Trigger Unhappy

In my years helping Dr Mike Yeadon I have spent much time admiring his ability to not get drawn in by bad faith communications.

But there is a more important aspect to his communications that I have always wanted to “learn’;

Responding factually and with reservation and kindness no matter how triggering the stimulus.

We can never truly know someone’s intentions.

A good faith person may be coming with a devil’s advocate argument to try and resolve their own confusions.

Or they may be feeling the same passion I am, perhaps unaware of some data, seeing me as a person who threatens the future of their children through ignorance as I am seeing them.

And here is the key point.

I am happy that throughout, my aim has been clear and simple; to try and protect the children from the common place assaults and impending dystopia so many are unaware of.

All I have said and done has been in honest and energetic endeavour to spread truth that heals.

But how effective have I been?

Lord knows my aims are true, but the road to hell is easily the best paved road around and I’m responsible for some fairly lengthy sections single-handedly.

There are indeed violent rare situations where strength, passion, anger, focus, commitment are the qualities needed to navigate with wisdom and courage. But these are rare.

Diplomacy in its most positive sense is usually much more potent.

Going down the rabbit hole has left us all at times frustrated with those who aren’t aware of the lies used to control and harm us.

2020 2021 was a time when we looked at friends, family, colleagues aghast as we attempted to show evidence and were dismissed as loonies - even by those who had trusted us for decades.

The first time you understand there has never been a climate emergency and that Net Zero is designed for a very different reason than “saving the planet” there is a desire to talk about it with others. It is very frustrating when intelligent friends just scoff rather than examine the evidence.

When someone you love is taking their child off to get the Covid Assault and won’t look at the clear evidence that it is purely harming the urge to try and communicate is even more immediate. What do you do? Just give up?

The same thing happens when you come to the clear factual understanding that “contagion” is a very recent fairy tale - “unnoticed” for 6000 years anywhere in the world - responsible now for probably the vast majority of unnecessary damage in the world - most physically caused damage and much more psychological damage being largely iatrogenic, justified by the war model and caused by its false fears and “treatments”.

The difference in this case is that those dismissing and scoffing are those fully aware of many of the other PsyOps. The frustration can be even greater.

Many of those who will walk in most other rooms and find the elephants refuse steadfastly to open the door to the contagion myth room. There’s a ruddy huge elephant in there but many just smile sweetly and say “let’s just agree to differ” without going in.

I have not always responded well. Too much is at stake.

In the last few years Mike has given me the most diplomatic hints possible to suggest that being triggered and responding with inappropriate passion may not be the best way.

And that responding at all to those coming unkindly is not compulsory or helpful!

He always frames it in a small story about himself rather than offering me direct advice. He does it beautifully.

A non-believer opened his heart to the Buddha, saying, “I am not asking about words, I am not asking about the wordless.”

The world honoured one sat quietly.

The non-believer replied to this, “With your wisdom and heart you have parted the clouds of my confusions, and showed me the way through.”

He made bows and departed.

After this the Buddha’s attendant Ananda asked, “What did the non-believer realize?”

The world honoured one replied, “He is like a fine horse that races at even the shadow of a whip.”

Every time I notice what Mike is kindly and gently doing, I note it, and I resolve to act on it. He is a brilliant teacher and a fine horse would have ‘got it’ by now.

Yet I still fall occasionally into the need to answer triggering barbs - whether delivered intentionally as such or not - in a passionate defensive way.

…Or is it defense of the small child inside me replaying old trauma? (Rhetorical question!)

How am I aiding the spreading of truth by acting like a cockwomble? (Rhetorical question!)

Doc Malik has a different complementary approach. He is happy to use the actual whip. He talked to me before the chat, during the chat and after the chat in several phone calls. A man whose business and living is helping people in consultations about this sort of stuff gave me lots of his time and attention for free.

He sent me screenshots of a nasty comment delivered to him, then of the mute option for them, then of his successful muting of them.

He sent me feedback he received for the chat with me.

A few years ago I would likely have found this patronising and unwelcome and told him so. But I have considerably more humility now than then. And I have had several high profile spats that didn’t need to happen. I have felt the shame of behaving shamefully and no longer wish to feel that any more.

The Two Colour Protocol - if established as the proper basis of science would eliminate pseudoscience and make tyranny impossible. I’m not going to help anyone get this hard fact by appearing as a buffoon.

The Virus Confirmation Fund is direct proof that viruses are fictional. If there was any evidence for viruses, someone with resources, awareness and due diligence would have claimed the money…

…Or, a medical freedom fighter would have claimed the money to “stop this PsyOp compromising the medical freedom community”.

But, I’m not going to help anyone escape the insanity of Germ Theory by righteous or passionate behaviour.

“Block and move on” was my traditional last resort after a battle.

My new “strategy” is “mute and move on” at the first hint of bad faith - before any battle. Thanks Doc Malik for that.

Blocking leaves ripples. Muting just removes the bad faith from your awareness. Battling, no matter how factually correct and well intentioned weakens our perceived position.

Factual points honestly raised can be addressed but clear gaslighting / Ad Hominem does not warrant or deserve any kind of response - a block from you is a result for a gaslighter.

“Block me I dare you” they often say.

Not any more. Mute out bad faith. Job done.

I hope you enjoy my chat with Ahmad. The first bit is available to all. I hope you get to see it all - though that will involve you or a friend subscribing to the good Doc.

Thanks Doc Malik for the opportunity to chat with you. Looking forward to our next chat on May 1st.

I make this commitment here never to ‘reprimand’ or ‘correct’ what feels like gaslighting comments thrown at me. Mute and move on.

I had a huge test on the day of release of the podcast. A blistering commentary on my rubbishness by a “major voice”, including important factual errors, claiming that the man who ran away from trying to claim the VCF was confused about what he needed to supply.

Dr Hill expressed clear understanding of what he needed to supply (it’s not complicated) and said he would be back with his submission and then disappeared.

I would without doubt have corrected this in the past and addressed her unpleasant remarks.

This time as soon as I saw the bad faith communication - I just muted her immediately.

It felt so much better than blocking. Much more empowering and relaxing.

Thanks Dr Mike Yeadon for your example and Doc Malik for your insistence.

If you can support me with a coffee https://ko-fi.com/timthagoras or a paid subscription that would be fab.

Warm wishes

Tim