15 Comments
Oct 14, 2022·edited Oct 14, 2022Liked by Bill Huston

Great job, Bill!

Also, finally someone dares to point out that RFK, Jr is a shill (although he can put a few transitory legal victories in his shop-window).

You and I are working on the same project, so please, place links to your articles into my comment sections, whenever relevant. We are too small to succeed alone... If we were much bigger (I estimate that at about 10k subscribers), we wouldn't be here. Yes, our finances are a disaster, because we devote 10-12 hours a day to this job. On the bright side, what else can we do before the waves close in over this freak show of "civilization"?

Expand full comment

Crikey, you've really done your homework. I was a follower of hammond in the very early days. I still get his emails though have not read them for a long while, until recently when i stumbled across one in my inbox. He just sounded like a complete douche bag. Like a crying baby.

Expand full comment

"The Co-opted “Medical Freedom” Movement

is like the “Working Families Party” of COVID"

LOVE IT! Precious, spot on.

Expand full comment

According to Hammond, he never called Cowan the cancer of the health freedom movement. Why not include a direct quote from his article—at the very least, to be honest to your readers?

Hammond writes:

"I will not stand with deceivers but will do what I can to hold them accountable for their deceptions. There is a cancer within this movement that needs to be cut out if we are to ever achieve the goal of eliminating the threat of authoritarianism and medical tyranny. I say we get to it."

He added:

"So, as you can see from the context, what I was describing as “a cancer within this movement” was not Tom Cowan personally but (a) the damaging misinformation emanating from within the movement (which is unfortunately not limited to the claim that viruses do not exist) and (b) what I perceive as the general unwillingness of health freedom advocates who know better to criticize other members of the movement for making demonstrably false claims."

- https://www.jeremyrhammond.com/2022/10/07/tom-cowan-dishonesty/

With regard to your mentioning my name in your write-up: I have already replied to your false statement in a previous thread, which should have made it clear to you where I stand - https://popularrationalism.substack.com/p/yet-another-final-respectful-response/comment/9650157.

And yet, you continue to claim I support Germ Theory when everything I write is in direct opposition to Germ Theory and vaccination. You are being intellectually dishonest by trying to convince people of something that is demonstrably false. My website is www.virusesarenotcontagious.com. Not contagious.

Perhaps you are counting on the fact that others will likely not attempt to verify your claims and will go on believing what you've written without pause.

Expand full comment
author

Thanks for stopping by and commenting, Jeff, where I can interact with you.

Which I can't do on your 'Stack, since you've blocked me.

Hahahahahaha! LOL! 😂😂😂😂 🤣🤣🤣🤣

Expand full comment

As I said (slightly edited for here) in response to one of Lyons-Weiler's recent pieces:

According to you and Hammond, he never called Cowan a cancer, but Hammond in his extensive "denial" he refutes himself. To quote Hammond's own words: "I will not stand with deceivers but will do what I can to hold them accountable for their deceptions. There is a cancer within this movement that needs to be cut out[.] ... I say we get to it." When you add that the whole point of his article was to paint Cowan as a deceiver, it doesn't take a vivid imagination to conclude that he's calling Cowan "a cancer within this movement."

These kinds of vile phrases prompt me to comment on tone and how normal people, in which I include myself, judge credibility.

When I read Lyons-Weiler's articles or Hammond's, or watch or read emails from others on your side, such as Kevin McKernan, I am amazed at the level of nastiness, self-importance, and arrogance on display. Meanwhile, when I watch Thomas Cowan's videos or read articles by Christine Massey, I find humility, willingness to question, and a self-deprecating humor (see for example Cowan's presentation of his "scientific advisory board").

If I knew nothing about the subject originally but were a jury member who had to hear both sides in a court case, I would have zero hesitation in finding the virus-pushing side to have zero credibility. And I would pray to all the gods that exist, if there are any that will listen, that the virus pushers never get into power, because they would make a hell on earth for all of us with their arrogance and nastiness.

Expand full comment

Thank you, Sanjoy. Indeed, i don't see how anyone could NOT conclude from the wording Hammond used in this passage, "I will not stand with deceivers but will do what I can to hold them accountable for their deceptions. There is a cancer within this movement that needs to be cut out[.] ... I say we get to it," and the entire thrustt of his article, that he's calling Cowan "a cancer within this movement." that he was equating Cowan and what he stands for to cancer. But Jeff Green has taken it upon himself to defend the RFK Jr/Del Bigtree mafia to the hilt.

Expand full comment

I know, the gaslighting never ends! First you libel someone, then you "deny" it while proving in the process that you did do it, and then all your friends join in to claim that it never happened.

But, having practiced resisting gaslighting by the sociopaths running the eugenocidal Convid operation, I have become more immune to it from Lyons-Weiler, A Midwestern Doctor, Steve Kirsch, and a few others, all of whom invoke proof by repetition. So, now I just watch more in amusement and with enough detachment to wonder what drives it and why it seems to have increased. My guess is that the virology house of cards is wobbling, so the defenders are getting worried.

Expand full comment

"I didn't call Tom Cowan a cancer, only what he stands for." 🤣🤣🤣

Expand full comment

Hammond literally didn't write that.

If Cowan and friends would like to be taken even a bit seriously, they can first start by stopping the sale of snake oil products like thousand-dollar shower heads, so-called 'water structuring' products, pushing expensive scam products, and creating 'health courses' all around funneling people into specific supplements they sell, all whilst promoting the idea that major parts of science are not real without providing legitimate science to take its place.

In breathtaking leaps of logic, many of you lash out at others, when you should be looking at yourselves and your own deceptive practices. Many of you are either willing dupes of the 'no-virus' gang, or you are incredibly naive.

Secondly, Cowan and friends, including yourself, Mr. Strahl, can then start actually quoting what someone says accurately, instead of going on a tirade about something they never even wrote, then calling them 'Big Pharma' shills when they disagree with someone in the gang. This is a repeating theme with many of you folks.

By misrepresenting what others say, even in light of knowing the actual remarks made, you are showing your true intent, which is to mislead.

Expand full comment

🤣🤣🤣

That will not wash, Mr Green! Paraphrasing the same content does not count as being different, that's just using different words to make the same statement. "I didn't call him a child molester, i just said he likes to take sexual liberties with kids."

The actual position is "no proof for the existence of the virus, via isolation and purification, and then proving it is a pathogen." Your pushing of the RFK Jr/Del Bigtree/McCullough-Malone-Cole/ "alternative treatment" and "better management of a pandemic" shows you to be a snake oil salseman deluxe.

Expand full comment

Hammond never claimed what you are suggesting. I provided the quote above of what he wrote.

I am not pushing an "alternative treatment" to a 'pandemic', and there's no evidence to come close to proving such a false statement. You just made that up out of thin air, similar to how Huston made up that I am a proponent of Germ Theory. Provide evidence of this charge.

And I'm well aware of your position. The position is that you do not believe particles called virus exist, whether they are pathogenic or not.

You are attempting to take blame off of yourselves and deflect it onto others. In actuality, it is the leaders of the 'no-virus' gang who are the snake-oil salesman, selling and pushing products and beliefs that are highly questionable.

Expand full comment
author

Viruses are pathogenic by definition.

It's you who are changing definitions.

I don't worry about people selling products (which I personally don't do). People need money for rent/food, to live in this world.

Expand full comment

Not sure which image better portrays you, a tiny tied up poodle jumping up and down and barking at passers-by, or the Black Knight from the Monty Python movie, after all his limbs were cut off. To quote "King Arthur" from that movie, "What are you gonna do now, bleed on me?" 😂

Expand full comment

RFK Jr is not just your everyday shill or operative, he is actually GROSS because he's obviously getting $ from the same world-govt corporate cronies that knocked off his father and uncle (ugh...PUKE!!). Look at the thousands of everyday persons that have woken up to the virus scam who just see some documentaries in their spare time compared to the multi-multi-millionaire RFK Jr doing this full time for many years who "doesn't know enough" to comment on it or have his staff take it up?@?

HE'S COME OUT OF THE SHADOWS GUYS, HE'S JUST GROSS!

Expand full comment