Robert Malone is exercising his God-given, First Amendment protected speech again, bless his heart, with another Substack article, this one titled "Hate Ecosystem and Fifth Gen Warfare (Part IV)."
Wow. I'm really sorry I missed Parts I, II & III. Anyway, according to the subhead, this essay is meant to be "A case study of interactions between online hate and a fifth generation warfare campaign." As an aside to new readers, that's just Malone's playful way of generally describing journalism and commentary that he's, you know, a tad bit less-than-enthused about -- as it pertains, I should add, to his own public self. We certainly don't have to worry about this man’s Jeffersonian commitment to freedom of speech; it's only rarely -- hardly ever, even -- that he sues people for $25 million for using their God-given, First Amendment protected speech.
Scanning this “hate ecosystem” essay, it's hard not to notice a lot of "hate" out there. Just for starters, there's "online hate," "hate cult," "ecosystem of hate." Wait -- I can add a few giggles. There’s also "latest round of hate" -- drink -- "hundreds of pages of substack hate" -- drink -- "lies and hate" -- drink -- "hate cult" – he already used that one, but, ok -- drink. You see how much fun it can be to read Robert Malone? Given this laugh riot he has so considerately provided for one and all, and at his own expense, it pains me now to have to bring up, well, a boo-boo in his essay.
And then there was the Rogan Malone interview, followed by the amazing [sic] successful “Stop the Mandates” Lincoln Memorial protest. Which apparently triggered conservative columnist Diana West who injected the “he is controlled opposition” story line that has been subsequently amplified by a wide range of individuals including: [link in the original to my January 28, 2022 essay, “Dr. Robert Malone: A Risk Analysis”]
He goes on to list his "wide range of individuals" (about a dozen notables), throws in another "wide range of third and fourth tier mimics, trolls, and others who routinely mirror and amplify the lies and hate promoted by the above," and then sums up: "Quite literally, a hate cult."
That's the good doctor's opinion. I don't have to agree with it. I can reject it and argue against it, if I so choose, using any words, even crude and rude ones, if I so choose. I happen not to care enough to do so.
What I do care about is being misquoted. Malone has attributed to me a phrase in quotation marks that I did not write. I did not write, per Malone's quotations marks, "he is controlled opposition." Further, I don't recall writing that phrase about anyone. It is not only a cliche, it denotes some status that is unconfirmable, thus drawing a cartoonish line around what is often a complex and ephemeral manifestation of influence.
Weirdly enough, there is in all of this a flash of good old Yogi Berra's déjà-vu-all-over-again. Longtime readers may recall an effort inside the wider disinformation campaign of lies against my 2013 book American Betrayal (which I painstakingly catalogued and rebutted) to flatten and simplify my careful and carefully sourced analysis of Soviet influence on Washington, DC. One tactic was to append that same word, "controlled," to my argumentation. I didn't use it then, I didn't use it now.