Already well advanced - but Sasha is far harder to track than Jane, she hasn't been hunting every journalist she met all her life - it'll take a little while to finish it.
I recently subscribed to your substack and see that I have much to catch up on. Thank you!
I used to follow Jane. At the time, I questioned some of her claims, but what prompted me to stop following her was her near-constant habit of touching her hair. Now I wonder if that habit points to a deep-seated psychological issue.
Tried that for 4 years, it's not working - "wanting attention" is Jane's default functionality, but she does a lot of damages in the process to the Medical Freedom movement, like a few of her colleagues.
Plus as I alluded to in this article, I don't think it's organic - and the only way to expose these networks is in depth investigation.
When something is presented like a soap opera—laced with smug jabs, sloppy writing, and emotional bait—it doesn’t enlighten, it manipulates. It insults the intelligence of the reader and poisons the well for serious discourse. If you're genuinely exposing lies, you don't need theatrics and personal vendettas. You let the facts speak. But here, the loudest message isn’t truth—it’s ego. “Form your own opinion,” they say, right before shoving theirs down your throat with a sneer. That’s not journalism. That’s propaganda dressed up in gossip.
The journalism side was on the previous article - here as it didn't escape you, it was to laugh at the tactics of the enemy.
A bit like I laugh at your over-verbose pathetic attempts to pass for a valid thinker, with the help of your chat-bot and your psychology for IQs below room temperature 😌
Onward to a scathing expose' on dear Sasha !!
Already well advanced - but Sasha is far harder to track than Jane, she hasn't been hunting every journalist she met all her life - it'll take a little while to finish it.
Yes, the shadowy one isn't a domestic flavor, but we will be here when it is ready.
Please dig deeper. Jane Ruby has attacked many in the health freedom movement. Who is paying her to cause chaos?
I don't have the contacts to obtain Jane's bank accounts in the US - plus with her pharma experience, she'll know a few things about fiscal paradises.
But if you have a look to who recycled her when she escaped Indivior's lawsuits, "which networks controls her" isn't too difficult to guess.
I recently subscribed to your substack and see that I have much to catch up on. Thank you!
I used to follow Jane. At the time, I questioned some of her claims, but what prompted me to stop following her was her near-constant habit of touching her hair. Now I wonder if that habit points to a deep-seated psychological issue.
I hate to lack gallantry, but perhaps because her ‘hair’ is a wig, and as fake as the rest of her?
Thanks for your kind words, in any case.
A wig! I hadn’t considered that possibility. Yes, that could be the reason. It fits with the rest of her.
I’m eager to catch up via your substack.
Would it be possible just to ignore Jane. It seems she is wanting attention.
Tried that for 4 years, it's not working - "wanting attention" is Jane's default functionality, but she does a lot of damages in the process to the Medical Freedom movement, like a few of her colleagues.
Plus as I alluded to in this article, I don't think it's organic - and the only way to expose these networks is in depth investigation.
I understand the (noble) impulse, tho.
Not one person mentioned in this screed deserves a bit of attention.
Well, we have to give them a bit of attention, so that everyone knows why they should be avoided like plague.
When something is presented like a soap opera—laced with smug jabs, sloppy writing, and emotional bait—it doesn’t enlighten, it manipulates. It insults the intelligence of the reader and poisons the well for serious discourse. If you're genuinely exposing lies, you don't need theatrics and personal vendettas. You let the facts speak. But here, the loudest message isn’t truth—it’s ego. “Form your own opinion,” they say, right before shoving theirs down your throat with a sneer. That’s not journalism. That’s propaganda dressed up in gossip.
I appreciate your critics, GPT.
The journalism side was on the previous article - here as it didn't escape you, it was to laugh at the tactics of the enemy.
A bit like I laugh at your over-verbose pathetic attempts to pass for a valid thinker, with the help of your chat-bot and your psychology for IQs below room temperature 😌