He didn't speak out about the dangers of the jabs. He wanted credit as the inventor, and even that was something of a distortion in that he was one of the inventors named on the patent, not THE inventor. He wanted it both ways: full credit for the invention but not blame for the destruction.
He didn't speak out about the dangers of the jabs. He wanted credit as the inventor, and even that was something of a distortion in that he was one of the inventors named on the patent, not THE inventor. He wanted it both ways: full credit for the invention but not blame for the destruction.
Breggin didn't come “spewing hatred”. Part of life is being willing to take consequences of your public claims and Malone's suit is just as much trying to “silence” Breggin. My impression of Malone is that he has a massive ego and isn't to be fully trusted.
Breggin had no reason to provoke a highly qualified scientist with claim to this technology. Malone did not attack Breggin originally, he just agreed with another guy on the other side of the pond. Malone never did anything to Breggin, why the public animus? How could it affect Malone's reputation and livelihood? It is absolutely normal in scientific groups to allow all associated with the technology be ON the patent.
Breggin probably never paid a damn dime to Malone; simply agreed to shut the hell up.
Breggin was simply pointing out that the mass formation hypothesis of Desmet, endorsed by Malone, made no sense. The point of the lawsuit was, as you say, to make Breggin "shut the hell up," that is, to censor Breggin's criticism of the Malone/Desmet mass formation thesis. That the lawsuit was an attempt at censoring criticism was what made it so sickening for many of us (not to mention that it was for $25 million and against someone long critical of psychiatric abuses.)
He didn't speak out about the dangers of the jabs. He wanted credit as the inventor, and even that was something of a distortion in that he was one of the inventors named on the patent, not THE inventor. He wanted it both ways: full credit for the invention but not blame for the destruction.
Breggin didn't come “spewing hatred”. Part of life is being willing to take consequences of your public claims and Malone's suit is just as much trying to “silence” Breggin. My impression of Malone is that he has a massive ego and isn't to be fully trusted.
Breggin had no reason to provoke a highly qualified scientist with claim to this technology. Malone did not attack Breggin originally, he just agreed with another guy on the other side of the pond. Malone never did anything to Breggin, why the public animus? How could it affect Malone's reputation and livelihood? It is absolutely normal in scientific groups to allow all associated with the technology be ON the patent.
Breggin probably never paid a damn dime to Malone; simply agreed to shut the hell up.
In case you missed it, Malone lost the lawsuit, and the judge warned him off pursuing other frivolous lawsuits. https://celiafarber.substack.com/p/congratulations-peter-and-ginger
The actual court decision, reiterated later in a request that Malone pay Breggin's attorney's fee (denied) is here: https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/virginia/vawdce/3:2022cv00063/126794/77/ To wit, on March 27, 2024, the judge dismissed the case against the Breggins for lack of jurisdiction.
Breggin was simply pointing out that the mass formation hypothesis of Desmet, endorsed by Malone, made no sense. The point of the lawsuit was, as you say, to make Breggin "shut the hell up," that is, to censor Breggin's criticism of the Malone/Desmet mass formation thesis. That the lawsuit was an attempt at censoring criticism was what made it so sickening for many of us (not to mention that it was for $25 million and against someone long critical of psychiatric abuses.)