW. THAT WAS IT.

It is plain to any observer that I conducted myself with openness, kindness and decency throughout this virtual encounter and yet despite my politeness, B behaved horribly. And even though I remembered her lack of decorum and honor of more than a year prior, I hoped that being seated next to one another on the plane might be an opportunity – and it was, just not as I had imagined.

B portrays herself as a person of compassion and kindness. She’s hosted Buddhist gatherings at her home and events benefiting a local foundation which states, “The heart of our work focuses on revealing our human potential for leading a wise, moral and compassionate life.” B has served on a local spiritual film festival board and holds a Masters in Counseling Psychology.

The irony of that resume is not lost on me. But does she see the irony?

Does she have any grasp of how her posture in life belies her own self-image? Is she ignorant of her hypocrisy?

Does she have any awareness that those of us opposing medical mandates and defending freedom do so because we want to protect people from their harms?

Or that forced masking when masks provide no benefit is tantamount to forced participation in a charade?

Has she learned that she was 100% wrong about the efficacy and necessity of masks and the COVID injectables, neither of which prevent transmission or infection?

It’s clear the answer is no.

So, when the plane finally landed in the midst of a full-on blizzard, I said to B before I walked off the plane, “You know B, the offer still stands if you ever want to talk” to which I was met with a stone-faced and vehement, “No interest.”

I responded, “You might find this is just like Gardasil” and she reiterated in an arctic tone, “Absolutely no interest.”

As I walked off the plane, I wished her a good day and made my way to my car.

To be clear, I am sharing all this for a reason – a very important reason, IMHO.

I had hoped that our airplane encounter might provide an opportunity to build a bridge, to discuss our differences, to explain why I founded Health Freedom Defense Fund, why I’m so committed to standing for truth, why I oppose mandates of any kind, and why I unequivocally support parental rights. But that was not to be.

Instead, the interaction was a useful, timely, and woefully painful reminder of one of the hardest lessons I’ve had to learn in my life, namely, that just because I do the right thing, just because I am kind, honest, open, forgiving, and ready to acknowledge and apologize for my mistakes, that does not mean that others will be – or even possess any inclination to be.

But this understanding will not stop me from living life my way because, to me, life is not worth living if I’m not living a life of integrity, honesty, and purpose. In my experience, it is impossible to love oneself or have self-respect – both of which are critical to happiness, wellbeing, and a good and meaningful life – absent those qualities.

And as disappointing and distressing as it may be, I’ve come to a place where I believe that I simply no longer share values with many others in our country. Those, like B, who oppose me and wrongfully malign me, who seek to erase me by refusing to even speak to me – after all, that is the purpose of cancel culture, to blot out another person – don’t believe in the American ideals I so cherish and which underlie the founding of this great nation.

They don’t believe in the rule of law, the Constitution, our inalienable rights, integrity, decency – or TRUTH. They have become so persuaded by the mainstream narrative, fear porn and sensationalism that they genuinely believe those who have different views are actually enemies.

And this is not an accident. Yes, they are victims, but victims of a sophisticated psychological program to dehumanize anyone who disagrees with them. Just look at the Instagram of Kara Vallow, a Disney supervisor whom Health Freedom Defense Fund is helping a Disney employee to sue.

Vallow unabashedly posts statements such as these under the misguided notion that SHE is virtuous and kind. Memo to Kara Vallow – hatred is neither.

She shamelessly portrays those with differing viewpoints not as part of the rich tapestry of America, but as evil, as hateful, as ignorant, as wicked – and as less than those who think like her. Whether you agree with the pilot’s opinion or view it as abhorrent, dissatisfaction with the president does not make one a terrorist.

While I’m not conflating B’s actions with the posts of Vallow, they do share a theme which is to unperson, degrade, and expunge those with whom they disagree from their orbit’s. Dehumanization is key to this tack and to them retaining a clear conscience.

But history teaches us that dehumanization of others is a crucial component of the psychological methods utilized against the populace to justify the persecution, segregation, abuse and genocide of human beings. It is perhaps the most insidious weapon deployed against the people in the past three years to ensure good people turn a blind eye to the suffering – and rights – of others.

If one resists the mainstream narrative and espouses a different view, one is reduced to a grandma killer, one is selfish, one is vile – one has become a pariah.

B, Vallow, and so many like them, have swallowed that narrative hook, line and sinker. They have zero awareness that Fauci and CDC have no scientific leg to stand on, they have no knowledge of the latest research proving that even their hallowed N95s do not stop transmission of COVID, they’re oblivious to the fact that COVID was never as dangerous as portrayed or that the COVID injectables do not act as purported, and they’ve missed the terrifying increases in excess deaths, and the rise in miscarriages subsequent to the shots.

They’ve been had and they haven’t a clue.  

But they do have one thing – righteous certitude.

They are certain they are correct and they don’t need to hear or see the abundant evidence to the contrary. And they are certain they are the good and virtuous ones.

A person of integrity would WANT to know if they’d erred, would court dialogue and would own their mistakes. But B and her type are hypocrites. They hold themselves up as kind, compassionate, selfless and caring individuals but that does not extend to anyone who holds a different opinion or has come to a different conclusion.

They don’t need or want to be reminded that as written in our Declaration of Independence, our rights come from our creator – that they are due to us by virtue of us being born human; that the First Amendment to the US Constitution says the government shall not infringe our right to freedom of speech, worship, and assembly; that the Fourth Amendment protects us against unlawful search; or that litigation is the peaceful way to resolve disputes.

But this experience was exactly the reminder I needed that I cannot, I will not, and I must not yield to B or her crowd as if I do, if we do, they will steamroll those of us who believe in decency, kindness, liberty, and the rule of law.

It is precisely because of people like B that we must pursue and expose the lies surrounding the COVID crisis, we must push back against the Marxist indoctrination of our children in our schools through school choice or building our own schools, we must create true healthcare systems based on homeopathy, chiropractic and naturopathy – not medical systems based on drugs (except for emergency medicine), we must launch independent currencies so that we can wrest control of our financial futures from the commercial banks and central banks, we must develop our local food-sheds and grow our own food – we must stand for freedom, for local control, for self-reliance, accountability, and liberty for all.

We must do all this – for ourselves, and for our children – so we can live free as our creator intended. Some of us would never even contemplate behaving the way B did, but many others would have no qualms about doing so. That fact alone should motivate us to safeguard our freedom and principles.

This lesson is well illustrated by the fact that while an evil minority of people perpetrated the vast majority of atrocities suffered by humans over our history – the silent majority let them. Those of us who understand history cannot sit idly by as the price of doing so is too great. It’s never been so great given the state of our world with collusion between the government and tech giants, social media platforms, captured-media, digital IDs, digital currencies, authoritarian “health” laws and practices, and a naïve populace.

It is precisely because so many are ignorant to the threats we face and the methods of those without scruples that those of us who remain in possession of our moral code must stand and resist the dystopian vision of the world THEY are trying to foist on us.

I will not yield to them. Not now. Not ever.

CDC – Just an Innocent Mistake?

Posted on by Leslie Manookian

In an internal video message to staff at CDC, CDC Director Rochelle Walensky announced a major overhaul of its operation acknowledging a failed response to the COVID crisis. According to ABC News, Walensky said, “To be frank, we are responsible for some pretty dramatic, pretty public mistakes. From testing, to data, to communications.”

I’m going to cut right to the chase, there is simply nothing CDC can possibly do to reform itself. It is way past the point of rehabilitation. CDC has destroyed any semblance of trust it once had with the American people. CDC didn’t just make some mistakes, CDC duped the American people on the science of PCR tests, masks, distancing, lockdowns, and spread of COVID.

An honest observer might even argue CDC waged war against the people by paying the media a billion dollars to “strengthen vaccine confidence in the United States” and collaborating with big tech to censor opinions from scientific and medical experts that conflicted with CDC’s diktats.

This wasn’t about failure to publish data quickly enough or communicate with the public, it was an unmitigated attack on the people, on free speech, and on our way of life.  

Now, making matters worse, CDC’s budget is to be quadrupled – and that tally excludes the tens of billions of extra funding CDC received from COVID crisis funds over the past two years.

According to Stand for Health Freedom, “The President’s FY2023 budget would increase the CDC’s budget from just under $9 billion dollars to $38.76 billion, a 356.9% increase relative to 2022.”

Yes, CDC failed to do its job but that was not because it lacked adequate funding and now CDC is to be granted billions more – to escalate their approach to public health – as somehow, money will make them honest? I’m confused.

ABC quoted Walensky as saying, “CDC needs to better “serve our partners, prioritizing the American people first.” Which leaves me wondering, what partners? CDC is a public health agency charged with protecting public health in service to the people. Who could the other partners be over whom CDC is now going to prioritize we the people? These partners “donated” $317 million to the CDC for the COVID crisis in 2021 alone, were there strings attached? Could these partners be all those private foundations like the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (BMGF) that “gave” CDC money through the CDC Foundation or the pharmaceutical industry players who’ve made tens of billions off their falsely labeled “safe and effective” injections? 

At the link above you’ll see that BMGF has generously donated to CDC for at least 5 years consecutively as have the GAVI Alliance and Imperial College London – which both happen to be major BMGF grant recipients themselves.

Also listed as 5-year consecutive donors are Bloomberg Philanthropies and Johns Hopkins University which just so happens to be a grant recipient of Bloomberg Philanthropies and whose school of public health is the Bloomberg School of Public Health.

Readers may recall that Imperial College of London is the outfit responsible for terrifying the world with their wildly inaccurate but alarming models forecasting millions of potential COVID deaths and used to justify lockdowns after being reported worldwide. BMGF donated a cool $79 million to them in March of 2020.

I could pick apart CDC’s disastrous COVID response but that’s been done. More than that, one might argue it would be a waste of time for one simple reason – conducting that analysis suggests CDC’s covid response was an isolated error, a mere oversight, a unique problem which has now been admitted and will be addressed. But is that accurate? Has CDC managed public health well and without controversy over the decades? Is American public health improving? Or have there been repeated ‘failings’ more suggestive of an agency corrupt to its core?

To anyone who’s been observing CDC for more than a couple of years, the answer is painfully, the latter.

CDC has been caught red-handed repeatedly over many decades, lying to the American public.

For decades, CDC claimed vaccines don’t cause autism but was forced to remove those claims after being sued by ICAN. ICAN demanded proof of their claim, CDC was unable to provide evidence and was then forced to remove the claim.

CDC covered up the connection between the MMR vaccine and autism which their own internal research revealed. This uncomfortable news was addressed in the documentary film VAXXED. CDC’s research found that when the MMR vaccine was administered before 3 years of age, children, especially African American boys, had an elevated risk of receiving an autism diagnosis. What did CDC do? Instead of holding an emergency press conference to alert parents to the danger, CDC scientists and officials met in a conference room to destroy the documents. Seriously.

Turning to mercury, that super cool metal your parents told you to never play with as you could literally lose your mind, CDC covered up the causal connection between the mercury-containing children’s vaccines and autism after their own research demonstrated the putatively safe preservative was being injected in dangerous amounts into innocent and vulnerable American babies. What did CDC do? They convened a meeting of health authorities and vaccine makers at Simpsonwood Retreat Center in Norcross, Georgia in June of 2000 to figure out how to make the connection between mercury and autism and neurodevelopmental problems “go away.” CDC was more concerned with covering its own backside than protecting innocent children. Just stew on that for a moment.

When scientists from around the world then discovered that the aluminum hydroxide adjuvant commonly used in vaccines is highly neuro and immune toxic, what was the CDC’s response? Ignore it. Aluminum is toxic to all life forms and has no biological function in the body – it does not belong in the human body – yet while highly esteemed scientists were documenting a spectrum of damage from aluminum-based adjuvants including cognitive impairment in healthy adults, to immune system problems, neuron death in mice, Alzheimer’s and even autism, CDC simply dismissed that research. To see dozens of studies on the damage wrought by injecting aluminum, see here, here, and here. Then click here to see CDC’s hollow assurances of safety.

During the swine flu/H1N1 outbreak of 2009, Dr. Anthony Fauci warned that one-third of Americans would contract the disease. As a result of the fear, vaccine makers received $1 billion to develop a vaccine and federal and state health agencies received a whopping $5 billion to promote the vaccine to the public. Sharyl Attkisson, an award-winning investigative journalist for CBS, discovered the CDC knew as early as July of 2009 that there was no emergency. She requested data from state health departments and found that very few of the patients being tested actually had swine flu. Nevertheless, on Friday, October 24, 2009, President Obama declared a national emergency. In the end, $7.65 billion was ultimately spent on what was in reality very few cases – no emergency. Yet the CDC never came clean and by June of 2010, the CDC said the H1N1 virus that caused the outbreak was a regular human flu virus that would continue to circulate. See my article from March 2020 for a deeper dive into this story.

Given this pattern of behavior over many decades, only a fool would conclude CDC’s conduct is the result of an innocent mistake. Rather, it’s business as usual for the thoroughly bought outfit erroneously labeled a public health agency.  

CDC has admitted failures in managing the COVID crisis and is now engaging in damage limitation to enable its stakeholders and partners to remain in control of the reorganization of the agency. CDC’s COVID response, an innocent mistake? Poor communication and coordination? Phooey.

Let’s not fall for that tripe again.

Sticks and Stones

Posted on by Leslie Manookian

Remember that old saying, “sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me?” That’s what millions of American kids were raised to believe so they would learn to ignore verbal taunts and bullying on the playground. While the idea sounds really nice and the intentions are surely pure, is it actually true? The answer is a resounding, if not unfortunate, ‘no.’

In reality, words and language can be used against us in all manner of ways to manipulate, frighten, control, guilt, shame, deceive, gaslight, divide, distract, and steer us toward a desired point of view, behavior, or outcome. Given our experience of the past two years, one would be safe in concluding that words have indeed been weaponized against us – quite successfully.

We’ve been bombarded with messages that nudge and cajole us into ways of thinking, desired behaviors, and ways of relating. We commonly employ a new vocabulary that was entirely foreign to us before the lockdown crisis. People now casually bandy about terms such as Ro, fomites, droplets, case fatality rate, and more.

How did this happen, and how did it happen so quickly? As uncomfortable as it might be to digest, highly sophisticated techniques were deployed by the federal and state governments, the media, and big tech in a brazen effort to control the public.

Methods of Manipulation

An array of proven but simple techniques ranging from purveying fear through a constant running ticker tape of cases, hospitalizations and deaths to cement the sense of danger; to the repetition of key phrases such as ‘15 days to stop the spread,’ ‘we’re all in this together,’ and ‘It’s a small ask, wear a mask’ to elicit compliance with the new state of living; to canceling and shaming as anti-vaxxers, anti-science, science deniers, and conspiracy theorists anyone who dared to challenge the mainstream narrative dispensed by those who control the narrative.

The scenarios through which these methods are utilized normally conform to the Hegelian Dialectic, or, in common parlance – problem, reaction, solution. The concept goes something like this: those in power have a desired outcome in mind so a crisis either occurs or is engineered; as expected, the public reacts to the crisis and demands that those in power do something; at which point those in power deliver the predetermined solution they had intended all along.

Hegelian Dialect at Work

The acclaimed journal, National Geographic, published an issue with the cover title, “The War On Science.” While some of us might flinch at that title, most will reflexively react with the innocent wish that somebody do something to defend science. Most are hoping some authority will implement some mechanism which will ensure truth – such as fact checkers, the Trusted News Initiative, or a Disinformation Governance Board so they can return to their lives, safe under the illusion that they don’t have to flex a muscle to ascertain the veracity of information.

But the seed has been planted and the message is clear: science is under attack so we must stop people from questioning or challenging officialdom. And the answer proffered by those in power are the misnomered “fact checkers” and “truth initiatives” funded by Bill Gates and Big Tech in recent years – and now even government – to justify silencing and demonizing anyone who posts or speaks about research and data at odds with the predominant storyline peddled by government and its minions.

Despite the glaring illogic, dissent must be arrested, lest science be destroyed.

Unfortunately for anyone who cares about truth, liberty, and self-determination, there are countless other examples:

  • The tragic events of 911 terrified Americans into accepting reduced freedom, warrantless search and surveillance, and other intrusions into our private lives – all in the name of security.
  • COVID led us to sacrifice more freedom, autonomy, and privacy in service to perceived safety from a disease.
  • Fear of future anticipated health threats has already spurred the WHO to contract with the private sector to deliver digital vaccine passports with a unique QR code-connected digital ID for all – a plan in development for several years before the COVID crisis.
  • Alleged virus-laden physical currency may prompt an unwitting public into accepting a central bank-backed digital currency – for our own protection.

To be clear, I’m not suggesting that government manufactured all these crises (although at this point, I’m also not immune to this possibility), nevertheless it appears those in power leveraged the situations in pursuit of an agenda long in the works, in homage to Winston Churchill’s famous quote, “Never let a good crisis go to waste.”

Propaganda as a Tool

Another device of manipulation is the use of propaganda, a method pioneered in the US by Sigmund Freud’s nephew, Edward Bernays. Inspired by Freud’s research, Bernays sought to turn propaganda into a more acceptable concept, namely public relations. His objective was to deliver the reins of power to leaders so that they could “control and regiment the masses according to our will without their knowing about it.”

In his opus, Propaganda, Bernays wrote,

“The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country. We are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes formed, and our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of…. It is they who pull the wires that control the public mind.”

Bernays successfully sold war to Americans, cigarettes to women, and disposable Dixie cups to all. He developed the use of interest groups to engineer the perception that a group of people were concerned about an issue and that perhaps you should be concerned too. His techniques were so effective Joseph Goebbels deployed them to hone the image of Adolph Hitler.

Bernays was undoubtedly very successful at selling products and ideas to a naïve public, but the beguiling, slick, and scripted manipulation and influencing tools at the core of his toolbox, were far from innocuous. His methods did elicit the desired response. But who amongst us does not take umbrage at being manipulated?

Legalizing Propaganda in America

Having explored the reasons for and methods behind the weaponization of words in service to an agenda, we turn now to legislative changes in the US which served this master.

Though banned for decades in America, the National Defense Authorization Act of 2012 legalized the dissemination of information in the US whether the information is true, partly true, or completely false.

Surprising as it may be, what you read in the newspaper, watch on the television, hear on the radio, or find on the internet may, in fact, be propaganda – “the spreading of ideas, information, or rumor for the purpose of helping or injuring an institution, a cause, or a person,” according to the Merriam Webster dictionary.

This uncomfortable revelation may explain, in part, why public health agencies persist with their studied talking points about the dangers of COVID, the high number of deaths, the lack of treatments, and the success of the COVID injections despite scores of doctors and scientists trumpeting the exact opposite – based on published peer-reviewed science and data.

In Britain, the government formed a “Nudge Unit” to frighten the public into yielding to its wishes – locking down, allowing loved ones to languish in nursing homes or perish alone in hospitals, submitting to the experimental COVID jabs, and other hitherto unthinkable measures. If government must weaponize behavioral science against the populace to coerce them to surrender their lives, livelihoods, freedoms, and way of life to a so-called new normal – count me out.

We inhabit confusing and frightening times – a situation worsened by our ignorance of the methods being deployed against us by those attempting to control us. The solution is to understand the tactics of manipulation as once they are seen, one is liberated from their shackles.

Awakening to the truth that we are being deceived and controlled is imperative in order that we understand how we surrender our power so we can instead make conscious choices and live rooted in reality.

As Confucius said, “Above all it is essential to refer to things by their correct names. If things are not referred to by their correct names, then our language will not reflect reality. If our language does not reflect reality, then our actions will not reflect reality, and will be exercises in futility.” [Confucius, 551-479 BC]

(The Analects of Confucius, Chapter 13, Verse 3 [Rectification of Names], Translation source article)

Not only is the truth required to live in reality, the truth is essential if we are to remain sane during these times. While ignorance may be bliss for some, awareness of the true nature of our world and lives, is essential to living an honest and conscious life.

I invite you to peruse the list that follows so you too might see many of the ways these nefarious control methods have been used against you in the past couple of years.

Weaponization of Language and Tactics of Control:

1) Gaslighting/Contradictory/oxymoronic terms:
• Life insurance – death insurance
• Patriot Act – not patriotic
• PREP Act – not to prepare but to shield corporations
• Too big to fail – too important to the rich and powerful
• Social security – nothing social about it and it’s not secure
• Department of Defense – Department of War
• Disinformation Governance Board – Censorship of truth that conflicts with government/official narrative
• Pravda – truth
• Third Reich’s Ministry for Public Enlightenment
• Fact checkers – Censorship of truth that conflicts with government/official narrative
• Misinformation, Disinformation, Mal-information – anything that conflicts with government/official narrative
• Contact tracing keeps us safe
• Cases – people with a positive test even if not sick
• Asymptomatic – healthy people
• Breakthrough cases – vaccine failure
• Adverse events – side effects
• Herd immunity – only individuals can be immune but shifts focus to group
• Social Distancing – physical distancing
• Lockdown for your safety – home imprisonment
• Universal Basic Income – government handouts
• Underserved – no need of service
• Woke – not awake at all
• New normal
• Stakeholder – those with vested interest

2) Change in Definitions of common words:

Pandemic:
• WHO definition April 2009: “several, simultaneous epidemics worldwide with enormous numbers of deaths and illness.”
• WHO definition May 1, 2009: “community outbreaks in humans in at least 2 WHO regions” (removed severity and high mortality)

Vaccine:
• Merriam Webster before COVID injections: a preparation of killed microorganisms, living attenuated organisms, or living fully virulent organisms that are administered to produce or artificially increase immunity to a particular disease.
• Merriam Webster after COVID injections: A preparation that is administered (as by injection) to stimulate the body’s immune response against a specific infectious disease (now also includes gene therapies like COVID injections.) (Source)

Vaccination:
• CDC before change September 1, 2021: “the act of introducing a vaccine into the body to produce immunity to a specific disease.”
• CDC definition from September 1, 2021: “The act of introducing a vaccine into the body to produce protection from a specific disease.” (Source)

Herd Immunity:
• WHO June 2020: “Herd immunity is the indirect protection from an infectious disease that happens when a population is immune either through vaccination or immunity developed through previous infection.”
• WHO October 2020: “’Herd immunity’, also known as ‘population immunity’, is a concept used for vaccination, in which a population can be protected from a certain virus if a threshold of vaccination is reached. Herd immunity is achieved by protecting people from a virus, not by exposing them to it.” (Note: until this change, herd immunity had always been known to be a natural phenomenon occurring after natural infection. Vaccinators borrowed the concept from real world, natural experience.) (Source, Source)

3) Cancel Culture/Shaming /Dehumanizing:
Anti-vaxxer, Anti-science, Follow the science, Climate Deniers, Science Deniers, Conspiracy theorist

4) Guilting:
Trust the science, 15 days to slow the curve, Do your part, We’re all in this together; It’s a small ask, wear a mask; Be kind, wear a mask; Stay home, Save Lives; Don’t be selfish, New normal, Protect others, Protect our hospitals/frontline workers, Protect grandma

5) Omissions:
What are the media not saying, covering, or reporting about injuries & deaths following the jabs, about the failures of the injections, about the true death rate, about the failure of jabs in other countries, about fraud and malfeasance revealed in the Pfizer clinical trial documents?

6) Distraction:
News releases, events on same days of bad news: Supreme Court leak on Roe v. Wade same day as Pfizer documents released – no reporting on Pfizer documents.

7) Limited hangout:
Touch on truth briefly but keep the official narrative alive, bury truth at end of article, video and written text in an article conflict.

8) Use fear, shock, and awe to frighten:
Reduces cognitive function, installs trauma pattern, citizens defer to authority.
Examples: virus lives on surfaces, paper money, China lockdown so we must too.

9) Repetition:
Stop the Spread, Build Back Better, Vaccines Save Lives, asymptomatic case (healthy), ticker of cases and deaths on TV, follow the science, trust the science, contact tracing keeps us safe, new normal; if you are not fully vaccinated, you must wear a mask.

10) Division:
Use words like ‘justice,’ Social justice, Racial justice, Climate justice
White Privilege, all white people are racist
Diversity/Equity/Inclusion – if you don’t buy in, you’re a bad person
Gender, Racist, Woke, Non-Binary
Progressive/Liberal = good, kind, caring, Conservative = bad, far right, selfish, fringe

11) Hidden meanings:
COVID-19 – Corona vaccine ID 2019
BioNTech – Biology and Technology
Moderna – Modified Endogenous RNA
Omicron – Moronic
Brain waves as ‘variant’ names: alpha, beta, delta, gamma, etc.

To reiterate, awareness of psychological operations and control tactics, such as the weaponization of language, is just the first step towards liberation from them. The next step is willfully choosing to unplug from media, technology, and government outlets which utilize these methods against us so that we may reduce their impact upon us. Then, unclouded by their influence, we are free to consciously forge the path of OUR choosing toward a life of freedom, integrity, honesty, balance, joy, respect, decency, love, and justice – for all.

Never has this last step been more important than it is today.

Where There Is Risk There Must Be Choice?

Posted on by Leslie Manookian

Where there is a risk there must be a choice?

Sorry but no. No. NOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!

I am so frustrated by all the well-meaning activists and their signs emblazoned with that message.

What I do with my body has nothing to do with the degree of risk involved. What I do with my body is strictly my choice, period. This is not negotiable. I am a sovereign human being with natural rights no person or government may infringe.

And I would die defending those rights.

No, I’m not being sensational. I simply refuse to live as a slave and do not want that future for my husband, my son, or all the other people on the planet enduring this dystopian present.

This is a line I will not, and we must not, concede.

Have we forgotten what our founders declared in the Declaration of Independence? Those prescient, revolutionary masterminds proclaimed, “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” [Emphasis mine.]

Have we forgotten why they wrote those words and what they truly mean?

Those who came before us wrote these words because they endured firsthand the hardship, suffering, indignity, and torment attendant to a system of government devoid of basic human rights and self-determination. They wrote them as they understood that our rights derive from something larger than any human being or human source – not from government, a person, or any manmade construct.

We possess natural rights due to the very fact of being born human. Our rights come from the source of all things and therefore cannot be removed.

This notion is unique to the United States. No other country’s founding documents proclaim such a fundamental and profound concept as this, an ideal millions of Americans hold dear, even sacred.

Our founders understood all too well the primacy of the individual and the fundamental rights which accompany each individual.

They grasped that if I yield the power and authority over my body to another who can force me to undergo a medical procedure as long as it’s deemed safe, then I am not free and may be compelled to submit to all manner of bodily intrusions.

That many politicians, thought leaders, and even judges defend a utilitarian ethos does not make it moral, ethical, or constitutional.

It is never right to harm one individual in service to the greater good and violating one individual’s fundamental right to bodily autonomy cannot be construed as anything other than harm.

As enlightenment philosopher John Locke explained so well, a society consists of individuals and cannot take precedence over the individual without sacrificing itself. Indeed, the individual is everything. If the greater good takes priority over the individual, we are a faceless mass.

If the greater good rules, may I be forced to eat only food deemed healthy and appropriate by the government? Does that mean I may eat no red meat, no butter and eggs, no raw foods – all foods I consider nutrient-dense health foods but which government has wrongly denigrated for decades?

May I be forced to eat bugs and synthetic meat, GMO salmon, corn, or soy? Before you laugh, search it up for yourself – lately, articles about the wonders of bug-eating abound. Restaurants serving ants, locusts, mealworms, and more are popping up nationwide.

What if I have allergic reactions or sensitivities to foods? Who decides how severe my reaction must be? What if my research on GMOs concludes they are harmful? Must I submit simply because some bureaucrat or potentially vested individual says so?

Can the amount of sugar I eat be restricted? Sugar undermines the immune system after all, so wouldn’t that benefit the greater good? What about potato chips, alcohol, cookies, crackers, and chips, all of which undermine my health and vitality, and therefore that of my community?

May I be coerced to donate blood to help my neighbor in need? What about one of my kidneys? May I be forced to take antidepressants to boost my mood or ADHD meds so I am more productive? May I be required to have brain and other implants installed in my body to monitor my moods and bodily functions and assure compliance with my medical treatment? May I be obliged to carry a baby for a woman who desperately wants to be a mother but can’t bear her own children?

Where do I the individual end and where does my community begin? If I as an individual can be harmed in service to the greater good, is my society a moral and ethical community?

With respect to what is deemed safe, who decides this? Have we completely forgotten history and all the mistakes science and scientists have made ranging from Vioxx to thalidomide and opioids?

Science is not absolute – it shifts and advances constantly. We once believed it was wise to x-ray pregnant women’s pelvises, we once believed handwashing was nonsense, we once believed mercury was a useful medicine. Ignoring these lessons of history is pure folly.

Who decides what is healthy or what research is valid? Why should someone I don’t know, who knows nothing about me, who is not me, who may have ulterior profit, political, or social motives, have ANY voice in how I keep myself well, how I care for myself when ill, or how I use my body?

When did we all vote and decide that the good of the community trumps the value of the individual? Western civilization, the US in particular, was built on the foundational principle of individual rights and freedoms. The Nazis reminded us that utilitarianism, the misguided belief that individuals may be sacrificed in service to the many, is evil. How did we so profoundly lose our way in 75 years?

The greater good is a glorified slide into a dark and endless black hole. A black hole I cannot and will not abide.

My body and my choices in relation to my body are not conditional on anything. Period.

Authoritarianism on the Rise

Posted on by Leslie Manookian

There has been a disturbing surge in arrests of freedom fighters and activists in recent weeks portending yet more assaults on our values, our freedoms, and our very way of life.

These events have shaken me deeply as I’m sure they will any reader who values liberty, justice, free speech, and the rule of law, as they reflect a decay in our society and our institutions.

Perhaps the better term is rot. Our systems are rotten.

That is the only description suitable to describe the heinous censorship, demonization, and silencing of those who challenge government narratives that has occurred over the past two years and which has now morphed into arresting peaceful, law-abiding citizens.

The message is clear: contradict the establishment norms and you represent a threat to the power and authority of politicians, even the system itself because those speaking out seek to expose the truth and potential wrongdoing of those holding the reins of power.

This development is not unique to any one western nation and reflects an alarming rise in authoritarianism. If there is a silver lining, perhaps it is that by arresting peaceful activists and attorneys, authorities reveal their true colors, which should serve to awaken more to the reality many of us already see closing in on us.

This escalation of pressure and arrests has taken place over the past few weeks against citizens seeking nothing more than truth, liberty, and justice for all.

Willem Engel, a Dutch activist and founder of Viruswaarheid (Virus Truth), was arrested on the charge of sedition and incitement. According to a close contact of Engel’s, this is, “A remarkable charge that goes against the core message of love, patience, connection, respect and non-violence tirelessly propagated by Willem over the past two years. ‘We are the decent people’ has been his constant motto.” 

Engel is being detained for 14 days and is to appear in court in Rotterdam on Tuesday, March 29th, 2022.

Engel’s group Viruswaarheid had planned two demonstrations in June but both were denied permission. Worse still, an appeal to that decision was denied as well.  An attorney close to Engel concludes that justice no longer exists in the Netherlands.

If government can deny the right to demonstrate, a sacred and protected right in western nations, one must seriously wonder where we are headed as supposed free societies.

In another example of government overreach, French attorney Virginie Araujo-Recchio’s home and office were raided culminating in her arrest in front of her children. She was taken into custody for alleged complicity in attempted acts of terrorism but released without charge three days later.

Araujo-Recchio, has been a vocal critic of France’s COVID measures and the violation of human rights and abuse of power those measures reflect. She has filed lawsuits challenging the legality of COVID measures and represents those seeking the freedom to live their lives according to their conscience and to direct the upbringing of their children.

She has been accused of nothing leaving us to conclude this exercise sought merely to intimidate, frighten, and harm. Chilling as the arrest was, such transparent attempts to silence opponents of COVID measures will be exposed for the unlawful, harassment, and abuse of authority that they are. 

In Germany, several actions signal an increase in pressure on those who question government. A German administrative court has green-lit government spying on a populist opposition party and the German government intends to seize the guns of over 1500 people whom they suspect of extremism. In another action, over 100 activists have been raided for the thoughtcrime of insulting German politicians online. Nicolai Binner, a German comedian, was criminally charged for making a Nazi comparison to the events of today.

Any thinking American must ponder whether these arrests and the escalation of the fight against truth seekers is a harbinger of what is to come in the US.

This question is particularly pertinent in light of the Department of Homeland Services’ recent National Terrorism Advisory System Bulletin deeming “The proliferation of false or misleading narratives, which sow discord or undermine public trust in U.S. government institutions” as a domestic terrorism threat. DHS wrote, “For example, there is widespread online proliferation of false or misleading narratives regarding unsubstantiated widespread election fraud and COVID-19.”

While Nineteen Eighty-Four’s thoughtcrime and Minority Report’s precrime may seem like warnings from a dystopian future, these incidents and directives indicate they have arrived in the present all across the west.

These actions against peaceful, law-abiding citizens and protestors by those in authority, backed by the genuine threat of force aren’t just frightening, they suggest an end to what westerners have known as the “free world.”

If you think I’m being sensational, consider what befell the truckers protesting, dancing, praying, and feeding the homeless in the streets of Ottawa – they were trampled with horses, had their truck windows smashed, their bank accounts frozen, their donations stolen – and some were arrested. All these measures contravene the Canadian Constitution and Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

The protestors and the world watched aghast as Canadian Prime Minister invoked the Emergencies Act, a war-powers style act, against his own citizens for the “crime” of protesting. As if such use of force to deal with peaceable people lawfully protesting their government was not frightening enough on its own, that a western leader would resort to such methods should serve as a wake-up call to us all that the push for more authority and power by government is neither inconsequential nor, likely, temporary.

Concerning as these times are, I believe that while we may lose in the short run, those of us who believe in freedom will win in the long run – there are simply too many of us and too few of them.

I hopefully wait for more who believe in the ideals of individualism, responsibility, freedom of expression, freedom of assembly, and bodily autonomy to join our ranks and demand that our natural rights be honored.

We are spiraling down into the depths of authoritarianism. We need all hands on deck. Will you stand with us?

A Lesson in Civics

Posted on by Leslie Manookian

Americans have failed our nation. We’ve failed to honor the sacrifices, beliefs, and dreams of our founding fathers. We have failed in our duty to educate ourselves, understand the principles upon which our nation was built, engage in civic responsibility, and hold politicians at the local, state, and national levels accountable.

We’ve been too busy watching sports and reality TV, buying toys, and “keeping up with the Joneses” to carry out our duty to those who forged a truly revolutionary path to birth this great nation.

Thankfully, that is changing all across America as parents, workers, and students demand their voices be heard and that their rights be respected. As more Americans hold public servants accountable, the political climate in America has entered a new season.

A couple of weeks ago, I received an education on this very issue. Monday morning, February 7, 2022, I submitted a public comment to the Ketchum City Council and Mayor of Ketchum, Idaho as well as to neighboring city councils and mayors.

I called out those who make rules for our community yet do not abide by those rules themselves. I highlighted that public servants made rules for our communities but failed in their responsibility to discuss and defend those policy choices in a public forum.

According to comments made by several Ketchum city council members during the meeting, they were taken aback by the tone of many public comments they received from exasperated constituents opposed to the longstanding mask mandate.

As Americans have generally been disengaged from the political process, such sudden and exercised engagement may have been a surprise.

One of the main refrains uttered by local politicians in communications with their constituents has been that they ‘trust the experts.’ County Blaine County Commissioner Chair Dick Fosbury wrote in an email (pg. 69) to Ketchum City Council member Amanda Breen, ”It is my professional opinion that you do not need to debate Ms. Manookian. Let her debate our State Epidemiologist, Dr. Christine Hahn.”  He continued, “This is not a debate, listen to the licensed professionals.”

For the record, I’d gladly debate Dr. Hahn or have one of the doctors and scientists with whom I’m in contact do so. I eagerly await an invitation from Chair Fosbury to do so in our valley and will reach out to him to make arrangements for such an event.

But his comments illustrate the primary purpose for which I write today: the need to remind politicians that voters did not elect faceless, nameless experts to represent them and experts are not accountable to the voters. 

The politicians elected to represent citizens are accountable to the people and we the people will hold them accountable.

Allowing anonymous experts to dictate policy unchallenged while hiding behind the defense that ‘I was just heeding the advice of the experts’ without publicly defending the science and rationale for one’s reasoning and policy choices is a clear abdication of the responsibilities of public office and a violation of our founding fathers’ intentions. 

Let’s not forget that “experts” make mistakes all the time and when the voices of dissenting experts are being censored and denigrated by government, as has happened during this crisis, it should alarm us all. 

Have we forgotten that experts brought us birth defects from drugs like Thalidomide and DES, that experts x-rayed pregnant women’s pelvises, approved Vioxx and opioids, and allowed mercury in eye drops, drugs, and children’s vaccines?

Are public servants unaware that the scientists who linked stomach ulcers to a pathogen were ostracized, defunded, and derided as lunatics only to be awarded the Nobel Prize for medicine twenty years later in 2005? 

Have elected officials not heard of regulatory capture and that FDA, CDC, and NIH are prime but unfortunate examples of this pernicious development? 

User fees paid directly to FDA by the pharmaceutical industry (the very industry it’s supposed to regulate), account for about 45% of FDA’s total budget and a whopping 65% of FDA’s drug approvers’ salaries. FDA has even gone so far as to ask a court to BLOCK release of Pfizer’s clinical trial data relating to its COVID injection for 75 years.

CDC takes millions from the pharmaceutical industry, giant private foundations, and other interested parties through its public-private partnership. It is the largest purchaser of vaccines in the US and even owns dozens of patents on vaccines while simultaneously being charged with ensuring the safety of vaccines.

Scientists at NIH own half the patent on the Moderna shot they themselves developed and earn up to $150,000 per year on these patents. 

NIH has received an estimated $2 billion royalties since 1991 from licensing fees on vaccines they developed.  These are conflicts of interest no wise person dismisses. Does this information concern you?

Educated Americans do not want or need fallible, human, often conflicted “experts” directing policy decisions behind closed doors unchallenged by those with differing opinions.

We want the light of day shining on all decisions made by public servants and we expect them to be capable of defending the reasoning and science underlying their policy choices.

If public servants are incapable of doing so, they have no business mandating policy.

Thankfully Americans are saying “no more.” We do not want just the preferred opinion of selected “experts,” who often have a vested interest in a particular outcome, dictating our policies. 

We do not want politicians that hide behind computer screens on zoom meetings and fail to appear in public before their constituents.

We do not want a process that denies constituents the ability to explain their perspective and hold those politicians accountable face-to-face. 

While many politicians talk about the importance of their mission to protect public health, I think they misconstrue that mission and imperative.

Public servants are supposed to ensure that corporations don’t dump toxins into our rivers, that there is no waste on the streets, and that we have a clean and safe environment in which to live, socialize, conduct business, attend school, etc.

Nowhere in our founding documents, indeed nowhere in law, does it state that public health power extends to forcing an individual to cover their face (and airways) in what can only be described as a dehumanizing and demeaning exercise in subservience, not to mention an unhealthy one.

Nowhere does any statute assert that experimental drugs should be forced or coerced into or onto anyone’s body. 

It may surprise you to know that CDC does not rely on a single controlled trial to prove the efficacy of masks, rather CDC ignores the dozens of controlled trials that show masks are ineffective. 

Anyone who has delved into the matter (see mask section) will know that ever since the Spanish flu, masks were universally viewed as ineffective at stopping the spread of airborne illnesses until so-called experts manufactured new “science” to support the narrative just a few months into the COVID crisis.

Any thinking person must question whether this “science” that suddenly contradicted a century of research, served as a convenient tool to frighten, control, and divide the public resulting in the loss of our rights and the destruction of all our societal and constitutionally protected and understood norms.

Many politicians display an utter disrespect and disregard for our founding fathers and founding principles and it is high time that they wake up and remember that our government is of, by, and for the people – and that they serve us. 

Furthermore, when attempting to impose restrictions on our freedom of movement and our liberty in any way, shape, or form, in violation of our rights, they should expect to be held accountable in the strongest peaceful manner possible.

That they are surprised when Americans peacefully protest reflects our decades-long failure to engage in the political process.

I remind these public servants that speech is not violence, and that anger is the result of people being dismissed, derided, and slurred as fringe conspiracy, anti-vaxxers, anti-Semites, racists, and more. When public servants dismiss and smear their own communities, they are going to feel the displeasure of the people. 

Hurling the “antisemitism” label at those with whom you disagree is despicable and inappropriate.  Unfortunately, this trend is a hallmark of the “cancel culture” plaguing our country and to which so many, sadly, to our detriment and potential national destruction, seem to subscribe. 

Big tech and social media spawned public sharing of hitherto private information to faceless followers and friends, many of whom post nasty comments hidden safely behind their screens.

Big Tech siloed users into echo chambers where they remained oblivious to other perspectives.

Big Tech quashed challenges to the mainstream opinion, labeling only those from Big Tech-sanctioned sources such as CDC and NIH as legitimate.

Americans removed from face-to-face contact combined with limited information and perspective begot what we now know as cancel culture of anyone with different opinions. 

This development not only shut down public discourse, it also allowed those who promulgated unlawful and wrongheaded policies to cocoon themselves in the misguided notion that their “expert-driven” opinions are absolute and that their decisions are unassailable because Big Tech censored opposing viewpoints, used fake fact-checkers to label them false, and created the impression there was no legitimate debate through their cancel culture tactics.

This is a loathsome, poisonous trend infecting our populace. Unfortunately, it is pushed by national leaders and now, it would seem, even local ones.

Ketchum city councilwoman Amanda Breen charged on the public record during a Ketchum City Council meeting that the work of Health Freedom Defense Fund, Inc. and our lawsuits are anti-Semitic.

Let’s be clear, anti-Semitism means being hateful against those of Jewish origin because of their religion and race, it means discriminating against them because of their religion and race, it means isolating them, marginalizing them, and dehumanizing them because of their religion and race. 

It does not mean referring to the Nuremberg Code as a seminal event in human history which instilled in the global consciousness and codified in international law the moral and ethical principle of informed consent, meaning that we do not force medical interventions, whether experimental or not, on human beings. 

Prior voluntary informed consent of all medical interventions is requisite for the practice of ethical medicine.

These legal norms have been reinforced in national laws and in international treaties, declarations, and agreements ranging from the Nuremberg Code in 1947 to the Declaration of Helsinki in 1964 and the UNESCO Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights in 2005.

That Amanda Breen deliberately conflated a reference to the Nuremberg Code in our lawsuits with anti-Semitism is unconscionable. That she doubled down when challenged is even worse.

But perhaps worst of all, Breen’s snipe is aimed at canceling the point of the lawsuit, namely, that the Nuremberg Code which seeks to protect human rights must be honored. 

Of course, she is free to say whatever she chooses to say, and I support her right to freedom of speech, but for a public servant to call a lawful, ethical person, and the nonprofit I run, anti-Semitic is not only inaccurate, it is deeply disappointing as it seeks to discredit and cancel my views and opinions through a highly charged smear rather than engage in debate.

I publicly challenged Breen to identify an instance where I have been racist, where I have been bigoted, where I have discriminated against anyone on the basis of their gender race, religion, or any immutable trait. She has not responded but I know she will not be able to as I have fought against bigotry in all its guises my entire adult life. 

That Breen has not been condemned by the local newspaper, by her community, or by other public servants speaks to the failure of Americans to understand our history, our founding principles, and the responsibilities attendant with public service.

History teaches that this kind of divisive rhetoric won’t end well. To those of you who dishonestly and dishonorably call those with differing opinions anti-Semites, conspiracy theorists, anti-vaxxers, and other slurs, there will be a day of reckoning.

You are pushing our country towards a breaking point, you are separating us, and it will only hurt us all.

At first, I was offended that someone I’ve known for many years would make such a statement but then I saw the gift of a teaching opportunity for me, my friends, and my community. 

Instead of shrinking away from such defamatory interactions, I view it as an opportunity to expose the lack of appreciation for our founding principles and our history and to hold public servants accountable for their votes and actions.

I hope my stand empowers others to do the same as that is the only answer to the strife we face. 

Americans must summon the courage to stand for our rights as sovereign human beings. Public servants must embrace an informed populace and actively engage their opinions as doing so will only strengthen our communities and our nation.

By coming together to embrace our shared history we can forge a new path, a better path for all.

Subscribe to Leslie’s Substack | Heretic with Leslie Manookian