Breggin and Malone: analysis and suggested solution

Written by Meryl Nass MD on April 6, 2023. Posted in Current News

I consider both Robert Malone and Catherine Austin Fitts good friends and extremely effective and knowledgeable, creative, brilliant warriors

Both I believe share with me the same conception of our world. I have never met or spoken to Matthias Desmet and I slightly know the Breggins.

While I was not taken with Desmet’s theory of mass formation or Malone’s term mass formation psychosis it seems ridiculous to go on the warpath about such terms or the concepts they represent.

To me, much of the population has gone mad, has lost the ability to see clearly or think logically, and whether we call it psychosis, brainwashing, lemmings, the result of 5th generation warfare or something else matters not.

What does matter is figuring out exactly what the methods were that were so successful, and preventing them from being used on us again. Training people in detecting propaganda. Ending censorship. Educating people to be independent, know their rights, fight against tyranny as soon as it appears, not when the noose is already tightening.

As best I can discern, psychiatrist Dr. Peter and his wife Ginger Breggin took offense to the term mass formation psychosis as used by pathologist Dr. Robert Malone, and took offense to the concept of mass formation as conceived by psychologist Dr. Mattias Desmet.

It was said that Desmet was blaming the victims of mass psychosis and not the perpetrators.

Well, I didn’t read his book, but those who have seem to argue both ways about what he actually meant. Desmet appears to have become famous through his association with Malone. His book, The Psychology of Totalitarianism, published June 23, 2022, has 1,031 Amazon reviews and a score of 4.7.

Robert Malone also has a book, Lies My Gov’t Told Me: And the Better Future Coming (Children’s Health Defense) Hardcover, published December 6, 2022 with 712 reviews and a score of 4.8.

Peter and Ginger Breggin have written many books, but their latest book on the Great Reset is COVID-19 and the Global Predators: We Are the Prey, published September 30, 2021, with 1,391 reviews and a score of 4.7.

I would suggest that all 3 are popular and successful authors with a message people want to hear, and to a considerable extent, it is the same message.

But a war started when Breggin began a review of Desmet’s book, and then pivoted to attack Malone for supporting Desmet. In my world that is not okay. You can attack the idea; you can attack the promulgator of the idea for the idea, but you can’t attack the author’s friend for defending him.

Malone stood up for his friend, and then the cannonballs started flying. Breggin set up a website titled, Threats from the Desmet/Malone Mass Formations and Mass Psychosis, which includes about 40 items, among them the following:

After asking the Breggins to cease and desist, Malone (who has been maligned or defamed by the NYT and WaPo, Jane Ruby and other questionable media) filed suit against the Breggins as well as these others—for $25 million dollars.

To win, he needs to show they libeled him. For the Breggins to win, they need to show they didn’t. All are public figures. I don’t think anyone believes a judge will grant a $25 million judgment to Malone or any other public figure for defamation no matter the outcome of the case.

Look at the quotes that are enumerated in Malone’s lawsuit. I sure would be unhappy if anyone said anything like that about me.

I was also very unhappy about the gross mischaracterization of Malone in a recent article by the Breggins, which I criticized here.

Now, imho this is no longer about mass formation, which wasn’t Malone’s theory anyway. It is a playground brawl, and the anti-Malone contingent is all about the fact he previously worked with CIA figures and the deep state vaccine mafia.

The mass formation thing is merely a sideline, the match that started the brushfire. Or maybe it is meaningful. Whatever.

What else are the anti-Malone contingent upset about? It has been widely claimed that Malone supports COVID vaccines for specfic demographics, like the elderly, or that he supports the entire childhood vaccine schedule.

It is claimed he cannot have taken the mRNA vaccines, because no one with any knowledge of the technology would be stupid enough to do so.

Sorry, but I think these are all speculative and specious arguments.

I know from first hand experience that Malone felt the vaccines were useful for the elderly in July 2021 (we discussed it and he was exceedingly open about his views), and I know for sure that a few months later he did not think they were good for anybody.

The guy is capable of changing his mind. He weighed the evidence. I hope my readers do the same.

He is basically an insider who started speaking publicly in May 2021, after being vaccinated and suffering serious side effects—and the Breggins are bitching because he didn’t come to the party till five months after the first vaccine rollout.

I can attest that he was just figuring things out then. Thank God he did come to the party. He didn’t have to. He could have shut up and kept his consulting work, which the Breggins spitefully claim has made him exceedingly rich.

I can tell you, it hasn’t. He tossed away his career in May 2021, and it will never come back, I can assure you. The powers that be will blackball and try to destroy him and Jill forevermore.

I know he was “stupid” enough to take them, just like a huge list of PhDs and MDs I know. And then there was my sister, who had no intention of taking them, but suddenly took them, thinking it was required to get on a plane.

(She didn’t need them, as it turned out, but she was hoodwinked by the overwhelming propaganda we have all been subjected to. The Malones also thought they would need them for flying.).

With respect to the other vaccines pre-COVID, historically adults had a low risk of severe side effects from any one of them. Grownups don’t get autism.

People who took the COVID shots thought there was a real FDA and CDC with real regulation of vaccines—they did not know there was a culling going on and that the rule of law had been tossed out the window.

The COVID shots are so fundamentally different than what came before. Kudos to Sasha Latypova and Katherine Watt for saying it out loud—these shots were meant to harm. Very few could have expected it.

It is counterproductive to our cause to blame the victims for getting vaccinated, and it is not productive to blame people for being brainwashed—after all, super duper military grade psyops are being used.

Get clear on who the enemy is. People are mad, and using a pellet gun at random targets. We need a laser focus instead on the real enemies. Save your powder till it’s needed.

Peter Breggin posted on his website the following talk by Catherine Austin Fitts (with a transcription) on the Malone issue. In it, she explains why she has the right to weigh in and defend the Breggins.

Well, I introduced both Catherine and Robert (separately) to CHD, and so I think I have the right to defend Robert. Catherine’s description of the reason why the Breggins started this war is in complete accord with my understanding of it. [Which seems a ludicrous reason even now, as I write.]

Block quotes are Catherine’s; my comments are outside the quotes:

… if you want to understand mass formation, it’s one of the things written, it was presented clearly in a book by Mattias Desmet called the Psychology of Totalitarianism, [which was reviewed on the Solari report, you can find it on the website.

And then Peter Breggin wrote a review of it as well. And it was interesting because I, I agreed to read the book at the same time Peter agreed to, to read the book. And I found it an exceptionally painful book to read, Peter began to criticize mass formation. And Peter is brilliant.

He’s intense, he’s aggressive. And one of the reasons he started to criticize it was he’s written a book describing the real problems we have with the intersection between psychopaths and political power.

And this has been a problem throughout human history where psychopaths, a certain percentage of the population, are born without empathy. It’s hard for everybody else to understand that, that people are like that, that they exist.

And, and the psychopaths are very good at finding each other and organizing to achieve political power. And now, with this centralization afforded by digital technology, it’s really dangerous.

So Peter has written a book, one of his most recent on the problem of predators, and the sort of the theory of mass formation attributes to totalitarianism the psychological hysteria of the general population, as opposed to psychopaths who engineer, you know, tyranny.

Anyway, so there’s a there’s a profound disagreement. And I think one of Peters greatest concerns was that Dr. Malone had associated the word psychosis or hypnosis with mass formation, and it looked like something that could be used to essentially forgive the people who’d implemented mass atrocity…

The legal concept of proportionality (wikipedia definition) is a “correct balance between the restriction imposed by a corrective measure and the severity of the nature of the prohibited act.”

So, Malone’s buddy Desmet makes a claim which the Breggins and Catherine interpreted as letting the bad guys off the hook.

Malone (seemingly bigger game) says something in support of Desmet, so then the Breggins pivot and aim the pot shots at Malone, to the point of creating a website with more than 40 items on it to smear Malone, and churning out one article after another to do the same.

Is that a normal or proportional response to someone who simply said he liked Desmet’s theory? Malone never said the bad guys should get off. That is just what Breggin assumed.

Then, as Catherine correctly stated, the Breggins wrote “a series of articles about Malone.” Peter “picked up the discussion.” That’s a polite way of describing the ‘take no prisoners’ attack that followed.

In so doing the Breggins created a bandwagon effect: people who were suspicious about Malone’s old Deep State connections (which he has been exceedingly and surprisingly open about) jumped on the bandwagon, as did the actual Deep State itself, that wanted nothing better than to neutralize Malone, who had lent a great deal of gravitas to the anti-mRNA movement and then the anti-globalist movement.

Peter really picked up the discussion and wrote a much longer book review of the Psychology of Totalitarianism, and started to criticize Malone for his insert of use, he’s started to write a series of articles about Malone, at the heart of it is, is Peter’s real policy concern about the weaponization of mental health, which is a far broader topic than, than just mass formation. But it’s an important one.

… it’s too bad Malone by bringing the lawsuit has kept us going; at the root of the discussion is a very important policy debate.

And that is the rule of law versus the rule of man. You know, should people who engage in mass atrocity be held accountable for breaking the law?

I love you Catherine, but to me this is flipping the script. If Malone ever said the criminals should get off easy, or get off totally, I have not heard it or seen it. I think he is 100% behind the rule of law.

Has Malone denied the weaponization of mental health? No. Malone is a device by which Breggin gets a great deal more attention to his own writing than he would otherwise. That explanation is the only way this story makes sense.

… Dr. Malone, as well as numerous other people in the discussion [at the World Council for Health conference in Bath last spring] clearly come down on the side of preserving the vaccine schedule.

If that is true, then argue about the vaccine schedule. But the 40 item website is not about vaccine schedules, it’s not about the weaponization of mental health, it is going after one famous guy by a slightly less famous guy for reasons that to me are obscure, while they are claimed to do with a third guy’s theories.

Catherine later got back to mentioning the vaccine schedule, and here I want to say that I no longer trust any vaccines, nor the regulators anywhere who are charged with assuring their safety.

No one will inject me with another vaccine as long as I live, unless I can assure its purity, potency and safety—which is what FDA is required to do, but doesn’t. But before I knew the regulators were bought criminals, I vaccinated an awful lot of people.

But the reality is, I don’t want to promote anybody who promotes continued poisoning by serial felons, which to me has nothing to do with immunology. This is not a vaccine schedule. It’s a poisoning scheduled by serial felons.

I will ask Robert if he still or ever liked the childhood schedule. If he does, he is wrong. I doubt he does. Those of use who know a lot about the subject of vaccines usually take a nuanced approach to it—some people did benefit from some vaccines some times. It required a risk-benefit calculation.

The risk-benefit calculations pre and post-COVID are very different. Does Catherine really have the evidence to call Malone a promoter of continued poisoning? Not a nice moniker. I don’t think he deserves it. She concluded with the following:

So those are my thoughts about the lawsuit in one way or another. I hope it gets ended quickly or settled.

I think it’s a complete waste of everybody’s time and money. As you can probably tell.

I agree. The lawsuit is a complete waste of everybody’s time. As are the incredibly nasty and unwarranted attacks on Malone.

And the Breggin fantasy that Robert Malone is such a Superman that he could have stopped the vaccines, simply by making a few calls or something, because he alone had the power as an insider to tell Fauci and Trump about ADE (as if Fauci and all the rest of the health bureaucracy didn’t already know) and stop the vaccine rollout—that is the craziest thing I ever heard.

It beggars belief. And it is scurrilous. Yet a lot of people apparently bought it. They were bedazzled by a series of false statements inserted into the article.

So yes, I agree the lawsuit should be dropped—but only after the Breggins make a public apology and correct their mischaracterizations, innuendo, etc. Admit to the falsehoods in what they wrote.

Take responsiblity. You cannot falsely and publicly allege that Robert Malone was singlehandedly responsible for the vaccine carnage of the past two years and then expect everyone to just forget about it.

Correct every incorrect statement, and APOLOGIZE. Take some of that “gofundme” money and take out a paid ad in a national newspaper and correct the record.

The Breggins started this, and they can finish it. I suggest they do.

Otherwise they can keep titillating the masses, getting attention, wasting energy and money, fearing a massive judgment against them, and playing into the hands of the elites.

Which will it be?

See more here substack.com

Some bold emphasis added

Header image: The Epoch Times

Please Donate Below To Support Our Ongoing Work To Defend The Scientific Method

PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX. 

Trackback from your site.