Stew Peters' Chaos: Credibility that Died Suddenly, Part 2
Chaos Agents, Part 4
"There is nothing more harrowing than a deadly hush with the feel of a great noise around it." -Jessie Douglas Kerruish, The Undying Monster: A Tale of the Fifth Dimension
This is going to be (at least) a three-part series, and could be a book in itself. I'm making comments for this post paid subscriber only. Others who would like to comment can add to the threads of the Part 1 article.
Before moving forward, I'll share Stew Peters's pushback at Robert Malone's criticism. Paul Alexander takes the side of Peters. I will take this moment to point out that part of the broader discussion is about "splitting the Medical Freedom community". So, I'd like to suggest that we view medical liberty (and all forms of liberty that don't involve legitimate rights conflicts of interest) as a value first and foremost. Everything after that is political strategy, and if anyone wants to point a finger somewhere over so-called "division" in the Medical Freedom Movement (MFM), at least a hefty portion of it stems from the irreconcilable differences of the political wings (both real and imagined).
The very goal of forming a single-minded block out of the MFM is unnecessary, wrongheaded (science is by definition about uncertainty, doubt, and open debate—things that become threatened when viewpoint unity is enforced), and probably contradicts best strategies in a moment such as this when the world is in the midst of a epoch-churning mass earthquake. Such a goal plays so hard into the whole "mass formations find a magnetic pole (Schelling point) that sweeps them into the clutches of a fascist dictator" story that every sober mind should take pause and meditate on where such a mass might be led.
Find your local community first, then reach further to work together where possible, but be part of a decentralized network that cannot be easily targeted by the Molochian machine. Understand the nature of your agency and control locus so that it cannot be steered by emotional manipulators.
Whether I'm right or wrong in my perspectives, you should not look for heroes to save you—not among the doctors or scientists (many of whom I respect, even where we sometimes disagree), not among the media leads or podcasters (some of whom are great educators and communicators), or anyone outside your community locus. A desire for heroes invites the snakes (even if there are some real heroes). So, work toward your health first, your family's health along with that, and the rest of your energy in your closest community—then in ways for communities to share a trust network of high fidelity.
Keeping It Simple and Factual
Understand that much of my critique of Died Suddenly is based in this terrible feeling after 34 months of research, I see an unnecessarily noisy MFM signal that is being bombarded by false or questionable information making it harder for both people in the MFM and people on the fence who might join the MFM to discern the most important basic truths:
Nobody should be coerced into medical experiments or treatments.
Individual autonomy is important for human health and progress.
The experimental quasi-vaccines were barely tested on small populations and only "shown" by highly questionable evidence to be safe or effective.
There is substantial evidence that the vaccines are injuring and killing people.
Fertility risks are an existential threat, and there are safety signals that need serious attention.
We might add to the conversation (for those ready for it) that,
Vaccination has an extremely muddy history.
Biological warfare has an extremely concerning history.
There is substantial evidence that the pandemic was/is spurred by iatrogenocide.
Control over human reproduction is a recipe for long-term human slavery.
These topics are made difficult by a ubiquitous propaganda campaign that we might as well describe as The Matrix.
The massive budgets of the U.S. Federal Government, plus potentially enormous shadow budgets, likely feed a shadow government responsible for war against most of the global population.
How might we prepare for what comes next? When it all breaks down, who's going to rebuild it?
However, throwing overly-specified or sketchy versions of these—or just bringing up Big Foot from the get go—isn't the best way to carry a person soberly over the barrier of cognitive dissonance.
Examining potential Chaos Agents, and critiquing shoddy work is a necessary chore in the process of keeping information signals as clean as possible. Now, let's take a look at more issues with or associated with the Died Suddenly documentary.
The Wrong Story of the VAERS Evidence
"All models are wrong, but some are useful." -George E.P. Box
40:34 - Steve Kirsch begins talking about VAERS.
The Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) is a safety signal generator. Think of VAERS as one type of map of the terrain. But the map is never the terrain. All forms of maps have their strengths and weaknesses, and that's the best place to begin any conversation of VAERS.
It is certainly irresponsible that public health authorities never developed a better system that does what VAERS does, despite the fact that some teams designed upgrades that have been suspiciously ignored. There is zero doubt that VAERS screams "Potential DANGER!" with respect to the COVID-19 vaccines. The only debate is over the magnitude of the problem.
One common piece of evidence people use and was also used in the documentary is the VAERS database. VAERS is used to report any reactions to vaccines and has been around for years. It gives us a good signal when something is wrong.
VAERS cannot give us any useful information besides that signal. It’s impossible to verify many of these reports. They are somewhat subjective in many cases. It isn’t really organized in any useful way.
Furthermore, nobody knew VAERS existed until 2020. Doctors have a vague awareness of its presence, but that was it. In 2020, people learned about it and started reporting everything.
I mostly agree with Doc Anarchy, but I've thought a lot about the "notoriety effect" he suggests in the last paragraph, and that many others have talked about. But nobody ever looks for evidence to match the effect with the VAERS reports. I have:
Yes, more people became aware of VAERS throughout 2021, but the VAERS reports came in hot and fast from the very start of the vaccination campaign. Two-thirds of VAERS reports are filed by members of the medical community—a fact that hasn't changed since the outset of the quasi-vaccine campaign began, though a substantial notoriety effect would skew toward reports filed by non-medical staff given that such staff would have been more likely to know about VAERS already. The result would be a dramatic change in the proportion of reports filed by medical staff, which we know did not take place. (I made this argument to Dr. David Gorski, but his only reply was a string of ad hominem.)
44:38 - Steve Kirsch: "There are about 14,000 Americans who have reported deaths [in VAERS]. Now, that's probably underreported by a factor of about 100. So, you take the 14,000 deaths reported in the VAERS system, and multiply it by 100, you get 1.4 million."
I've worked with Steve for 19 months now, though I'm concerned that he has chosen a path where he is taking advice from, and being influenced by, the wrong people. But that's only my suspicion because he disappeared almost completely from his own vaccine steering committee in which I take part. To my knowledge, almost nobody there has any idea who he spends his time communicating with. Had he ever mentioned working with Stew Peters on a documentary, I'd have put considerable energy into talking him out of it, and I suspect that others on the committee would have joined me.
After the Snake Venom fiasco, I'm utterly shocked that Steve would throw his weight into a Stew Peters documentary at all, but the mistakes only pile up from there. Steve's assertion that a 100x factor should be applied to the 14,000 deaths in VAERS is not well supported. Whenever Steve, Jessica Rose, and I discussed the underreporting factor (URF) in VAERS, I always made it a point to mention that AEs, SAEs, and deaths all likely have different URFs. The ballpark estimates that he and Jessica came up with last year were around 31 and 41, computed in different ways. And it's not exactly clear to me what proportion of the resulting number would be causal. I thought we were all pretty much on the same page about all of that.
In debates over the total number of vaccine-associated deaths, I've always kept a broad range open, perhaps 100k to 500k in the U.S., which is chilling already. Maybe I'm wrong, but the discussion needs to happen plainly. Steve usually said 500k deaths after he, Jessica, and I combined our work last year, so it baffles me to hear him jump to 1.4M. He talks about the deaths "five months laters", but he ignored me and others who said, "This appears to be seasonal and with a Simpson's paradox creating the appearance of a spike at around that time," but if he has arguments against that perspective, he hasn't shared them with me. The supposed five-month effect is likely the result of excess deaths in the oldest cohort hitting an inflection point, which was bound to happen after a period of mean-reversion where the least healthy elderly Americans died in much larger numbers in 2020.
Is Steve giving in to the temptation of replacing the plain realities of the data with shocking, or easily-canned-and-communicated statements?
Reminder: I was one of the first people in the world, if not the first, to formulate multiple approaches to estimating vaccine-associated mortality that loudly screamed "these vaccines appear to be killing people" (which could have been powerfully summarized in 60 seconds in such a documentary). So I'm clearly not saying this because I think these vaccines are safe and effective—I think they're unjustifiable, dangerous, and a tool of global warfare. But I'm extremely sad to see such sloppy work handed as ammunition to our adversaries.
Steve certainly did his detractors, and the detractors of the documentary, a huge favor, but I haven't even gotten to what most irritates me yet: the military health database story.
Partisan Manipulation Did Not Die Suddenly
I'm not a fan of political parties. I believe that to the extent that there is a Deep State that pulls strings to accomplish its goals—goals that seem to have aligned with those of the globalist class in general over the past century-and-then-some. I also believe that many of the policies that have eroded liberty in the U.S. (and elsewhere in the world) have been channeled through both of the primary American political parties. The process involves a combination of corruption and brainwashing of the public in part through a hypnotic Hegelian dialectic.
That is not to say that I reject wholesale everyone who uses a partisan label, or their politics. But I warn against framing the MFM in terms of partisan politics, or allowing partisan organizations to steer the ship.
Before going too much further, understand that while I've never leaned particularly further away from either major party, I publicly rooted for Republicans to take both houses of Congress in hopes that a policy counterweight to Executive power would slow the dreadful policy changes we've been witnessing at a faster pace these past few years. I've donated to just one political campaign over the past two decades, and that was the campaign of Republican candidate Dr. Brian Tyson because (1) my support is about the individual (not the party), and (2) sometimes (nearly always during my lifetime) gridlock is the necessary finger in the dike. I mention this to make clear that I'm not going after anyone for being or voting Republican.
Obviously Stew Peters is styled as a right-wing commentator whose audience leans heavily Republican. I wasn't going to talk about that initially, but it was brought to my attention that Lauren Witzke jumped into the ring. While she is not listed on Died Suddenly's IMDB page, the documentary is listed on her IMDB page along with the Stew Peters Show. She is the President and Producer of the Stew Peters Show.
Witzke was the Republican nominee for a Senate seat for Delaware in 2020. During that campaign, she reported on an unsubstantiated rumor that her opponent's underage daughter was on Hunter Biden's laptop (Salacious!). I doubt that rumor was true, but I'm not sure how I'd check. Maybe she has CIA ties that I don't?
She also goes on dates with double-vaxxed socialists and writes all about it (emphasis mine).
The problem with the modern-day socialist is that it is an idea pushed in America by the Godless Marxist American University Industrial Complex. You cannot claim to care about working-class families while working as a foot soldier for the same Godless Marxists who feminize men, extort workers, incentivize the breakdown of the nuclear family, and chemically castrate your kids.
Socialist policies can work, and will only work when you have a staunch conservative Christian in charge, a prime example being Hungary. Viktor Orban has served as the Prime Minister for Hungary since 2010. He entered into office facing one of the biggest problems that a nation could face: A drastically dropping birthrate.
It's interesting to see this young wing of the Republican Party pushing socialism. What else? The phrase "Godless Marxist American University Industrial Complex" is interesting. We'll come back to that.
Witzke claims that the documentary team never shared the (claimed) story of their swatting with anyone. I have a few thoughts…
Can you imagine the makers of such a shock documentary (shockumentary) not seeking both the social protection and also the attention such an event would draw?
She says "we didn't tell anyone" and "Nobody knew", but did she check with the documentary makers before making that statement? She may be setting herself up with real reputation risk here. If this story unfolds with public confirmation of my claim, she will be on record spinning a tale.
I suppose it is plausible that I was passed information about the swatting claim by somebody who obtained that information through intelligence insider high tech spycraft. If so, mea culpa. At least I made it clear that I was reporting hearsay (which anyone can choose to take how they like). But I doubt that my information came from the spymasters to me.
Here is Witzke taking credit via the Died Suddenly documentary for an article recently authored by Raymond Palmer.
Understand that while I disagree with Palmer's summary view, the claim that it is a response to the documentary is even more absurd given that Palmer's article was published nearly three months prior to the documentary.
I'm amusing myself wondering what sort of dirt the QAnon hivemind might dig up on me now that I've poked the nest. Will they reveal that for a few months during my 20s I illegally purchased and smoked an illicit plant (mostly as migraine remedy)? Are they going to dig up my wife's bioterrorism defense work (she worked on a prototype of a hospital decontamination spray device)? Will they take me down with some lie I told to get out of homework (that probably happened!) during grade school? Are they going to tell you that my textbooks are trash and contain coded signs of devil worship (just trying to be creative here)?
Questions About the Music
A commenter on my first article noted that the music used out the outset of Died Suddenly could offer an insight into the documentary makers. She put together an article about it.
GREAT analysis. But first: "Eerie psychedelic ambiance music segues into a barrage of conspiracy theory topics"...actually, this is PINK FLOYD! Animals, to be exact! So when Animals started playing, my first thought was, did they get permission or pay royalties for this music to be played in this inflammatory documentary? Why isn't Pink Floyd's record company all over their asses?
If the documentary makers DID get permission to use Pink Floyd...then...that actually makes me suspicious. So we are either dealing with hacks who have no clue that they can't just take music (especially from a major band like Pink Floyd) and put it in their documentary without permission...or...these clowns actually got a corporate stamp of approval on their music choice. Hm.
Beyond that...Stew Peters was a nobody prior to covid and then suddenly shot to fame with this slickly produced online TV show. Do I think he's "controlled opposition"? I think it's highly likely. Everything he puts out poisons the well. Either that, or he's a highly successful hack. Unfortunately, he is doing incredible damage to the credibility of the health freedom movement.
1:05:26 - Most of the last three minutes of the video is the start of the song Knights of Shame by the band AWOLNATION.
Here is the video that goes with the song, the whole of which is over 12 minutes in length. Warning: graphic sexuality and violence.
The song sounds so…upbeat…poppy. That's an adorable way to talk about THE WORLD ENDING, amirite?
If you didn't watch the video the whole way through, it ends with something like a fireball from space (coronal mass ejection?) wiping out humanity while the presumed heroes who partied to the end cheer it on.
Understand, I can handle a little throwback to 99 red balloons, a song I loved growing up that wrapped the angst of the Cold War up in a (alarmist? defeatist?) hit that you can dance to…wait a minute…
Back to Knights of Shame…let's take a look at the lyrics to best understand where we're being led.
Their power’s fear and it surrounds me
Their signs, you can see
One day we will wake the walking zombies
‘Til then we pray, ooh
Seems reasonable so far.
Drop your feet
I'm Duke Ellington
My mother said there'd be days like this
But one of the fires lit made her piss
Calling all zombies all up inside me
Transforming vampires right beside me
And you can't run
‘Cause you did, you'd be dead
And the walls can't roll from the side of my head
I beat the drool, my beats are cool
But here’s last kiss, all suckers they will cease to exist
I can't entertain what it'd be to be human
Lay waste to cities leave towns in ruin
Okay, so we're veering into "burn it all down" levels of defeatism a few verses in. But I'll defeat some of the lyrics as beautiful, while noting that's often the problem with decadent art.
And, yeah, it's no fun waiting for the fall
And there'll be no more waiting for you all
And there'll be one more chance for the truth
Without you, I would die
And, yeah, it's no fun waiting for the fall
And there'll be no more waiting for you all
And there'll be one more chance for the truth
Without you, I would die
Without you, I would die
Waiting on a heartbeat
Is anybody listening?
We’re waiting on a heartbeat
Can anybody hear me?
Clean this rock anthem up a bit and it could be one for the ages. It's a lot like the writings of men like Karl Marx in that regard—it contains numerous extremely important observations about what is going wrong in the world, but then spins out of control at the political level.
The next part is a surprise for those who stopped the song at the end of the video. That's because when the video ends, the song isn't over.
After some silence, the nearly-fifteen-minute track picks back up with a barely intelligible message of Marxist violence—not aimed merely at the corrupt, but at the wealthy in general.
We rob from the rich to blow down the door, oh
We rob from the rich and blow down the door
We rob from the rich and blow down the door
We rob from the rich to blow down the door
There are multiple reasons why this song might close out such a documentary. These include,
The makers of the documentary aren't the sorts who are all that good at interpreting a poem without Cliff's notes.
This is the punctuation of an insidious form of psychological warfare meant to stoke a portion of the target audience into Marxist violence.
It's for the lulz. They're laughing at the audience.
I haven't made up my mind, but I lean toward the first explanation. But it's the documentary telling us that this is a matter of fifth-generation warfare, so what do I know?
Since I would inevitably be challenged by some troll over my interpretation of AWOLNATION's lyrics, I'd like to point to another of their popular songs, Jump On My Shoulders from which those Marxist lyrics are apparently recycled verbatim.
I wonder if Lauren Witzke chose the music…
Let's Talk About the DMED (Again, Sigh)
Now, let's get to my biggest irritation with the documentary—or at least start the process.
Here is a quick guide to acronyms used in discussing the military health data.
Defense Medical Epidemiological Database (DMED)
Defense Medical Surveillance System (DMSS)
Medical Surveillance Monthly Reports (MSMR)
General Lloyd James Austin III (ASSHOLE)
While there is a slight distinction between the DMSS (identifiable data) and the DMED (de-identified data), I'm going to use DMED to refer to data from either since the quantities should be the same.
Now, before we move forward…
I'm beyond frustrated. Beyond angry. I'm pissed. I'm a pretty calm and relaxed guy most of the time, but I've been brought to pacing tensely through my house resisting the urge to grab my baseball bat and start swinging at fragile, inanimate objects.
For those who might have joined my substack more recently, I was the statistician asked by Dr. Robert Malone to sort out the conflicting stories between the whistleblowers and the DoD. My team spent more than a thousand hours working on the project. Perhaps 800 of those hours were mine, but with a caveat—I've likely spent nearly half those hours fighting misinformation, and trying to turn attention to a far more productive story of a specific source of any fraud that exists in the data. There is not yet a smoking gun for that fraud, but if any attorneys had committed to filing FOIAs, then going after the data contractor, we might know by now—and we might be on a more direct legal path toward shutting down the coercive experimental vaccination program in the military and elsewhere.
My gut feeling is that the results of my work on the DMED were suppressed by those in the MFM with big channels for one or both of the following purposes:
To set the stage for the use of the original DMED testimony presented at the Johnson hearing in January in propaganda materials (like fifth-generation warfare, ahem).
To protect the contractor that processes DMED data from immediate investigation. If they manipulated the DMED data, all records of that manipulation will be lost as the military is just now transitioning to a new health database system—and Senator Johnson only demanded that the contractor keep data from after the moment when I believe it was most likely that any data manipulation took place.
Does this sound serious?
Brook Jackson's suit against Pfizer involves the largest set of liabilities in the history of lawsuits. If the U.S. military is in danger of being crippled by the experimental genetic injections, that's an even larger effective liability. It could mean a change in the global world order—something that was likely coming, regardless, but also something that the American people (and soldiers themselves) might steer better than the military-banking complex.
If you want to understand as much of the DMED story as possible ahead of my next article, watch this video that I made in October.
DMED Exhibit A: Cancerous Sleight of Hand
When Died Suddenly veers into the story of the DMED data, the comedy of errors and misdirection begins. Is this intentional sleight of hand? You decide.
25:40 - Thomas Renz: "We saw almost 300% increase in cancer over the five-year average. Cancer is not being talked about except by Dr. Ryan Cole. Thank you doctor."
25:51 - Dr. Ryan Cole: "I was the first pathologist in the world to say, 'Guys, I'm seeing an uptick in cancers.' That toxic spike protein has so many mechanisms that allow cancers to wake up…"
The magic trick is the leap from a 300% increase to "an uptick", blurring the unqualified statements of Thomas Renz to the observations of the exceedingly competent pathologist (whose words do not support the extraordinary 300% claim). I haven't seen a single person point this out, which is to say that almost none of the audience was aware of the magic trick. (Though Michael Kane discussed it with me today in a CHD interview after I'd mentioned it to him.)
Was this scene arrangement accidental, or intentional?
In case you're wondering, here is cancer death data from Vermont (via my friend Aaron/ashmedai), the most-vaccinated state in the U.S., showing around a 6% uptick of cancer deaths in 2021 over a 5-year average.
There is a further, additional uptick in 2022. This is already alarming! But the data would look far, far worse if there were a 300% increase in (all neoplasms) cancer reports among any broad cohort.
Just how much apparent sleight of hand will we observe with respect to the DMED story when we dig into Died Suddenly, scene-by-scene?
Essentially all of it. I'll walk through my more total observations in the next article.
Debate is healthy, and the health of the medical freedom movement is probably dependent on its ability to discuss these issues openly. The more we beat on each other's ideas, the less likely we are to waste our time or fall prey to propaganda or conmen. Metal sharpens metal. Part of what defines the pandemic is the lack of transparency and open discourse.
As I neared the end of writing my first article, I noticed Colleen Huber's defense of Died Suddenly.
Huber calls out Malone's critique of Died Suddenly as "this unsubstantiated smear piece" and challenges him to a debate. I'm certain this won't reach the top of his priority list. But I offer to step in for a friendly debate with Colleen. Rounding the Earth is happy to broadcast it. In fact, Rounding the Earth is going to host a Roundtable discussion at 1 PM Eastern on Tuesday, December 13, livestreamed to Rumble and Rokfin (maybe elsewhere), to discuss Died Suddenly. I hereby invite any and all of the following people to participate. Please email me at firstname.lastname@example.org to RSVP.
Matthew Miller Skow
Any of the DMED whistleblowers
Thomas Renz or Leigh Dundas
A Midwestern Doctor (substack author)
Any of the embalmers (Richard Hirschman is welcome)
Dr. Ryan Cole
Dr. Susan Oliver
Dr. Eric Burnett
Dr. Paul Alexander
Dr. Karen Kingston
Mike Adams (who invited me on Brighteon)
Obviously it is not likely that everyone on this list will be interested in participating, or can meet the schedule, but hopefully we can bring together at least some productive discussion.
I would invite the Croatian stoner, but I worry that he might be the smartest person in the room and I don't want that to intimidate anyone. He also has no filter whatsoever, and I want to maintain a polite atmosphere, as always.
If there is anyone else who can convince me that they would have something productive to say on the topic of the documentary, I'm happy to consider them.
Edit: I accidentally said Witzke ran for Senate in Vermont, but she ran in Delaware. I had my wires crossed while looking at Vermont data.