Well done Sasha, I applaud your common sense approach to Mark Bailey.
It is foolish to respond to to a matter without first hearing the other side of the story, as it written in the Bible.
I hope both Mark and Sam can recognize this and seek to build bridges with you in the future. We all have a common enemy and we cannot afford to create enmity among ourselves without just cause.
Here's another ration of bullshit written by Sam Bailey. She is obviously completely clueless regarding Lyme disease and the realities of pathogenic infection. >>> The Lyme Disease Lie
OMG. As a long time, sufferer of Lyme disease and two other tickborne infections, Babesia and Bartonella her article so profoundly offends me. It completely discredits this woman and Sasha should not even give them 1 ounce of respect. Mountains of evidence discredit her position.
Hello David S. Yes. As you most likely know, "Lyme" disease was weaponized at Plum Island, Fort Detrick, and other military based laboratories decades ago. Plum Island gets the most attention, but experiments involving biting insects were wide spread for decades. The weaponizing practice should be common knowledge by now.
I just did a Google search using the term "Lyme" and noticed many former Lyme related sites did not make the search. Here's a link to one of the better sites I've had on file for years. > https://www.columbia-lyme.org/other-tick-borne-diseases
I generally don't watch videos, as video content clearly distracts executive/cognitive associations. I've stated this fact quite clearly for years. The general public has been led to believe that observing interviews is educational, when it has been proven to negatively affect frontal lobe executive reasoning and relocate the experience toward limbic system behaviors. That said:
I read the entire written transcript and compared her 'analyses' with that of hundreds of related peer reviewed documents I've read these last 18 years. Ms. Bailey is not a forensic pathologist, period. Borrelia burgdorferi is only one form of numerous tick born pathologies proven via nucleic acid essay and dark field microscopy. My comment was based on analysis, not speculation. Thank you for commenting.
I don't believe you've read the transcript or the references supplied either. The 'science' doesn't follow the scientific method. It is classic pseudoscience. A 7 year old can read the foundational papers in this area and realise they don't prove what is being claimed.
...some of us have been trying to say exactly that here for a while and have been brutally and ruthlessly pursued and attacked in the same manner, by this author, in the same fashion that this author complains of in this post. Glad to see everyone else here finally "getting" that, in every sense of the expression.. And yes, Karma's a bitch, indeed, once it finally catches up with what YOU'VE been putting out ;-)
Fragile egos, much?!! Dear Lord! Ego and good science don’t make happy bedfellows. The strength of a hypothesis isn’t measured by how many likes it gets on social media but how well it explains the data. I have to say I also ditched the Baileys long ago for just this reason.
I don't think the Baileys have fragile egos. Quite to the contrary, they seem to be some of the sanest people doing an alternative media product.
I would like to ask you what data are you talking about. If the data is false, no hypotheses are needed. Sadly, there's been a lot of scientific data fraud over the decades. In the last 25 years, data fraud is worse than ever. The cat is out of the bag. But it takes a long time for professionals to accept the dire reality.
But, besides that, we should all be free to read or not read whatever we want to. Censorship is crushing mental health everywhere.
I agree that censorship is bad for mental health. And health in general too.
But freedom of speech does not mean that people are not allowed to censor things, in a different meaning of the word, that it seems to me you are conflating by accident. For example, you are the owner of your substack publication. The software grants you editorial control of your writing, and also the ability to ban or block other users from reading or commenting in your posts (there is also the option to disable all comments). Some people would call that censorship, but I think that's confused. There is nothing immoral or illegal about an author restricting the access to his or her publications to anyone. Censorship comes not from the user, but from outside. A judge, for example, under some circumstances, may censor the speech of some author. Not completely though. And this is probably immoral, but you know there is often a way for political power to obstaculize human rights. There are indirect ways of censorship, which should be illegal in my opinion, such as deplatforming people for whatever reason.
The only valid reason to allow the practice of deplatforming is when the person being deplatformed is committing a real crime with real victims or intends to commit a crime. Live streaming a sexual assault is a crass example. Other than a real crime, natural persons should not be deplatformed because that is censorship. For example, expressing any form of political dissent should not be a cause of deplatforming, and the law should fine the companies causing deplatforming with a huge fine plus damages for the victim. But we don't live under such anti-censorship legislation, yet.
With regards to our topic, I don't know if you are aware of the events prior to Sam Bailey video. Just in case, I'll tell you a bit about it. Weeks before the video, a certain substack user that I won't name, published a long post that is demafatory of at least three people, Sam and Mark Bailey being two of them. This defamatory post was completely unrelated to Brave Sasha Latypova and she didn't appear mentioned there.
When the Baileys learned about the attack, weeks after the fact, they did a video. They defend themselves from the attacker in the first part of the video. And, to my mind they are telling the truth, and completely prove that the attacker is a liar. In the second part of the video, they complain about people who promoted the defamatory post, and about other things, like repeated misbehavior of several notorious substack users over years of interaction with them. They mention several people, and the video finishes with the infamous picture of the contents of the skull of the mummy of Karl Marx, as well as several insects doing a postmodern interpretive dance of the famous opera-ballet "Das Kapital". Profile Pictures of several users are given in this collage, and Sasha's profile is one of them. A few days later, Sasha learned about this and published her defense and commentary, which culminates in this present post of hers.
It was surprising for me to see her picture there. I didn't thought she did anything to deserve that smear. Other people did, for sure. There's a number of crazy people in the no-virus corner of Substackistan. Also, there are people who are chaos agents: they are not crazy, they are evil.
I think the Baileys have done a great work over the years, and they keep doing great good to the public. Lots of people can't stand them, and my guess for that is any one or more of these four points:
a) the Baileys do not agree with some pet issue of the person who is angry at them.
b) the Baileys are happy people with a great life, they know many useful things and enjoy great mental health, but miserable people cannot stand their splendor. Misery loves company, as they say.
c) Sam is a beautiful person and she looks well in the camera, which is very convenient for her line of work, and many ugly people hate beautiful people, unsurprisingly.
d) The Baileys are successful in their efforts, and winged monkeys have been dispatched against them by the censors.
Now. You probably dislike the Baileys judging by your comment, and probably you don't fit in any of the four points I've just described. But you have a right to not like them and to like only Sasha. I like the three of them. They give good information to people.
I think it's sad that good people receive attacks from weird people out there. But I guess this is a risk any more or less public figure has to accept. And, of course, the attacker enables any commensurate retaliation from his targets. Those are the ground rules, I think.
Lastly, it's very likely, from what I understand now, that Sasha being banned or blocked from commenting at Sam's substack is probably due to a personal decision by the person who manages the comment section there. Mark Bailey has stated that they rarely go to comment sections, and that the best way to contact them is through their webpage, not the substack page. So this is not exactly a case of censorship. More of an unfortunate misunderstanding, and a clarification of the terms of a professional relationship, which seems to remain friendly enough, for all I know.
The comment about the scientific method and ego being unhappy bedfellows wasn’t specific to the Baileys but was a general one about what makes for good science.
I have a lot of time for the ‘viral theory is nonsense’ position. What I don’t have time for is histrionics, drama, insulting people just because they liked a post you disagreed with, refusing to debate with people unless they agree with you, etc, etc, all of which I’ve seen the Baileys do with various people who tried to engage with them cordially and scientifically. If you conflate your own personality with the hypothesis you’re trying to promote - especially if you’re proposing that a theory generally accepted is a nonsense - and react to attacks on the hypothesis as if people are attacking you personally, few good scientists will take you seriously. Rigorous debate has always been part of the scientific method. If you can’t stand that kind of heat, get out of the kitchen.
Also it’s not enough to simply say “this is nonsense and the proof is invalid”. Every established theory has dozens of scientists questioning it and following different lines of reasoning. That’s how we progress. So if you want to get serious attention, you need to propose an alternative mechanism of action for observed effects for which the original theory was constructed as an explanation. That’s how science works. Otherwise you contribute nothing to the debate.
Sounds like projection of fear of group rejection on your part. Sorry! I mean no offense!
And I don't like to use the word "projection." I use that word very sparingly.
On progress: if it so happens that the future of progress can be found in going back to some year point in the 1800s when science got lost and entered in the present cul de sac, then I would say that progress is regress, and also would say that scientists and philosophers who refuse to accept truth simpliciter do not belong in research, and they will be happier in the madhouse that has been science and philosophy since the 1950s.
Do you want a positive theory of diseases? Perhaps it would be best to start from the ground, as close to the reality of disease as possible. Many have argued that the best science in general always start from engineers tinkering with basic things, like Archimedes did. So, I propose to pay attention to the health engineer Florence Nightingale, who argued that there were no diseases but only "diseased conditions," and my (possibly flawed) interpretation of that is that she was arguing that the art and science of healing has the individual human being as an object of study, or as a subject to portray, but the disease is never the object of study and lacks aesthetic interest. I give her more cred because she lived right there on the ground, with little theory or traditions to pay attention to.
The best theories are worth little compared to effectively reducing human suffering.
Maybe, if more people disbelieved germ theory, they would calm down, and their health would improve. Maybe, many health problems stem directly from delusional thoughts. Maybe, doctors would do well in gently helping people to overcome their delusions. None of this is acceptable in modern medical science, research, insurance industry or governance. Political programs exist precisely to make people sick, as all empirical evidence proves. It's the opposite of what healing should be.
Not that you’d care, but I respect you even more than I did before. You are clearly the adult in the room. A professional thru and thru. Grateful you shared how you handled that as I have something similar going on and it helped me figure out how to deal with it going forward. Grateful also to be here and I also use the like function to mark whether I’ve read something or not.
Many blessings to you Sacha and May September be an ever better riding month for you!
You obviously did not listen to the video from Sam Bailey that Sasha is referring to. If Sam was being immature then I’d have to say the same for Sasha. I believe neither were being immature and I hope it was a misunderstanding between them. What Sam is in fact pointing out IS fraud and defaming. Perhaps we ALL need to read more carefully when we ‘Like’ something. However Sasha justifies her liking of his post it did put her in the middle of something she claims not to care about. ALL of these people with large followings care about their ‘likes’ and followers. It’s how they make money and get their message out. It’s basically currency on social media. Stop pretending it doesn’t matter.
Come on now, making a vid about defaming by by passive aggressive insults. Wouldn't it have been better to personally ask someone about the situation? Oh nooo, that wouldn't generate anything would it.
Like I said, the whole thing is immature. But time and time again there is a troll or Bot inserted into an ‘influencers’ posts or content when they have reached a certain tipping point of influence or putting out controversial content. And I’m sure you see how it’s ramping up with absurd attacks on freedom of speech. It’s so sad that we have played right into the corporate clowns hands! Pretending that alternative media is somehow free and unbiased and uncorrupted is delusional. Both Sasha and Sam felt they needed to defend themselves. Ok, fine. I still like both of them in their respected areas of expertise and value their opinions. Both of them are courageous for doing what they do. We ALL need to be rebels and/or heroes these days cuz this shit is gettin real!!!
Sasha, welcome to the new world of faceless communication, a definite paradigm shift from when I was young(er)! Marshall McLuhan (born July 21, 1911, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada—died Dec. 31, 1980, Toronto) was a Canadian communications theorist and educator, whose aphorism “the medium is the message”. Oh how right he was. Same issue, different time, only added complexities with 'likes' clicks. Appreciate your open and direct response to 'The Bailey's" nonsense. By the way, I always look for your art at the end of a posting, photos are different and good!
Great comment regarding the "faceless communication" shift. Computers are excellent at sorting technical data. Interpreting human communication? Nah...
I miss the good old days when people would tell stories around roaring camp fires on a chill Autumn night. If the story teller sucked, ya'd just toss 'em into the fire...
Campfires are a lost treasure for 'being human'. I was away last week at a camp on a beautiful, clean Northern Ontario lake. My niece's 8 year old helped light the outdoor fire pit, made smores with melted marshmallows, and yakked the night away with us adults. Priceless!
Good for you, Sasha, for trying to de-escalate conflict. Since the day America was born, there have been infiltrators seeking to divide us; pit us against one another in order to destroy us from within. We must always stop and consider the possibility that any conflict could be contrived division -- manipulation of both parties. The deep state has been at this for a long time, and they are expert at it. It's our job not to fall prey.
That was my first thought. I have appreciated the Baileys’ work very much up until now, until reading all this. Sad, but I totally respect Sasha’s deep sanity in handling the conflict.
Fear of virus/infiltrator/evil can bring about all the 'symptoms' of being hacked and hijacked (by our countermeasures/defences). Image and reputation can be falsely or maliciously misrepresented. Error calls to be undone, malice runs on an insistence that errors are irrevocably guilty, evil or sinful and deserving of excommunication, denial or stamping out. Forgive them father, for they know not what they do.
I know- but the pattern is archetypal to a current human 'consciousness'.
As if our connected or communioned truth is lost to a game of musical chairs set in a depleting struggle for survival within a narrative or mythic repackaging of toxic debts and conflicts.
Meaningless thoughts do not have to be invested with evil powers (or divine retribution) that we then invoke defences against.
That is the basis for infiltration. There will be 'controlled opposition' of active deceit to protect deeply invested agendas, and there will be captured opposition where self-interest seeks damage limitation to its own vested interest framed in fear of total loss of face, status, social support and inclusion, and protections from penalty of pain and loss - even unto death of self or loved ones.
The 'Accuser' is a name for the devil, as is the Adversary and the deceiver. If we let them in they shape and frame our perceptions & responses (reality-experience).
What aligns all things but the purpose you hold or align in your heart?
A world of opportunity to release grievances and restore a truly shared appreciation for being is not at war with a god of vengeance -but will seems so while we vacillate between 'self-power' set in All the king’s horses and all the king’s men, and the power love is.
usually I unsubscribe immediately from those smearing the people I like. Throwing mud is for the professionals, the politicians. In a more or less like-minded group there should not be mud-throwing. We should all stand together against what really matters - the govt stepping away over its lines.
Unfortunately lately several have either stepped back to the other side, joining advertisers of dangerous drugs, or pushing them, and others seem to have truly lost direction. There used to be mud games here in southern GA, I would invite them, but that, too, has been scrapped due to the scamdemic.
Trusting the Holy Spirit allows a discernment of a situation without siding into judgements of blame, hate and exclusion.
Listening for truth is easily lost to reactions that come out of our (respective) past adaptations.
There is no truth IN a world of lies, but the gift of truth extends and shares another 'world' or fruits than a realm of blame and sacrifice set under terror.
I keep a mental note of who smeared whom and how nastily they smeared them. Most of the people I follow and like have smeared somebody else I follow and like, and I prefer to let it go if it is a one off, since people do sometimes get over-excited and release negative comments into the public arena that, on reflection, they might have thought better of keeping to themselves. But for serial offenders I will unsubscribe. But I am not a totalitarian, so if they smear people I don't like, that's fine by me. :)
I do not like that Sasha called Christine Massey "infected pimple on the ass of the internet." I read Christine posts on Sasha's substack before Sasha banned her and found them to be respectful and interesting, while Sasha's language was extremely crass.
That bothered me too. I have noticed that Massey can be a bit aggressive in putting forth her opinion, but that doesn't call for such insults. Who else has matched the kind of work that Massey has done collecting FOIAs? Seems to me Massey has made a unique and admirable contribution, not unlike Sasha's unique contribution, not unlike that of the Bailey's. Personality grumbles are no reason to throw any of that away.
Yes, that "infected pimple" depiction was a bit mean. But this antipathy between these two has been going on for a long time now and it may have reached the grudge stage. And beyond those two, the "virus"/"no virus" is starting to divide people into two rival cults composed who are finding it increasingly difficult to tolerate each other.
Christine is, of course, best known as the researcher who has made a fruitless effort to find a C19 virus anywhere and who has gathered a lot of replies from institutions and health authorities confirming that they haven't got any samples. I think we should all thank her for her service in this. But she as well as quite a few other people of her persuasion are injecting "no virus", "viruses don't exist" or "viruses have never been proven to exist" into almost every other health/medical freedom discussion and that can only be destructive of the aims of "the movement" to stop the ongoing roll-out of immune-altering injections and medical fascism.
In my opinion, there is a classic divide and conquer psyop going on using a strategy straight out of the Tavistock playbook, and it doesn't matter whether the "no virus" people are sincere, or even whether they are right; they are serving the agenda of enemies of freedom and justice by continuing to interrupt the rest of us who are doing our best to stop people being poisoned and murdered.
So, I can understand how several years of being pestered by a long stream of people insisting that there are no viruses might have pushed Sasha past the limits of tolerating gladly what she may have considered irrelevant interruptions.
Also, while you may have found Christine's posts to Sasha respectful and interesting, that is a subjective judgement. I haven't read them and can't say. But personally, I became turned off of the Baileys and of Dr Cowan after initially listening attentively to try to understand what they were trying to explain. Eventually, I simply tuned them out, as one has to. if one wants to preserve one's sanity. Some things click with you and others simply grate.
This was one of Christine's Substack posts just after she got banned by Sasha a year and a half ago. When I read it now, I find it to be mostly tedious nitpicking and snark. I hope both ladies can agree to put this sort of thing in the past and just ignore each other from now on.
I don't fouw people who display that behavior and to be clear I'm not referring to those who say off for things, but those WHO clearly only care about clicks, bullshit headlines, etc.
I use like for posts I actually like. I usually like them because they make me think. I like to think. I don't necessarily agree with them, at least not yet, I may still be thinking about them. I have received likes on X and them trolled by the same. I scratch my head, them mute or block and move on. These folks have an investment in their blog, so much they have volunteer or paid assistance. I'm am not interested in their blog and even less so now, knowing they will write to protect their income stream which calls everything into question. What's their name again?
YES. I will like something despite not agreeing with all of it, makes me think, shines a light on something, etc.
What use to brother me are those that I would pose a question to and they acted as if I don't exist. (blinking, yeah I would put the question mark and everything 😆)
El gato malo and Dr Makis also will write to protect their online business, and that's not wrong and doesn't prove them wrong in any of their opinions or arguments.
Everyone protects their investments as an extension of themselves - thus to 'store up treasures in Heaven' properly refers to qualities of felt being, not rewards set into a carrot & stick 'future'. To recognise where we are giving value is then to give to the spirit and not to gain function for getting fruits for a boosted self-specialness.
Yet we can feel blessed by being 'liked' acknowledged or rewarded in the same way we can be phished by images and messaging online.
I feel for a rightness in terms of resonance and coherency of life as making sense - or holding Meaning - rather than ANY contest of rights taken over the denial and destruction of a 'wrong'. When God saw that it was Good - is a resonant or perfect alignment - not a mind of judgement set against evils, seeking power thereby.
I'd say we all have blind spots or liability to turn a blind eye as part of our masking self-adaptation to a world of threat, blame and exclusion (& death). We may also hold resonance in such denials of truth by WANTING to see the sins of others as a buffer against reliving pain of conflict within. Releasing blame as the Guide & Protector, allows a real question to move within us as the uncovering a real answer that we can love and understand - not a mystery of rabbit holed 'awakenings'.
With the Holy Spirit as the Guide we align to truth as basis and law of healing, rather than weaponise 'truth' to boost a gain of fiction. (Lies given power running as if true).
Did you get the impression that I had a problem with them? I was responding to the post and the folks who don't handle the comments in the substack. It is being handled by someone else. They have an investment they want to protect. Sure go ahead but I know that will restrict the subject matter and what they are willing to write about. Take the early risers in the health freedom movement. They were quick strong and loud and helped form the perceptions that many of us share. They won't move on though. some still talk about lab leak as if it matters. This was always supposed to lead to the perpetrators. Not the Fauci's Collins and Daszak's. They were operators, yes and involved, no doubt, but this wasn't their idea. They weren't responsible for the million+ killed in hospitals in this country alone, someone else came up with the treatment regimen and cash bounty plan, let alone jab injuries and deaths that keep on accumulating. and may even accelerate. many of the early risers are doing good work and keeping it loud keeps the pressure up but the real work is capturing the greedy brains behind this and seeing them punished. I was hoping to see more, with better access, Malone anyone?, make more headway here.
As time goes by, it becomes clear that everything else we are experiencing will continue to rob this effort of momentum. Whether it's immigration, censorship, DEI, climate change, transgender, locking up dissenters, Muslim conversion of European countries, inflation, assassination and more all are part of a much larger global agenda that is a long time in planning and in action right now. At this point, it would be a safe bet to start with the WEF, it's members and fan club and then work your way down as far as necessary The symptoms of their disease will continue to be overwhelming. Go to the source, the symptoms will dissipate. It will be strange bedfellows that get this done, new alliances and split countries. I think it is achievable.
It's sad that it has come to fighting over an upvote/downvote or even a laughing emoji. Sigh. I would LOVE it if we could debate on topics, shake hands, and be civil to each other. This road we are on is going to be rough and bumpy for some time as the social engineers "build back better." God bless you all and may we extend a helping hand whenever and wherever needed.
I am perplexed at the behavior of San Bailey whom I followed during the lockdown chaos. It surprises me that she could be so petty. Just goes to show we don't know who people really are....but no matter because as you say we can read or listen to information put out and make our minds up based on the info not the person writing or speaking.
Yes that upset me. I am sick to death of people who have a different opinion being demonised. We are all coming from a variety of angles in our search for truth. I was incredibly disappointed at the pettiness of the article though I reckon it has bothered me more than you, Sacha lol x
I watched this weird video by Sam Bailey (Narcissists Who Hate The Baileys) and I was amazed how petty this woman could be. OMG, comparing Sasha to a manure fly for the crime of liking the wrong post! Why is Sam so afraid of Sasha?
Having said that, if someone compared me to a dung fly, I would be really proud, because dung flies recycle animal waste, which nobody in the medical freedom community knows how to do. ☺
Ugh! I (unfortunately) watched the Sam Bailey video to see and hear what was said. I generally don't watch videos, as I find the posing and character acting only serves to distract from critical data analyses. I guess I was trained differently than the current media-based generation...
The quick and curt smile's included after nearly every point made in the presentation, finally forced me to just cue off the damn thing... Interesting the term "Narcissists" was included in the title...
I commented regarding the 'virus/no virus" debate some time ago. >>> “It's amusing to witness the spectacle of people hotly debating whether the moon is made of cottage cheese or Gouda...” - Paul Vonharnish - (1/6/2023)
Illness exists. Many persons who are very ill run for political office... And they win...
Hi Lilly. Heh, heh... When I was young, gas-lighting was kids lighting their farts on fire. It was great fun...
I think Ms. Bailey should run for Parliament, or perhaps Congress. We need newer/better actors to mesmerize the public, whilst robbing them of their health, dignity, and property...
There are occasions in life when one needs to recognise when someone is toxic, and walk away from them. If not, they will be emotional vampires and destroy your peace.
Being in NZ myself although British, I would say that the psyche of the New Zealander tends towards believing they are special and rather superior in many ways. The Baileys appear to have a bit of a freedom rock star image in some people’s opinions. Well done Sasha for pointing out what you have done. Whoever we are it’s always worth checking the ego at the door.
No one is perfect though Janey, certainly not me however it is simple toxic sour grapes from the Baileys its disappointing that they are stooping so low
I'm mortified. I've spent many years discussing health and mind body medicine in great depth with wise thoughtful people . It's fascinating and important. Along came the crisis of 'covid' and somehow the level of debate plummeted. Name calling and childish slurs. I dont understand why it's bring out the worst in so many people. We need to be doing our best to understand at this point. I get that people are competing for readers etc but surely we can compete by trying to get at the best perspectives ? We've wasted a lot of time on nonsense I'm afraid :(
I remember hearing that New Zealand is where B"ill" Gates moved to after the plandemic. Maybe this Sam woman (who i have never heard of, sorry) is neighbors with this bugger bill. All I know is Sasha oozes integrity in her work and writings.
Sasha... Have fun, but be safe on those two wheels! Took my last bike outing in 2011, as it resulted in the implantation of a metal plate and a couple dozen screws in my L wrist... Took that as a message from the deity-at-hand to cease and desist. Of course, I am old enough to be your father and you are still a young chick...
As to the Bailey kerfuffle... Life is just too damned short...
Gave mine away a decade ago... You are still a young woman - have you beat by a few years... Mentally about 12 here, but the old bod is showing the mileage,
Very strange. Even stranger that someone would go through "likes" for one post and "tally" who is liking the post. Exhausting, really. But then I am so very tired of everything "COVID" and "virus" and "jab" at this point. Thanks for all you do.
I had another deranged individual on SS who wrote an entire hit piece about my daughter (completely unrelated to my work here) solely because I DIDN'T put a like on her comment here. Just imagine what goes on in people's heads...
I am so sorry. That is disturbing. I stopped going on nearly all SM until Telegram and Substack. But sadly, these too have become toxic in the reader comment sections. I don’t know how you and others do it. It’s just too much on the psyche to have such negativity coming at you. I’m glad you have your artwork. Thank you for all that you do and the courage you’ve had for humanity. I also feel the same way about the Baileys. Lastly, I have no idea what has compelled me to even engage in the few comments I have made as it’s not often I do. So I guess I needed to put some thought or idea into the human energy ethos…..I hope it is positive!!
100% Shit head, Sasha. We (you and I and I'm sure many others) are of the age where it was/is an unwritten rule that no matter the issue, people's children are off limits.
Anyone that has doubts about this situation, y'all worry me bc y'all are I consider a liability. The kind who would make use of reporting systems like some states encouraged during covidsmovid.
Only on the original post, yes you can. At the bottom of the original post there's a groupingnof avatars of folks who have liked the OP and next to that is a count of likes. If you click on that number it brings up a list of folks who liked the original post. Edit: although I just did it again here and there were at the time 132 likes but it only showed me 90 with a line at the end saying +42 more but no way to access those 42
I e would think that likes are a good thing and be grateful bc what you wrote, some of registered. And if I'm not mistaken that is the one thing that all writers desire, to connect through their words, No?
Have fun biking 🚴♂️… the rest is noise.
Well done Sasha, I applaud your common sense approach to Mark Bailey.
It is foolish to respond to to a matter without first hearing the other side of the story, as it written in the Bible.
I hope both Mark and Sam can recognize this and seek to build bridges with you in the future. We all have a common enemy and we cannot afford to create enmity among ourselves without just cause.
Here's another ration of bullshit written by Sam Bailey. She is obviously completely clueless regarding Lyme disease and the realities of pathogenic infection. >>> The Lyme Disease Lie
FEBRUARY 17, 2024 BY SAMANTHA BAILEY >>> https://www.westonaprice.org/health-topics/the-lyme-disease-lie/#gsc.tab=0
Interesting that she utilizes the term "Lie"...
OMG. As a long time, sufferer of Lyme disease and two other tickborne infections, Babesia and Bartonella her article so profoundly offends me. It completely discredits this woman and Sasha should not even give them 1 ounce of respect. Mountains of evidence discredit her position.
Hello David S. Yes. As you most likely know, "Lyme" disease was weaponized at Plum Island, Fort Detrick, and other military based laboratories decades ago. Plum Island gets the most attention, but experiments involving biting insects were wide spread for decades. The weaponizing practice should be common knowledge by now.
I just did a Google search using the term "Lyme" and noticed many former Lyme related sites did not make the search. Here's a link to one of the better sites I've had on file for years. > https://www.columbia-lyme.org/other-tick-borne-diseases
Notice the list of related illness. I had to go 10 pages deep with my search to reach competent (non-CDC funded) information. > https://parasitesandvectors.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13071-019-3495-7 Ms. Bailey's analyses were amateurish at best. Thank you for commenting.
😂 you clearly haven’t watched that video or you wouldn’t be commenting in such a manner.
I generally don't watch videos, as video content clearly distracts executive/cognitive associations. I've stated this fact quite clearly for years. The general public has been led to believe that observing interviews is educational, when it has been proven to negatively affect frontal lobe executive reasoning and relocate the experience toward limbic system behaviors. That said:
I read the entire written transcript and compared her 'analyses' with that of hundreds of related peer reviewed documents I've read these last 18 years. Ms. Bailey is not a forensic pathologist, period. Borrelia burgdorferi is only one form of numerous tick born pathologies proven via nucleic acid essay and dark field microscopy. My comment was based on analysis, not speculation. Thank you for commenting.
I don't believe you've read the transcript or the references supplied either. The 'science' doesn't follow the scientific method. It is classic pseudoscience. A 7 year old can read the foundational papers in this area and realise they don't prove what is being claimed.
...some of us have been trying to say exactly that here for a while and have been brutally and ruthlessly pursued and attacked in the same manner, by this author, in the same fashion that this author complains of in this post. Glad to see everyone else here finally "getting" that, in every sense of the expression.. And yes, Karma's a bitch, indeed, once it finally catches up with what YOU'VE been putting out ;-)
Fragile egos, much?!! Dear Lord! Ego and good science don’t make happy bedfellows. The strength of a hypothesis isn’t measured by how many likes it gets on social media but how well it explains the data. I have to say I also ditched the Baileys long ago for just this reason.
I don't think the Baileys have fragile egos. Quite to the contrary, they seem to be some of the sanest people doing an alternative media product.
I would like to ask you what data are you talking about. If the data is false, no hypotheses are needed. Sadly, there's been a lot of scientific data fraud over the decades. In the last 25 years, data fraud is worse than ever. The cat is out of the bag. But it takes a long time for professionals to accept the dire reality.
But, besides that, we should all be free to read or not read whatever we want to. Censorship is crushing mental health everywhere.
Roger,
The entire situation was explained at the beginning of this writing.
Censorship is killing mental health. How about it's ILLEGAL, AGAINST OUR 1ST AMENDMENT.
Somewhere in the backs of many pls heads, they think it's okay to censor this, or that over there.
IT IS NOT.
People should not make vids talking about others, everyone for the most part I believe if you follow Sasha and Baileys are ON THE SAME SIDE.
Hello Lilly,
I agree that censorship is bad for mental health. And health in general too.
But freedom of speech does not mean that people are not allowed to censor things, in a different meaning of the word, that it seems to me you are conflating by accident. For example, you are the owner of your substack publication. The software grants you editorial control of your writing, and also the ability to ban or block other users from reading or commenting in your posts (there is also the option to disable all comments). Some people would call that censorship, but I think that's confused. There is nothing immoral or illegal about an author restricting the access to his or her publications to anyone. Censorship comes not from the user, but from outside. A judge, for example, under some circumstances, may censor the speech of some author. Not completely though. And this is probably immoral, but you know there is often a way for political power to obstaculize human rights. There are indirect ways of censorship, which should be illegal in my opinion, such as deplatforming people for whatever reason.
The only valid reason to allow the practice of deplatforming is when the person being deplatformed is committing a real crime with real victims or intends to commit a crime. Live streaming a sexual assault is a crass example. Other than a real crime, natural persons should not be deplatformed because that is censorship. For example, expressing any form of political dissent should not be a cause of deplatforming, and the law should fine the companies causing deplatforming with a huge fine plus damages for the victim. But we don't live under such anti-censorship legislation, yet.
With regards to our topic, I don't know if you are aware of the events prior to Sam Bailey video. Just in case, I'll tell you a bit about it. Weeks before the video, a certain substack user that I won't name, published a long post that is demafatory of at least three people, Sam and Mark Bailey being two of them. This defamatory post was completely unrelated to Brave Sasha Latypova and she didn't appear mentioned there.
When the Baileys learned about the attack, weeks after the fact, they did a video. They defend themselves from the attacker in the first part of the video. And, to my mind they are telling the truth, and completely prove that the attacker is a liar. In the second part of the video, they complain about people who promoted the defamatory post, and about other things, like repeated misbehavior of several notorious substack users over years of interaction with them. They mention several people, and the video finishes with the infamous picture of the contents of the skull of the mummy of Karl Marx, as well as several insects doing a postmodern interpretive dance of the famous opera-ballet "Das Kapital". Profile Pictures of several users are given in this collage, and Sasha's profile is one of them. A few days later, Sasha learned about this and published her defense and commentary, which culminates in this present post of hers.
It was surprising for me to see her picture there. I didn't thought she did anything to deserve that smear. Other people did, for sure. There's a number of crazy people in the no-virus corner of Substackistan. Also, there are people who are chaos agents: they are not crazy, they are evil.
I think the Baileys have done a great work over the years, and they keep doing great good to the public. Lots of people can't stand them, and my guess for that is any one or more of these four points:
a) the Baileys do not agree with some pet issue of the person who is angry at them.
b) the Baileys are happy people with a great life, they know many useful things and enjoy great mental health, but miserable people cannot stand their splendor. Misery loves company, as they say.
c) Sam is a beautiful person and she looks well in the camera, which is very convenient for her line of work, and many ugly people hate beautiful people, unsurprisingly.
d) The Baileys are successful in their efforts, and winged monkeys have been dispatched against them by the censors.
Now. You probably dislike the Baileys judging by your comment, and probably you don't fit in any of the four points I've just described. But you have a right to not like them and to like only Sasha. I like the three of them. They give good information to people.
I think it's sad that good people receive attacks from weird people out there. But I guess this is a risk any more or less public figure has to accept. And, of course, the attacker enables any commensurate retaliation from his targets. Those are the ground rules, I think.
Lastly, it's very likely, from what I understand now, that Sasha being banned or blocked from commenting at Sam's substack is probably due to a personal decision by the person who manages the comment section there. Mark Bailey has stated that they rarely go to comment sections, and that the best way to contact them is through their webpage, not the substack page. So this is not exactly a case of censorship. More of an unfortunate misunderstanding, and a clarification of the terms of a professional relationship, which seems to remain friendly enough, for all I know.
Any questions?
The comment about the scientific method and ego being unhappy bedfellows wasn’t specific to the Baileys but was a general one about what makes for good science.
I have a lot of time for the ‘viral theory is nonsense’ position. What I don’t have time for is histrionics, drama, insulting people just because they liked a post you disagreed with, refusing to debate with people unless they agree with you, etc, etc, all of which I’ve seen the Baileys do with various people who tried to engage with them cordially and scientifically. If you conflate your own personality with the hypothesis you’re trying to promote - especially if you’re proposing that a theory generally accepted is a nonsense - and react to attacks on the hypothesis as if people are attacking you personally, few good scientists will take you seriously. Rigorous debate has always been part of the scientific method. If you can’t stand that kind of heat, get out of the kitchen.
Also it’s not enough to simply say “this is nonsense and the proof is invalid”. Every established theory has dozens of scientists questioning it and following different lines of reasoning. That’s how we progress. So if you want to get serious attention, you need to propose an alternative mechanism of action for observed effects for which the original theory was constructed as an explanation. That’s how science works. Otherwise you contribute nothing to the debate.
Sounds like projection of fear of group rejection on your part. Sorry! I mean no offense!
And I don't like to use the word "projection." I use that word very sparingly.
On progress: if it so happens that the future of progress can be found in going back to some year point in the 1800s when science got lost and entered in the present cul de sac, then I would say that progress is regress, and also would say that scientists and philosophers who refuse to accept truth simpliciter do not belong in research, and they will be happier in the madhouse that has been science and philosophy since the 1950s.
Do you want a positive theory of diseases? Perhaps it would be best to start from the ground, as close to the reality of disease as possible. Many have argued that the best science in general always start from engineers tinkering with basic things, like Archimedes did. So, I propose to pay attention to the health engineer Florence Nightingale, who argued that there were no diseases but only "diseased conditions," and my (possibly flawed) interpretation of that is that she was arguing that the art and science of healing has the individual human being as an object of study, or as a subject to portray, but the disease is never the object of study and lacks aesthetic interest. I give her more cred because she lived right there on the ground, with little theory or traditions to pay attention to.
The best theories are worth little compared to effectively reducing human suffering.
Maybe, if more people disbelieved germ theory, they would calm down, and their health would improve. Maybe, many health problems stem directly from delusional thoughts. Maybe, doctors would do well in gently helping people to overcome their delusions. None of this is acceptable in modern medical science, research, insurance industry or governance. Political programs exist precisely to make people sick, as all empirical evidence proves. It's the opposite of what healing should be.
Me too. I also ditched the Baileys long ago for just that reason.
Be in NZ blue hair, and go against the authorities, then we'll see what stuff you're made of.....
It would be better (for you) to leave The Lord out of this.........
Your name is apt.
Not that you’d care, but I respect you even more than I did before. You are clearly the adult in the room. A professional thru and thru. Grateful you shared how you handled that as I have something similar going on and it helped me figure out how to deal with it going forward. Grateful also to be here and I also use the like function to mark whether I’ve read something or not.
Many blessings to you Sacha and May September be an ever better riding month for you!
You obviously did not listen to the video from Sam Bailey that Sasha is referring to. If Sam was being immature then I’d have to say the same for Sasha. I believe neither were being immature and I hope it was a misunderstanding between them. What Sam is in fact pointing out IS fraud and defaming. Perhaps we ALL need to read more carefully when we ‘Like’ something. However Sasha justifies her liking of his post it did put her in the middle of something she claims not to care about. ALL of these people with large followings care about their ‘likes’ and followers. It’s how they make money and get their message out. It’s basically currency on social media. Stop pretending it doesn’t matter.
Schreck,
Come on now, making a vid about defaming by by passive aggressive insults. Wouldn't it have been better to personally ask someone about the situation? Oh nooo, that wouldn't generate anything would it.
Like I said, the whole thing is immature. But time and time again there is a troll or Bot inserted into an ‘influencers’ posts or content when they have reached a certain tipping point of influence or putting out controversial content. And I’m sure you see how it’s ramping up with absurd attacks on freedom of speech. It’s so sad that we have played right into the corporate clowns hands! Pretending that alternative media is somehow free and unbiased and uncorrupted is delusional. Both Sasha and Sam felt they needed to defend themselves. Ok, fine. I still like both of them in their respected areas of expertise and value their opinions. Both of them are courageous for doing what they do. We ALL need to be rebels and/or heroes these days cuz this shit is gettin real!!!
Sasha, welcome to the new world of faceless communication, a definite paradigm shift from when I was young(er)! Marshall McLuhan (born July 21, 1911, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada—died Dec. 31, 1980, Toronto) was a Canadian communications theorist and educator, whose aphorism “the medium is the message”. Oh how right he was. Same issue, different time, only added complexities with 'likes' clicks. Appreciate your open and direct response to 'The Bailey's" nonsense. By the way, I always look for your art at the end of a posting, photos are different and good!
Great comment regarding the "faceless communication" shift. Computers are excellent at sorting technical data. Interpreting human communication? Nah...
I miss the good old days when people would tell stories around roaring camp fires on a chill Autumn night. If the story teller sucked, ya'd just toss 'em into the fire...
Campfires are a lost treasure for 'being human'. I was away last week at a camp on a beautiful, clean Northern Ontario lake. My niece's 8 year old helped light the outdoor fire pit, made smores with melted marshmallows, and yakked the night away with us adults. Priceless!
Hi Paul,
And the times when someone directly asked the person what was meant, hey what's the deal, or any other number of ways to clear up a situation.
Good for you, Sasha, for trying to de-escalate conflict. Since the day America was born, there have been infiltrators seeking to divide us; pit us against one another in order to destroy us from within. We must always stop and consider the possibility that any conflict could be contrived division -- manipulation of both parties. The deep state has been at this for a long time, and they are expert at it. It's our job not to fall prey.
That was my first thought. I have appreciated the Baileys’ work very much up until now, until reading all this. Sad, but I totally respect Sasha’s deep sanity in handling the conflict.
Hear! Hear!
What infiltrators?
Fear of virus/infiltrator/evil can bring about all the 'symptoms' of being hacked and hijacked (by our countermeasures/defences). Image and reputation can be falsely or maliciously misrepresented. Error calls to be undone, malice runs on an insistence that errors are irrevocably guilty, evil or sinful and deserving of excommunication, denial or stamping out. Forgive them father, for they know not what they do.
Im not sure the other person meant that
I know- but the pattern is archetypal to a current human 'consciousness'.
As if our connected or communioned truth is lost to a game of musical chairs set in a depleting struggle for survival within a narrative or mythic repackaging of toxic debts and conflicts.
Meaningless thoughts do not have to be invested with evil powers (or divine retribution) that we then invoke defences against.
That is the basis for infiltration. There will be 'controlled opposition' of active deceit to protect deeply invested agendas, and there will be captured opposition where self-interest seeks damage limitation to its own vested interest framed in fear of total loss of face, status, social support and inclusion, and protections from penalty of pain and loss - even unto death of self or loved ones.
The 'Accuser' is a name for the devil, as is the Adversary and the deceiver. If we let them in they shape and frame our perceptions & responses (reality-experience).
Thanks Binra
Everything you see and things you don't see out here is contrived
ORCHESTRATED
What aligns all things but the purpose you hold or align in your heart?
A world of opportunity to release grievances and restore a truly shared appreciation for being is not at war with a god of vengeance -but will seems so while we vacillate between 'self-power' set in All the king’s horses and all the king’s men, and the power love is.
usually I unsubscribe immediately from those smearing the people I like. Throwing mud is for the professionals, the politicians. In a more or less like-minded group there should not be mud-throwing. We should all stand together against what really matters - the govt stepping away over its lines.
Unfortunately lately several have either stepped back to the other side, joining advertisers of dangerous drugs, or pushing them, and others seem to have truly lost direction. There used to be mud games here in southern GA, I would invite them, but that, too, has been scrapped due to the scamdemic.
I don’t unsubscribe automatically….too many clues to discover about who is trustworthy.
Trusting the Holy Spirit allows a discernment of a situation without siding into judgements of blame, hate and exclusion.
Listening for truth is easily lost to reactions that come out of our (respective) past adaptations.
There is no truth IN a world of lies, but the gift of truth extends and shares another 'world' or fruits than a realm of blame and sacrifice set under terror.
I keep a mental note of who smeared whom and how nastily they smeared them. Most of the people I follow and like have smeared somebody else I follow and like, and I prefer to let it go if it is a one off, since people do sometimes get over-excited and release negative comments into the public arena that, on reflection, they might have thought better of keeping to themselves. But for serial offenders I will unsubscribe. But I am not a totalitarian, so if they smear people I don't like, that's fine by me. :)
I do not like that Sasha called Christine Massey "infected pimple on the ass of the internet." I read Christine posts on Sasha's substack before Sasha banned her and found them to be respectful and interesting, while Sasha's language was extremely crass.
That bothered me too. I have noticed that Massey can be a bit aggressive in putting forth her opinion, but that doesn't call for such insults. Who else has matched the kind of work that Massey has done collecting FOIAs? Seems to me Massey has made a unique and admirable contribution, not unlike Sasha's unique contribution, not unlike that of the Bailey's. Personality grumbles are no reason to throw any of that away.
Yes, that "infected pimple" depiction was a bit mean. But this antipathy between these two has been going on for a long time now and it may have reached the grudge stage. And beyond those two, the "virus"/"no virus" is starting to divide people into two rival cults composed who are finding it increasingly difficult to tolerate each other.
Christine is, of course, best known as the researcher who has made a fruitless effort to find a C19 virus anywhere and who has gathered a lot of replies from institutions and health authorities confirming that they haven't got any samples. I think we should all thank her for her service in this. But she as well as quite a few other people of her persuasion are injecting "no virus", "viruses don't exist" or "viruses have never been proven to exist" into almost every other health/medical freedom discussion and that can only be destructive of the aims of "the movement" to stop the ongoing roll-out of immune-altering injections and medical fascism.
In my opinion, there is a classic divide and conquer psyop going on using a strategy straight out of the Tavistock playbook, and it doesn't matter whether the "no virus" people are sincere, or even whether they are right; they are serving the agenda of enemies of freedom and justice by continuing to interrupt the rest of us who are doing our best to stop people being poisoned and murdered.
So, I can understand how several years of being pestered by a long stream of people insisting that there are no viruses might have pushed Sasha past the limits of tolerating gladly what she may have considered irrelevant interruptions.
Also, while you may have found Christine's posts to Sasha respectful and interesting, that is a subjective judgement. I haven't read them and can't say. But personally, I became turned off of the Baileys and of Dr Cowan after initially listening attentively to try to understand what they were trying to explain. Eventually, I simply tuned them out, as one has to. if one wants to preserve one's sanity. Some things click with you and others simply grate.
This was one of Christine's Substack posts just after she got banned by Sasha a year and a half ago. When I read it now, I find it to be mostly tedious nitpicking and snark. I hope both ladies can agree to put this sort of thing in the past and just ignore each other from now on.
https://christinemasseyfois.substack.com/p/virus-questions-sasha-latypova-hop
So would you say you are a Smearatarian?
🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂
Yes, I would.
But in my defense, I would add that I always try to be a Good Smearatarian.
I don't fouw people who display that behavior and to be clear I'm not referring to those who say off for things, but those WHO clearly only care about clicks, bullshit headlines, etc.
I use like for posts I actually like. I usually like them because they make me think. I like to think. I don't necessarily agree with them, at least not yet, I may still be thinking about them. I have received likes on X and them trolled by the same. I scratch my head, them mute or block and move on. These folks have an investment in their blog, so much they have volunteer or paid assistance. I'm am not interested in their blog and even less so now, knowing they will write to protect their income stream which calls everything into question. What's their name again?
YES. I will like something despite not agreeing with all of it, makes me think, shines a light on something, etc.
What use to brother me are those that I would pose a question to and they acted as if I don't exist. (blinking, yeah I would put the question mark and everything 😆)
El gato malo and Dr Makis also will write to protect their online business, and that's not wrong and doesn't prove them wrong in any of their opinions or arguments.
Everyone protects their investments as an extension of themselves - thus to 'store up treasures in Heaven' properly refers to qualities of felt being, not rewards set into a carrot & stick 'future'. To recognise where we are giving value is then to give to the spirit and not to gain function for getting fruits for a boosted self-specialness.
Yet we can feel blessed by being 'liked' acknowledged or rewarded in the same way we can be phished by images and messaging online.
I feel for a rightness in terms of resonance and coherency of life as making sense - or holding Meaning - rather than ANY contest of rights taken over the denial and destruction of a 'wrong'. When God saw that it was Good - is a resonant or perfect alignment - not a mind of judgement set against evils, seeking power thereby.
I'd say we all have blind spots or liability to turn a blind eye as part of our masking self-adaptation to a world of threat, blame and exclusion (& death). We may also hold resonance in such denials of truth by WANTING to see the sins of others as a buffer against reliving pain of conflict within. Releasing blame as the Guide & Protector, allows a real question to move within us as the uncovering a real answer that we can love and understand - not a mystery of rabbit holed 'awakenings'.
With the Holy Spirit as the Guide we align to truth as basis and law of healing, rather than weaponise 'truth' to boost a gain of fiction. (Lies given power running as if true).
No, primarily they write to share research and their truth. Not an industry, no employees.
There is nothing wrong about making a business about that.
I see no moral problem at all in Makis or el gato earning money by sharing their views.
Why is it that so many people seem to have this latent anger about gratifying people with money?
Did you get the impression that I had a problem with them? I was responding to the post and the folks who don't handle the comments in the substack. It is being handled by someone else. They have an investment they want to protect. Sure go ahead but I know that will restrict the subject matter and what they are willing to write about. Take the early risers in the health freedom movement. They were quick strong and loud and helped form the perceptions that many of us share. They won't move on though. some still talk about lab leak as if it matters. This was always supposed to lead to the perpetrators. Not the Fauci's Collins and Daszak's. They were operators, yes and involved, no doubt, but this wasn't their idea. They weren't responsible for the million+ killed in hospitals in this country alone, someone else came up with the treatment regimen and cash bounty plan, let alone jab injuries and deaths that keep on accumulating. and may even accelerate. many of the early risers are doing good work and keeping it loud keeps the pressure up but the real work is capturing the greedy brains behind this and seeing them punished. I was hoping to see more, with better access, Malone anyone?, make more headway here.
As time goes by, it becomes clear that everything else we are experiencing will continue to rob this effort of momentum. Whether it's immigration, censorship, DEI, climate change, transgender, locking up dissenters, Muslim conversion of European countries, inflation, assassination and more all are part of a much larger global agenda that is a long time in planning and in action right now. At this point, it would be a safe bet to start with the WEF, it's members and fan club and then work your way down as far as necessary The symptoms of their disease will continue to be overwhelming. Go to the source, the symptoms will dissipate. It will be strange bedfellows that get this done, new alliances and split countries. I think it is achievable.
If I had more time, I would explain it in great detail.
I leave you with this question?
You got any problems with a covidsmovid test costing over $400?
It's sad that it has come to fighting over an upvote/downvote or even a laughing emoji. Sigh. I would LOVE it if we could debate on topics, shake hands, and be civil to each other. This road we are on is going to be rough and bumpy for some time as the social engineers "build back better." God bless you all and may we extend a helping hand whenever and wherever needed.
If you think that's what is going to happen, social engineers building back better....I hope that was sarcasm.
To be absolutely clear: I DO NOT WANT a WEF "build back better" scenario. But then no one asked me.
I am perplexed at the behavior of San Bailey whom I followed during the lockdown chaos. It surprises me that she could be so petty. Just goes to show we don't know who people really are....but no matter because as you say we can read or listen to information put out and make our minds up based on the info not the person writing or speaking.
My sentiments exactly if this is what passes for damage limitation by Mark and Sam then its a very ill conceived counter productive strategy
Did you watch the video?
Right? You don't know who anyone is online but if you see them in an interview, it can help.
I get energy from everything, I don't consider it a gift, but I DO pay attention, and I will often call something out way before it gets here.
Yes that upset me. I am sick to death of people who have a different opinion being demonised. We are all coming from a variety of angles in our search for truth. I was incredibly disappointed at the pettiness of the article though I reckon it has bothered me more than you, Sacha lol x
I feel ya!
I watched this weird video by Sam Bailey (Narcissists Who Hate The Baileys) and I was amazed how petty this woman could be. OMG, comparing Sasha to a manure fly for the crime of liking the wrong post! Why is Sam so afraid of Sasha?
Having said that, if someone compared me to a dung fly, I would be really proud, because dung flies recycle animal waste, which nobody in the medical freedom community knows how to do. ☺
Ugh! I (unfortunately) watched the Sam Bailey video to see and hear what was said. I generally don't watch videos, as I find the posing and character acting only serves to distract from critical data analyses. I guess I was trained differently than the current media-based generation...
The quick and curt smile's included after nearly every point made in the presentation, finally forced me to just cue off the damn thing... Interesting the term "Narcissists" was included in the title...
I commented regarding the 'virus/no virus" debate some time ago. >>> “It's amusing to witness the spectacle of people hotly debating whether the moon is made of cottage cheese or Gouda...” - Paul Vonharnish - (1/6/2023)
Illness exists. Many persons who are very ill run for political office... And they win...
Gd Paul, I just commented to someone the vid itself is narcissistic, the title and the making of it.
It's GASLIGHTING.
I knew so erhung was niggling me and this ☝️☝️☝️ is what it was.
Hi Lilly. Heh, heh... When I was young, gas-lighting was kids lighting their farts on fire. It was great fun...
I think Ms. Bailey should run for Parliament, or perhaps Congress. We need newer/better actors to mesmerize the public, whilst robbing them of their health, dignity, and property...
Thanks for pointing out which video it was. I didnt want to comment without seeing it.
The very title is narcissistic. I have no problem writing this, bc it's the truth..
There are occasions in life when one needs to recognise when someone is toxic, and walk away from them. If not, they will be emotional vampires and destroy your peace.
And there are also times to stand up to bullies lest they think continued destruction is warranted.
Also times to set them straight publicly and professionally and let their own reactions illustrate who they really are.
Some may be worth salvaging after they learn their lesson.
It's my belief we stand up and speak out anytime we see something wrong. The problem these days is the word bully is overused and misused..
I can guarantee that most ppl who use that word really have no idea what a real bully looks like.
Being in NZ myself although British, I would say that the psyche of the New Zealander tends towards believing they are special and rather superior in many ways. The Baileys appear to have a bit of a freedom rock star image in some people’s opinions. Well done Sasha for pointing out what you have done. Whoever we are it’s always worth checking the ego at the door.
No one is perfect though Janey, certainly not me however it is simple toxic sour grapes from the Baileys its disappointing that they are stooping so low
I'm mortified. I've spent many years discussing health and mind body medicine in great depth with wise thoughtful people . It's fascinating and important. Along came the crisis of 'covid' and somehow the level of debate plummeted. Name calling and childish slurs. I dont understand why it's bring out the worst in so many people. We need to be doing our best to understand at this point. I get that people are competing for readers etc but surely we can compete by trying to get at the best perspectives ? We've wasted a lot of time on nonsense I'm afraid :(
I remember hearing that New Zealand is where B"ill" Gates moved to after the plandemic. Maybe this Sam woman (who i have never heard of, sorry) is neighbors with this bugger bill. All I know is Sasha oozes integrity in her work and writings.
Sasha... Have fun, but be safe on those two wheels! Took my last bike outing in 2011, as it resulted in the implantation of a metal plate and a couple dozen screws in my L wrist... Took that as a message from the deity-at-hand to cease and desist. Of course, I am old enough to be your father and you are still a young chick...
As to the Bailey kerfuffle... Life is just too damned short...
twas my r wrist, I am titanium! Still got the bike. I am hopeful.
I can sympathize and empathize! Be safe!
I hear you.
My mountain bike is in the basement with flat tires. Turning 70 in December and thinking of giving it away before we move.
Gave mine away a decade ago... You are still a young woman - have you beat by a few years... Mentally about 12 here, but the old bod is showing the mileage,
Curmudgeon.
😆😂🤣
I'm just kidding you. I retain my sense my humor, it's can be difficult these days.
Very strange. Even stranger that someone would go through "likes" for one post and "tally" who is liking the post. Exhausting, really. But then I am so very tired of everything "COVID" and "virus" and "jab" at this point. Thanks for all you do.
I had another deranged individual on SS who wrote an entire hit piece about my daughter (completely unrelated to my work here) solely because I DIDN'T put a like on her comment here. Just imagine what goes on in people's heads...
I am so sorry. That is disturbing. I stopped going on nearly all SM until Telegram and Substack. But sadly, these too have become toxic in the reader comment sections. I don’t know how you and others do it. It’s just too much on the psyche to have such negativity coming at you. I’m glad you have your artwork. Thank you for all that you do and the courage you’ve had for humanity. I also feel the same way about the Baileys. Lastly, I have no idea what has compelled me to even engage in the few comments I have made as it’s not often I do. So I guess I needed to put some thought or idea into the human energy ethos…..I hope it is positive!!
100% Shit head, Sasha. We (you and I and I'm sure many others) are of the age where it was/is an unwritten rule that no matter the issue, people's children are off limits.
Golly. I'm so sorry.
"Just imagine what goes on in people's heads..." ...ehh, with respect, no thanks. ..welcome to the stuff of which nightmares are made. :-)
Sasha, you'll know the old chestnut, “It's better to keep your mouth shut and appear stupid than open it and remove all doubt.”― Mark Twain
People are unbelievable stupid to do this type of thing. What a waste of everyone’s time. Too much fluoride & mercury in these dolts.
Not only that, they (or their minions) crawled through all the old posts of Proton Magic that they had liked and unliked them all :D :D = insanity
WHAT? This gets more and more crazy.
Anyone that has doubts about this situation, y'all worry me bc y'all are I consider a liability. The kind who would make use of reporting systems like some states encouraged during covidsmovid.
I have my eyes wide open..
I did not realize that they could see it was Sasha who liked the post. I can’t see who likes someone’s posts. Can you?
Only on the original post, yes you can. At the bottom of the original post there's a groupingnof avatars of folks who have liked the OP and next to that is a count of likes. If you click on that number it brings up a list of folks who liked the original post. Edit: although I just did it again here and there were at the time 132 likes but it only showed me 90 with a line at the end saying +42 more but no way to access those 42
I e would think that likes are a good thing and be grateful bc what you wrote, some of registered. And if I'm not mistaken that is the one thing that all writers desire, to connect through their words, No?
Thank you! Makes sense. Appreciated.
Right on. My GOD, and use the word narcissist in a time fur their vid.
Woooooo, this is Gaslighting at its finest.