Righteous Certitude

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 CodeDeclaration of HelsinkiUS 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.


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.

Where There Is Risk There Must Be Choice?

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

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

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