In May of 2022, I spoke at length with lawyer Arnar Þór Jónsson, about the COVID lies, war propaganda, and the urgency—and perils—of confronting them with truth (however painful it may be)
Looking forward to watching this - thanks for sharing! I'm struck by how bright and well you look, which is good to see.
All the very best to you and yours for providing such a clear window despite the muddy waters we are constantly being deluged with.
I have been buoyed by your missives since the beginning...
Meanwhile, despite my pleadings my 90 year-old mum will receive the latest COVID injectable product next Thursday on the "advice" of my MIT -trained sibling, a dedicated disciple of Pharma Sponsored Scientism. 5 days before her 91st birthday. Heartbreaking.
Thank you. I did. I got her on ivermectin. Siblings vetoed it. She's not done well with previous shots so I'm praying like hell the outcome will be peaceful regardless.
it's so hard to fathom though: best girlfriend (late 40ies; PhD, University lecturer) got "long covid" (PR term meaning Adverse Event) since one year ago and will have her 2nd booster next week. heartbreaking, but she does-not-want-to-contemplate the risks. but then again, one can lead the horse to water and it won't drink, no matter what. something's very, very wrong!
Dear Quinn, as Prof. Miller expressed well and succinctly, you did what you could. I had two friends and one, a [third person and a] priest, who was very much not a friend, all die[d] quickly and surprisingly and ignor[ed] my cautions: one from super-turbo cancer, a drop-dead heart attack and the last from a supposed case of COVID. The friends were in their near-eighties and very much from the tail-end of the era of FDR-savior-from-the-dustbowl-and-"Japs" (one Annapolis-trained, the other an Oklahoman). These two took the shots with great enthusiasm and pride. The last, the priest, refused to listen to me about Ivermecti[n], etc. and angrily demanded to know when I was going to develop a vaccine. He was dead four weeks later from some respiratory illness. So there were two ways to have fallen prey to the COVIDian propaganda. At least you succeeded with ivermectin and your mother.
But do not be hurt by being ignored. It is almost, in a paradoxical way, often guaranteed (if "almost" makes sense in claiming something as being other than random) that a good argument will be ignored. Reasonableness sounds like diabolical trickery to people who perhaps are not well educated enough to not rely upon authorities. They might be innately intelligent, but simply out of their depth on a particular topic. An "outsider" denying the official narrative looks mighty suspicious. Then, being intelligent but a compliant receiver of propaganda can actually be a[nother] deadly hazard. (The Fordham University philosophy professor who became riled up in the clip MCM provided. is a good example. )
I was a guest scientist for three years at, let's say a prestigious medical institution. Vaccinology, virology and pulmonology are NOT my specialties -- but you know -- I had hoped that my background would mean something to my neighbors as a general basis for a tiny bit of credentialing undergirding my warnings. NAH. It did not even come close. When a News chick in a very tight, short skirt tells the audience that the COVID cases in the state are skyrocketing and that the State of California might "require" visitors to be vaccinated to travel in for Christmas --- that's it. Game over. The ubiquitous propaganda machine wins.
Good luck. My 103.5 year-old aunt is getting hers, too. She did not start to show any mental decline until getting those shots. Nor did she get Covid until after third shot.
All the knowledge being lost as each elderly person is fooled into poisoning themselves is tragic. 103.5 is impressive. My grandmother almost made to 100. She passed away over a decade ago.
Everyone on my wife's side took but she didn't. Her dad passed away about 7 weeks ago. Her mom has clots in her lungs and she can't recall any of her children now. Her 4 siblings all took it and no issues that we are aware of. One of my nephews was diagnosed with colon cancer at 38. They removed a section of his colon and seems to be doing well for now. His wife was diagnosed with ovarian cancer as soon as he got better. They took it. Everyone on my side took it except 2. There's 1 I'm unsure about. It's only a matter of time before it clicks with those who took it. I've seen many comments from those who took it and now regret it. The one's who didn't take are mostly like aware about what's happening. This isn't going to end well... for those who did this.
Your talk is a gem, Mark! The way you handled the interruption from the infuriated Fordham Professor of Philosophy was phenomenal! You made it the mother of all teachable moments! I learned so much from this, and look forward to listening to the radio interview. I wholeheartedly agree with the person who mentioned that you look great. And your calmness under verbal attack was beautiful to see. THANKYOU!!!
starting at about 23:00, the leadup to the exchange where MCM is assailed by fordham's john davenport is priceless, and is one of the most amusingly instructive illustrations of the power of propaganda i've ever seen. how lucky we are this was captured on video
It seems so clear when you say it, but I always seem to believe the propaganda. I think I am coming around to seeing it as it is presenting itself or unfolding. However, is being skeptical what it’s all about? Thinking for oneself and not believing everything or maybe anything at all seems to be what is required. I appreciate you providing your propaganda lectures. It is an awakening, albeit often slow. And that is perhaps the point. WAKE UP and pay attention. Thank you.
This would require a long post but I can sketch what I am trying to do:
- Study math and some basic physics. Nothing fancy, just be able to understand how logic works and the concepts of energy and entropy
- Whatever the problem is, go to basics. Does it makes sense arithmetically and logically? Is the energy conserved? Is the entropy increasing? BTW, this is very helpful in getting over your emotions. Math requires a detachment that helps fight propaganda, whish is all about manipulating emotions.
After you did all that - be prepared to fail. There is no secret sauce. I knew from 2020 that most of the anti-jab crowd will turn evil - the psychopaths have so many buttons to push! If it's not the religion of progress, it's zionism or fake patriotism. I can list a LOT of people that one day blamed the Israeli govt for killing children with the jab, only to turn around the next to be happy that Israeli govt is killing children with bombs (see James Howard Kunstler for example). Or look at the anti-jab republicans that went from censoring anyone against the Iraq war, to complaining about being censored, back to censoring people that don't want war with Russia or China.
If you have free will (and most don't) you will be able to see your mistakes, take responsibility and move on. If not, who cares? Nothing I say can help.
“people that one day blamed the Israeli govt for killing children with the jab, only to turn around the next to be happy that Israeli govt is killing children with bombs”
I continue to be angry at Israel for deploying the shots. And I do want Israel to survive as a Jewish country and permanent haven. And I know that Hamas uses children as shields. It is cynical and habitual. Too many have fallen for Islamist propaganda while proclaiming their objectivity and resistance to Zionist propaganda.
we're just living through the murderous plan they came up with 100 years ago. check out this cover of the Economist magazine from dec 2012...in particular the paragliders of hamas and israel under the heading...they're just laughing at and mocking us at this stage. https://www.economist.com/weeklyedition/2012-12-22
This was a pleasure! I wish I was one of your students or just a damm fly on the class room wall. You have rare inteligence ,you comely turned the lemons tossed at you by another prof. Into lemonaid
Coincidentally, my U-grad degree is in cinema. Spent lots of time on aesthetics and analysis. "Triumph of the Will," "Birth of a Nation," and "The Blood of Heroes," among others, compelled me to study propaganda in depth. Once you know how the trick is done, you can never be fooled by it again.
Just finished listening. This was great, very clarifying, and shareable with relatives and friends (though ones who are more like-minded or least have a tendency to question).
My biggest takeaway: it’s useless to argue with propaganda, at least directly. It seems like it’s like arguing in a relationship with a narcissist: you just don’t go there.
Isn't it necessary to "argue with propaganda"? If it's false, or only partly true, we "argue with" it by saying so.
In fact, if we DON'T do that, it takes over. The problem is that, increasingly, we're not ALLOWED to argue with it. It's just about illegal now to say that the "vaccines" are lethal, that this or that election may well have been stolen, that men can't be women, and so on. Without the freedom to thus "argue," we can have neither democracy nor science.
Fantastic conversation in Iceland from 18 months ago ! Thanks for this most edifying master class. Knowledge is power. Truth can set us free. Your courageous vision and eloquence brings knowledge and truth for all who seek freedom and justice.
Express your righteous indignation. Refuse to be a tool of tyrants. Embrace the truth and we will prevail against the evil lies to finally salvage our humanity.
Mark, I could listen to you talk all day long. What I take away is just as you say: don't believe anything you read, not even what YOU yourself say. The key is to research it for yourself and come to you own conclusions.
Great teaching moment in the midst of that interruption. I really appreciated your talk. I started with serious media studies in the 90s--and always admired the work coming from NYU--Neil Postman and also (from Fordham!)--Robin Andersen's book Consumer Culture. I have an odd odd story which is rather long and involved that I would love to someday share. It has to do with my reading of The Manchester Affair by John Corry at the same time I was reading Conspiracy Theory in America by Lance de-Haven Smith and felt I had found evidence that the suppression of Manchester's book (through the lawsuit brought by Jackie and Bobby expurgating some of the content in the Death of The President) was directly responsible for the infamous 1967 CIA memo (Stern, the German magazine went ahead and published the unexpurgated Death of the President) and when I relayed all this to de-Haven Smith my gmail account was corrupted and changed my name to Jennifer Marlowe (Loni Anderson's character in WKRP in Cinncinnati). Bizarre. But the timing is their--the court case was in december of 1966 and it was right around Christmas that Stern published the bits that the American court had struck down. Equally, the Corry book is insightful--he wrote for the NY Times and reports how Manchester felt hounded by government spies (Several of the witnesses that Manchester interviewed reported to Corry that Manchester seemed preoccupied with people hiding in the bushes as he was interviewing them and would gaze out the window, troubled) and ultimately ended up writing the book in his psychiatrist's office--the only place where he felt safe enough to write. He had a lot of info about LBJ which really upset everyone (including the Kennedy's who hired him to write the book) and were excised from the book. It is deeply puzzling to me that he stuck with the lone wolf theory. but perhaps Corry's account explains why.
Hi Mark,
Looking forward to watching this - thanks for sharing! I'm struck by how bright and well you look, which is good to see.
All the very best to you and yours for providing such a clear window despite the muddy waters we are constantly being deluged with.
I have been buoyed by your missives since the beginning...
Meanwhile, despite my pleadings my 90 year-old mum will receive the latest COVID injectable product next Thursday on the "advice" of my MIT -trained sibling, a dedicated disciple of Pharma Sponsored Scientism. 5 days before her 91st birthday. Heartbreaking.
I'm so sorry. You tried your best, though.
Thank you. I did. I got her on ivermectin. Siblings vetoed it. She's not done well with previous shots so I'm praying like hell the outcome will be peaceful regardless.
Thanks again for all that you do.
May you find peace in your heart, and may your mother be well. So many of us are in this same or similar heartbreaking situation.
And may she change her mind.
it's so hard to fathom though: best girlfriend (late 40ies; PhD, University lecturer) got "long covid" (PR term meaning Adverse Event) since one year ago and will have her 2nd booster next week. heartbreaking, but she does-not-want-to-contemplate the risks. but then again, one can lead the horse to water and it won't drink, no matter what. something's very, very wrong!
I’m convinced these folks are afraid of real life.
May the booster be expired and therefore harmless.
Dear Quinn, as Prof. Miller expressed well and succinctly, you did what you could. I had two friends and one, a [third person and a] priest, who was very much not a friend, all die[d] quickly and surprisingly and ignor[ed] my cautions: one from super-turbo cancer, a drop-dead heart attack and the last from a supposed case of COVID. The friends were in their near-eighties and very much from the tail-end of the era of FDR-savior-from-the-dustbowl-and-"Japs" (one Annapolis-trained, the other an Oklahoman). These two took the shots with great enthusiasm and pride. The last, the priest, refused to listen to me about Ivermecti[n], etc. and angrily demanded to know when I was going to develop a vaccine. He was dead four weeks later from some respiratory illness. So there were two ways to have fallen prey to the COVIDian propaganda. At least you succeeded with ivermectin and your mother.
But do not be hurt by being ignored. It is almost, in a paradoxical way, often guaranteed (if "almost" makes sense in claiming something as being other than random) that a good argument will be ignored. Reasonableness sounds like diabolical trickery to people who perhaps are not well educated enough to not rely upon authorities. They might be innately intelligent, but simply out of their depth on a particular topic. An "outsider" denying the official narrative looks mighty suspicious. Then, being intelligent but a compliant receiver of propaganda can actually be a[nother] deadly hazard. (The Fordham University philosophy professor who became riled up in the clip MCM provided. is a good example. )
I was a guest scientist for three years at, let's say a prestigious medical institution. Vaccinology, virology and pulmonology are NOT my specialties -- but you know -- I had hoped that my background would mean something to my neighbors as a general basis for a tiny bit of credentialing undergirding my warnings. NAH. It did not even come close. When a News chick in a very tight, short skirt tells the audience that the COVID cases in the state are skyrocketing and that the State of California might "require" visitors to be vaccinated to travel in for Christmas --- that's it. Game over. The ubiquitous propaganda machine wins.
Wise words.
Good luck. My 103.5 year-old aunt is getting hers, too. She did not start to show any mental decline until getting those shots. Nor did she get Covid until after third shot.
All the knowledge being lost as each elderly person is fooled into poisoning themselves is tragic. 103.5 is impressive. My grandmother almost made to 100. She passed away over a decade ago.
Everyone on my wife's side took but she didn't. Her dad passed away about 7 weeks ago. Her mom has clots in her lungs and she can't recall any of her children now. Her 4 siblings all took it and no issues that we are aware of. One of my nephews was diagnosed with colon cancer at 38. They removed a section of his colon and seems to be doing well for now. His wife was diagnosed with ovarian cancer as soon as he got better. They took it. Everyone on my side took it except 2. There's 1 I'm unsure about. It's only a matter of time before it clicks with those who took it. I've seen many comments from those who took it and now regret it. The one's who didn't take are mostly like aware about what's happening. This isn't going to end well... for those who did this.
103.5!!! Wow! Sorry to hear about your aunt. Legions of the elderly are suffering...I'm just trying to surround my mum with love.
She passed away a week after I posted this.
You mean the church of the endless boosters?
Our Lady of Perpetual Boosters?
Your talk is a gem, Mark! The way you handled the interruption from the infuriated Fordham Professor of Philosophy was phenomenal! You made it the mother of all teachable moments! I learned so much from this, and look forward to listening to the radio interview. I wholeheartedly agree with the person who mentioned that you look great. And your calmness under verbal attack was beautiful to see. THANKYOU!!!
I absolutely adore that moment! "He can't listen." My favorite quote of the century!
Thank you for sharing this.
starting at about 23:00, the leadup to the exchange where MCM is assailed by fordham's john davenport is priceless, and is one of the most amusingly instructive illustrations of the power of propaganda i've ever seen. how lucky we are this was captured on video
“Too Comfortable Notions” would make an excellent website name.
It seems so clear when you say it, but I always seem to believe the propaganda. I think I am coming around to seeing it as it is presenting itself or unfolding. However, is being skeptical what it’s all about? Thinking for oneself and not believing everything or maybe anything at all seems to be what is required. I appreciate you providing your propaganda lectures. It is an awakening, albeit often slow. And that is perhaps the point. WAKE UP and pay attention. Thank you.
Believing nothing is just as dangerous as believing everything, as that can paralyze you.
This would require a long post but I can sketch what I am trying to do:
- Study math and some basic physics. Nothing fancy, just be able to understand how logic works and the concepts of energy and entropy
- Whatever the problem is, go to basics. Does it makes sense arithmetically and logically? Is the energy conserved? Is the entropy increasing? BTW, this is very helpful in getting over your emotions. Math requires a detachment that helps fight propaganda, whish is all about manipulating emotions.
After you did all that - be prepared to fail. There is no secret sauce. I knew from 2020 that most of the anti-jab crowd will turn evil - the psychopaths have so many buttons to push! If it's not the religion of progress, it's zionism or fake patriotism. I can list a LOT of people that one day blamed the Israeli govt for killing children with the jab, only to turn around the next to be happy that Israeli govt is killing children with bombs (see James Howard Kunstler for example). Or look at the anti-jab republicans that went from censoring anyone against the Iraq war, to complaining about being censored, back to censoring people that don't want war with Russia or China.
If you have free will (and most don't) you will be able to see your mistakes, take responsibility and move on. If not, who cares? Nothing I say can help.
“people that one day blamed the Israeli govt for killing children with the jab, only to turn around the next to be happy that Israeli govt is killing children with bombs”
Powerfully put.
I continue to be angry at Israel for deploying the shots. And I do want Israel to survive as a Jewish country and permanent haven. And I know that Hamas uses children as shields. It is cynical and habitual. Too many have fallen for Islamist propaganda while proclaiming their objectivity and resistance to Zionist propaganda.
we're just living through the murderous plan they came up with 100 years ago. check out this cover of the Economist magazine from dec 2012...in particular the paragliders of hamas and israel under the heading...they're just laughing at and mocking us at this stage. https://www.economist.com/weeklyedition/2012-12-22
This was a pleasure! I wish I was one of your students or just a damm fly on the class room wall. You have rare inteligence ,you comely turned the lemons tossed at you by another prof. Into lemonaid
Terrific presentation.
Your students were lucky to have you.
Coincidentally, my U-grad degree is in cinema. Spent lots of time on aesthetics and analysis. "Triumph of the Will," "Birth of a Nation," and "The Blood of Heroes," among others, compelled me to study propaganda in depth. Once you know how the trick is done, you can never be fooled by it again.
for those who want to avoid the ads on spotify, here's the interview from iceland
https://www.listennotes.com/podcasts/arnar-%C3%BE%C3%B3r-j%C3%B3nsson-hugsa%C3%B0-upph%C3%A1tt-arnar-%C3%BE%C3%B3r-jfuoeMBlNrQ/
Thank you so much! I was hoping for a way to download this great interview, and found a download link at that page.
thanks! didn't notice that
Just finished listening. This was great, very clarifying, and shareable with relatives and friends (though ones who are more like-minded or least have a tendency to question).
My biggest takeaway: it’s useless to argue with propaganda, at least directly. It seems like it’s like arguing in a relationship with a narcissist: you just don’t go there.
You go elsewhere instead.
Isn't it necessary to "argue with propaganda"? If it's false, or only partly true, we "argue with" it by saying so.
In fact, if we DON'T do that, it takes over. The problem is that, increasingly, we're not ALLOWED to argue with it. It's just about illegal now to say that the "vaccines" are lethal, that this or that election may well have been stolen, that men can't be women, and so on. Without the freedom to thus "argue," we can have neither democracy nor science.
As I mentioned, not directly. “You go elsewhere instead.”
For instance, the folks under the Soviet system had their samizdat. No doubt that was influential in getting the system closer to collapse.
Their samizdat was also their way of arguing with propaganda---sometimes "directly."
How can samizdat be direct when it was secret/underground?
"Direct" just means addressing its truth claims directly. That's all one can do. You can't talk back to it, because it's all around us.
What? Are you gaslighting me? LOL
That’s my point: you don’t talk/address/whatever a narcissist or a propaganda directly, if you know what’s good for you.
Ideological direct, not physically direct.
I’m talking about MY meaning of “direct” as I expressed it in MY original comment.
"safe and effective"
safe for the manufacturer. effective at harming: https://eccentrik.substack.com/p/6-ridiculous-propaganda-lines-of
hi pleased to restack this post and provide link for today’s “alternative” media press release:
(share everywhere)
link to "how pharma fix works" with Bobby Kennedy
https://open.substack.com/pub/vigilantfox/p/rfk-jr-explains-why-vaccines-are?r=1hkfi5&utm_medium=ios&utm_campaign=post
Fantastic conversation in Iceland from 18 months ago ! Thanks for this most edifying master class. Knowledge is power. Truth can set us free. Your courageous vision and eloquence brings knowledge and truth for all who seek freedom and justice.
Express your righteous indignation. Refuse to be a tool of tyrants. Embrace the truth and we will prevail against the evil lies to finally salvage our humanity.
Mark, I could listen to you talk all day long. What I take away is just as you say: don't believe anything you read, not even what YOU yourself say. The key is to research it for yourself and come to you own conclusions.
Thank you for this gem of a talk!
Great teaching moment in the midst of that interruption. I really appreciated your talk. I started with serious media studies in the 90s--and always admired the work coming from NYU--Neil Postman and also (from Fordham!)--Robin Andersen's book Consumer Culture. I have an odd odd story which is rather long and involved that I would love to someday share. It has to do with my reading of The Manchester Affair by John Corry at the same time I was reading Conspiracy Theory in America by Lance de-Haven Smith and felt I had found evidence that the suppression of Manchester's book (through the lawsuit brought by Jackie and Bobby expurgating some of the content in the Death of The President) was directly responsible for the infamous 1967 CIA memo (Stern, the German magazine went ahead and published the unexpurgated Death of the President) and when I relayed all this to de-Haven Smith my gmail account was corrupted and changed my name to Jennifer Marlowe (Loni Anderson's character in WKRP in Cinncinnati). Bizarre. But the timing is their--the court case was in december of 1966 and it was right around Christmas that Stern published the bits that the American court had struck down. Equally, the Corry book is insightful--he wrote for the NY Times and reports how Manchester felt hounded by government spies (Several of the witnesses that Manchester interviewed reported to Corry that Manchester seemed preoccupied with people hiding in the bushes as he was interviewing them and would gaze out the window, troubled) and ultimately ended up writing the book in his psychiatrist's office--the only place where he felt safe enough to write. He had a lot of info about LBJ which really upset everyone (including the Kennedy's who hired him to write the book) and were excised from the book. It is deeply puzzling to me that he stuck with the lone wolf theory. but perhaps Corry's account explains why.