Glenn Greenwald joins Russell Brand on the show to discuss whether or not the CDC lied to pregnant women about what they knew about the birth control pill, and why they should have told the truth about it. Plus, a look at the latest piece from the Daily Wire alleging that Vladimir Putin meddled in the 2016 election, and how we should deal with it in the future. Russell Brand is a comedian, writer, podcaster, and podcaster. His work has appeared in The New York Times, The New Yorker, and The Guardian, among other publications. His music has also been heard on Sirius XM and other radio stations. He is a regular contributor to The Daily Caller and The Daily Wire. He is the author of several books, including Conspiracy Theories, and has been featured on the BBC, NPR, and other media outlets. His new book, The Dark Side of the Truth, is out now, and is available for pre-order on Amazon Prime and Vimeo. If you haven t already checked out his work, you can do so here. It's free and will greatly help spread the word about it! Thank you so much to all of our supporters. We need your support now more than ever. We can t do this without you. We'll be looking out for you in 2020, and we'll see you next year, in the next episode of Stay Free with Russell Brand's new show, Stay Free With Russell Brand. Stay Free, on Monday, November 19th, at 7/21st, at 8/28/19th, @ 7/30/19/8/19, at 9/7/19 @ 7pm and 9/28, 8/9/19 9/8, 9/9, 7/8th, 7/9th, 8th, and 8/10, 8/6, 9th, 6/9ths, 5/8 6/7, 10/9 7 8 11/9rd, 6 10, 11, 13/8 , 8/7 5 12/8? 15/8 ? 13 14 16, 15, 16 17, 14, 3 & 7/6 And 7/5, And 6/6? 15
00:02:02.000Thank you for joining me for Stay Free with Russell Brand.
00:02:05.000We've got an incredible show for you today.
00:02:07.000We're going to be talking about whether or not the CDC lied to pregnant women, and we've got Glenn Greenwald on the show.
00:02:12.000Now, the first part of our stream will be available on YouTube, then will be exclusively available on Rumble.
00:02:20.000If you can support us there, it will be incredibly appreciated.
00:02:24.000Click the red button on your screen to support us directly.
00:02:27.000We need your support now more than ever.
00:02:30.000Now with something as complex as war it would be healthy, wouldn't it, to have a nuanced debate.
00:02:37.000It would be good to see at least two sides to the story of the benefits of an ongoing publicly funded war and whether or not it might be plausible, possible, desirable to reach a peaceful conclusion as soon as possible.
00:02:50.000Well that's less likely to happen now because the Republicans are also for pursuing and perpetuating This war and not investigating the possibility for peace.
00:04:32.000How shall we destabilize that process?
00:04:35.000Well, Hillary Clinton warns that Putin is going to try and meddle with the 2024 election in spite of them having lost 50% of their armed forces.
00:04:43.000According to a recent advertisement, they can still meddle in domestic American elections.
00:04:48.000Vladimir Putin has obviously, your friend and mine, he has intervened in our election in the past.
00:04:55.000It's not something... Firstly, it's extraordinary to see Jen Psaki, whose former role was advocating for, I think, exactly the type of policies that are now wreaking havoc upon the globe.
00:05:08.000being posited as a neutral voice within media. And secondly, I don't think there's any evidence
00:05:16.000at all that Putin meddled with the last election. In fact, I believe that Russiagate is now
00:05:22.000widely regarded as a hoax which delegitimised even the Democrats' claims that Trump was
00:05:29.000denying the results of the last election.
00:05:33.000It's extraordinary the way that this machine operates, the way that it functions.
00:05:37.000People just plainly telling you things that are not true.
00:05:41.000And remember, we've just seen a piece of propaganda that tells you whoever you vote for, you're going to be voting for perpetuating war.
00:05:48.000Now you're being told That Putin meddled in another election when there's some evidence, I'm talking about the Steele dossier, that that's precisely the opposite of true, false.
00:05:57.000And now we're going to hear that the 2024 elections are also delegitimized.
00:06:23.000Uh, there's any doubt that he interfered in our election, or that he has interfered in many ways in, uh, the, uh, internal affairs of other countries, funding political parties, funding, you know, political candidates, uh...
00:06:39.000If we're talking about funding political candidates from the opposition party in order to create a bogus election dynamic, the Democrats literally did that a couple of years ago.
00:06:50.000The elasticity ...of truth these days is outrageous.
00:06:56.000As we try to hold together a plainly fragmented society where some people just will never trust the Democrats again, where some people are never going to trust Trump, the pretence that there can ever be a kind of unified America or a unified public narrative where people are going to go, oh we know that Putin meddles in elections, we know that the Democrats would never do anything of that nature, that public space doesn't exist anymore.
00:07:18.000It's almost like the function of media is to present to us a kind of version of a unified public sphere.
00:07:28.000Remember reality where Putin did that?
00:07:30.000Remember this reality where the war is entirely necessary?
00:07:33.000Remember the reality where we can trust the legacy media?
00:07:36.000All of those things are now just debris.
00:07:39.000No one has any trust in the political system.
00:07:42.000No one has any trust in the mainstream media.
00:07:44.000No one has any belief that the people that are in positions of power now are the people that are going to bring about resolutions to the myriad set of crises that the world faces.
00:07:55.000And the fact that it's just discussed in this sort of over-a-cup-of-coffee, genteel and presumably verified way Points to the theatrics of the entire thing.
00:08:05.000Buying off, you know, government officials in different places.
00:08:09.000So that is his opus, you know, his opus operandi in the sense that he hates democracy.
00:08:18.000He particularly hates the West and he especially hates us.
00:08:22.000That is the kind of Saddam Hussein rhetoric that we went through on the build-up to the Iraq war.
00:08:33.000Can you imagine how complicated and difficult that is?
00:08:36.000This peculiar nexus of concerns and priorities and challenges.
00:08:41.000They don't have time to just Hate the abstract concept of freedom.
00:08:45.000That is the rhetoric that's used by people that are not interested in freedom at all.
00:08:50.000Reductive, simplistic, childish, lacking in nuance.
00:08:54.000Where is the conversation about whether or not the perpetuation of this war is beneficial?
00:08:59.000Where is the conversation about whether new models of democracy have to be explored?
00:09:04.000Where's the conversation about the reliability of media?
00:09:06.000Where's the conversation about the porous relationship between media and the state as demonstrated by this conversation and the Clinton Global Initiative?
00:09:15.000I bet if you looked into that for more than half an hour you would discover All sorts of peculiar funding.
00:09:21.000Certainly if it's anything like the Clinton Foundation, there'll be funding from Military Industrial Complex, from Big Pharma.
00:09:26.000These kind of initiatives and conversations being presented as neutral, when in fact they're the most malign propaganda, is a significant part of what's wrong.
00:09:35.000And he has determined that he can do two things simultaneously.
00:09:41.000He can try to continue to damage and divide us internally, and he's quite good at it.
00:09:48.000And sadly, he has a lot of apologists and enablers.
00:09:55.000An apologist and an enabler in this instance means people that don't just directly consume propaganda without questioning.
00:10:14.000Well that discernment is now labeled being an enabler or an apologist.
00:10:19.000There are degrees and nuances and complexities to talking about something like the relationship between the United States of America and Russia, the nature of propaganda, degrees of propaganda, the ability to have perhaps a democracy that doesn't need to be continually engaged in war to sustain its economic models and its true powerhouses, specifically the military-industrial complex.
00:10:40.000To raise those topics of conversation does not make you an apologist for Vladimir Putin.
00:10:45.000In fact, the people that are truly apologizing for Vladimir Putin Are American state interests themselves because they cannot use the International Criminal Court to persecute Russia for their criminal if provoked invasion because if they were to evoke those edicts they themselves would be indicted under its terms because of the numerous criminal invasions that they have engaged in.
00:11:07.000The ongoing bombing of Syria Iraq, Afghanistan. So simply this kind of slightly banal,
00:11:14.000gentle fog of easy language is toxic, noxious and designed to distract and dumb you.
00:11:22.000In our own country, people who either don't see the danger or dismiss it out of hand or
00:11:28.000maybe agree with some of the positions he's taken on certain things, including his barbaric
00:11:41.000How many conversations do you have to have with Glenn Greenwald?
00:11:43.000How many times do you have to listen to Jeffrey Sachs or Aaron Maté to identify and discern that that statement is so lacking in complexity as to amount to an absolute lie?
00:11:54.000The 2014 coup, NATO infringement on their territories, military industrial complex objectives, Nord Stream pipeline, so many!
00:12:05.000That's the evidence of the lies right there because you wouldn't say that if you were telling the truth.
00:12:11.000You'd say obviously we've provoked Russia in numerous ways and in fact why do you even need NATO at this point in history?
00:12:19.000And geopolitics is complicated and We're going to have to accept that there are going to be numerous people at the table if you're going to have a sensible conversation about how the world is run in 2023 as we continue to evolve, as we start to accommodate and incorporate new technologies.
00:12:31.000New dissenting voices have to be listened to if we're going to have anything like a judicious and fair and open society, which is what we claim to support.
00:12:37.000Of course those conversations can't happen and people that push for those kind of conversations will be one way or another maligned and dispatched and legislation will be introduced like the new legislation in my country, the UK, where on the new online safety bill which amounts to just a huge new censorship power that prevents dissenting voices from being heard.
00:12:58.000We are truly living in extraordinary times and sometimes I do think there are black and white good versus evil dynamics going on but certainly not in the way that the legacy media reports.
00:13:34.000Don't look out of your window though, don't look online, don't ask any questions, because you're going to see a very different reality.
00:13:41.000...has proved themselves to be quite adept at interfering and if he has a chance he'll do it again.
00:13:48.000So there you go, there's one version of reality that I'm not entirely comfortable with.
00:13:53.000Let's have a look at another stream of propaganda that apparently presents questions that are difficult to Ask and even more difficult to answer.
00:14:03.000You will perhaps recall that at the height of the pandemic one of the greatest concerns about proposed medications was whether or not they had been tested on breastfeeding or pregnant women because one might imagine that pregnant and breastfeeding women are not ...particularly likely to put themselves forward to clinical trial.
00:14:22.000Although, in many cases, eight or nine mice will usually suffice.
00:14:26.000I don't know if these mice were pregnant mice or not.
00:14:29.000So, did the US government and CDC have enough scientific evidence before recommending mRNA vaccines to pregnant and breastfeeding women?
00:15:06.000Now during the pandemic and at its height many people were questioning the efficacy of vaccines and the plausibility of them being safe for breastfeeding and indeed pregnant women because how would you ever accurately clinically trial that?
00:15:19.000Now at the time it was very difficult to have those conversations because of online censorship of true information.
00:15:25.000Because of experts who had concerns and questions being censored, shut down, de-platformed, Ignored.
00:15:31.000Extraordinary things went on during that period.
00:15:37.000Now new evidence has emerged that suggests that we were right to have those lines of inquiry.
00:15:43.000Let's have a look at the story now with a little more detail and see whether or not due process was undertaken by the CDC and American government before recommending mRNA vaccines and whether or not Facebook did indeed censor Today the CDC urged all pregnant women to get vaccinated.
00:16:01.000Tonight there's new guidance, the strongest yet, from the CDC urging women who are pregnant or plan to become pregnant to get the vaccine.
00:16:09.000Some official recommendations from the CDC.
00:16:12.000A continuation because last week we heard the Society of Maternal Fetal Medicine and ACOG issue their strong recommendations.
00:16:18.000Now we're hearing from the CDC about the importance of this vulnerable population recommending vaccination.
00:16:31.000It is crystal clear why we're hearing all our professional organizations recommend imploring women in all three trimesters who are considering being pregnant or breastfeeding get vaccinated.
00:16:47.000Concerted effort to convey one particular message without dissent, without inquiry, and propose it as science or fact.
00:16:56.000Let's have a look at some additional information that might help us to review the level of certainty and confidence we just witnessed from the legacy media.
00:17:03.000It is safe for pregnant and breastfeeding women to get vaccinated against COVID-19 according to the Centers for Disease Control.
00:17:09.000In fact, according to the CDC, vaccination during pregnancy benefits the baby and reports have shown that breastfeeding people who have received mRNA COVID-19 vaccines have antibodies in their breast milk which could help protect their babies.
00:17:23.000So not only is it not dangerous, it's actually beneficial with the vaccine trickling down through the generations like economic opportunity in an indefatigable capitalist system.
00:17:34.000The American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology repeatedly urged pregnant and breastfeeding women to get vaccinated.
00:17:40.000There was no reason to worry, experts said, because injected mRNA stays in the arm and does not travel around the body.
00:17:47.000Oh dear, doesn't find its way to the heart at all?
00:17:49.000It is unlikely that the vaccine lipid would enter the bloodstream and reach breast tissue, the Academy of Breastfeeding Medicine assured mothers in a statement on the 14th of December 2020.
00:17:58.000If it does, it's even less likely that either the intact nanoparticle or mRNA transfer into
00:18:05.000But now a pivotal new study reveals that this was always a lie.
00:18:09.000Isn't it curious how sometimes your intuition, your memory, and your perception and understanding
00:18:14.000of reality had already kind of informed you that there would be risks when a novel, to
00:18:20.000some degree experimental, type of vaccine was being used across a population, that there
00:18:24.000would be perhaps additional complexity when it came to breastfeeding mothers or pregnant
00:18:29.000women that perhaps required further scrutiny?
00:18:32.000In the same way that we've subsequently learned that conversations around natural immunity were repressed or vitamin B or potential resolutions and solutions to COVID-19 that did not follow the prescribed course We now know that some of those conversations were pressed and were controlled.
00:18:47.000Now it seems that this, one of the most sensitive aspects, one of the areas where the vulnerability is much more costly, is also being reviewed.
00:18:54.000The study, Biodistribution of mRNA Covid-19 Vaccines in Human Breast Milk, found that trace amounts of mRNA were detected in 10 out of 13 lactating women in a 45 hour period after vaccination.
00:19:06.000Our findings demonstrate that the COVID-19 vaccine mRNA is not confined to the injection site, but spreads systematically, the authors wrote.
00:19:14.000The study confirms previous results published in the Journal of the American Medical Association Pediatrics last year.
00:19:21.000The 2022 paper, Detection of Messenger RNA COVID-19 Vaccines in Human Breast Milk, found trace mRNA amounts in seven samples from 11 lactating women.
00:19:30.000Crucially, the new Lancet study concedes that mRNA vaccines do not stay in the arm.
00:19:36.000Initially, it was thought that the vaccine mRNA encapsulated in the NLP's lipid nanoparticles would remain localised at the injection site and quickly degrade, write the authors.
00:19:46.000However, several reports suggest that the NLP's mRNA can enter the bloodstream and accumulate in distant tissues.
00:19:54.000The authors further explain how vaccine mRNA is carried to mammary glands.
00:19:58.000For lactating mothers receiving the vaccine, our results suggest that the vaccine NLPs will reach the breast tissue, they write.
00:20:04.000Despite being excluded from the main vaccine trials, many pregnant and breastfeeding women were mandated to get vaccinated in accordance with CDC guidance.
00:20:14.000Does it not seem extraordinary to you that CDC guidance, as well as the media parroting this consistent message, did not have access to, and indeed the trials were not even undertaken, that could demonstrate the possible dangers or inconsistencies with that messaging?
00:20:30.000Does it not seem troubling to you that at that time, just a few short years ago, conversation was literally closed down?
00:20:37.000That there was uniform messaging, both in legacy media and on certain social media sites, where censorship was routinely undertaken?
00:20:44.000Where deep state officials with direct contacts to some of these agencies were willing to censor, control, shut down and purge true information simply because it was inconvenient?
00:20:54.000Does this single story not demonstrate the necessity of absolutely questioning this type of information?
00:21:00.000The obvious intention to cleanse, control and dominate the media space in order to prevent reasonable conversations from taking place?
00:21:08.000Experts with valid opinions being heard?
00:21:14.000And what we're talking about now, symbolically, significantly, are mothers.
00:21:18.000The symbol, really, of the continuation of our species, the, in a sense, epicentre of many of our value systems.
00:21:25.000It seems casually unconscious that such a thing would be disregarded in this manner, but not at all surprising when we look at how the media has behaved regarding this issue and many others.
00:21:35.000The Lancet study demonstrates just how irresponsible and reckless the CDC's recommendations were.
00:21:41.000CDC encourages all pregnant people or people who are thinking about becoming pregnant and those breastfeeding to get vaccinated to protect themselves from COVID-19, said former CDC director Dr. Rochelle Walensky in August 2021.
00:21:53.000Walensky made a recommendation based not on science but on faith alone.
00:21:57.000Oh my god, that's so extraordinary, isn't it?
00:21:59.000When you think how malign and neglected faith is, when you think how God or a belief in values and principles is regarded as sort of some kind of hokey crap-pot superstition, and faith-based decisions were being made on the basis, or pretense at least, of science.
00:22:11.000Continually people just chatting to their mates, what are you gonna do?
00:22:18.000And she's like, okay, neither are we, neither are we.
00:22:19.000Science just operated, I believe, for much of this period as a kind of new orthodoxy to shut down opposition, It functioned in the same way that a medieval use of theology might have done.
00:22:32.000If you question this, you are a heretic.
00:22:34.000If you oppose these views, there's something morally wrong with you.
00:22:37.000It just seems astonishing to me that this information continues to leak out like breast milk.
00:22:43.000At that time, Pfizer and Moderna had not completed trials on pregnant women.
00:22:46.000Behind the scenes in 2021, reports journalist Marianne De Marcy, Pfizer was scrambling to conduct a clinical trial of its vaccine in pregnant women.
00:22:54.000To this day, Pfizer data on pregnant and breastfeeding women is still incomplete and has yet to appear in a peer-reviewed journal or pre-print and has not been submitted to the FDA for evaluation.
00:23:04.000Moderna's trial is also ongoing and the company has not released its data.
00:23:08.000So as of today, there is no clinical trial data available.
00:23:12.000So what was this we were watching on the mainstream news?
00:23:29.000It was essentially wishful thinking, authoritarianism, preferences, politicised.
00:23:34.000It was at odds with science at almost every step.
00:23:37.000And the people that questioned that were regarded as kind of crackpots, heretics and, as you know, conspiracy theorists.
00:23:43.000Demarcy reports that Pfizer's trial had major design flaws that would corrupt the data.
00:23:47.000Peculiarly, notes Demarcy, Pfizer planned to vaccinate all the mothers in the placebo group one month after giving birth to their babies, effectively getting rid of their control group.
00:23:57.000Well, that doesn't seem very controlled.
00:24:40.000Also, we're not sure what happened to JFK yet, but this bullet sure got around.
00:24:44.000Proponents of vaccine mandates may argue that none of this matters because there have not been adverse events in breastfeeding children.
00:24:51.000But one of Pfizer's own post-marketing surveillance reports contradicts this assertion.
00:24:56.000Due to legal action, the FDA was forced to release the report last year.
00:24:59.000It showed that in 133 cases of breastfeeding babies tracked down by the company, 17 experienced clinical adverse events, and 3 of these events were reported to be serious.
00:25:09.000So, that's some more information that challenges the Legacy Media narrative.
00:25:13.000Another Pfizer document released by the FDA under court order found that there were 215 cases of exposure via breast milk, maternal exposure during breastfeeding reported to Pfizer's voluntary pharmacovigilance database.
00:25:38.000Because there is no precise or conclusive information being offered, because conversation keeps being shut down, dissenting voices keep being censored, legitimate experts who are offering alternative views are being shut down, silenced, shadow banned, whatever resources are available.
00:25:54.000That does not inspire a great deal of confidence, does it?
00:25:57.000Millions of women were compelled to get multiple doses of the mRNA vaccines under threat of losing their jobs, and in some cities like San Francisco, Los Angeles, Chicago and New York City, being excluded from public life through vaccine passports.
00:26:09.000Other women who willingly got vaccinated were told they would have no effect on pregnancy and breastfeeding, but experts did not actually have the data to assert this was the case, and they still don't have it.
00:26:18.000Mandating pregnant and breastfeeding women to take an experimental medical product that had not completed clinical trials in their cohort undermined the bedrock principle of medical ethics, informed consent.
00:26:28.000Now, we can't continue to bring you this content without your support and without the support of our sponsors.
00:26:34.000We are so grateful for your ongoing support.
00:26:37.000And we're grateful to the support of our sponsors.
00:26:39.000Now, do you know that the IRS October 15th tax deadline is right around the corner?
00:26:44.000So if you're scrambling, thinking about those estimated payments, expense write-offs and messy deductions, I've got a recommendation for you from our commercial partners, the attorneys at Tax Network USA.
00:26:55.000They've been absolute lifesavers for many, and their team has successfully saved clients over $1 billion in tax So whether you're in the hole for $10,000 or staring at a $10 million debt, they're ready to help you.
00:27:08.000Even if you haven't filed in one, five years, or even an entire decade, they're equipped to secure the best settlement for you.
00:27:15.000So before the tax clock runs out, give taxnetworkusa.com forward slash brand a shout.
00:27:20.000Okay, let's get back to this complicated story.
00:27:23.000The disregard for informed consent was not exclusive to mothers.
00:27:26.000It affected all women of childbearing age because regulators, doctors and officials were equally dismissive of women's concerns about menstruation.
00:27:34.000In 2021, many women noticed changes in their menstrual cycles after getting vaccinated, but health experts claimed that vaccines were not responsible.
00:27:41.000In May 2021, Dr. Paula Hillard, a pediatric and adolescent gynecologist of Stanford Children's Health, told the San Francisco Chronicle that it was biologically impossible for the vaccine to impact menstrual cycles.
00:27:52.000The virus, she claimed, was far more likely to change women's cycles.
00:27:55.000I've noticed many times that coronavirus conveniently appears to offer up the symptoms and effects that a potentially malign vaccine ought to offer up.
00:28:06.000It's myocarditis, and it makes your breast milk taste the chemicals.
00:28:09.000So far, there's no data linking the vaccines to changes in menstruation.
00:28:13.000It does seem, based on the certainty of the mainstream media, when it was relevant to encourage people to get vaccines, that there's potentially a bit of an agenda here, and certainly some questions that appear to require answering.
00:29:07.000We would prefer that it didn't affect breastfeeding women, so it doesn't.
00:29:10.000We would prefer it didn't affect menstruation, so it doesn't.
00:29:13.000We would prefer that there wasn't any debate, let alone clinical trials, to oppose this agenda, so there aren't going to be any.
00:29:19.000Experts and once reputable institutions made reassurances about menstruation with zero clinical data at hand, shredding their credibility as scientific authorities.
00:29:27.000and when women first raised concerns about noticeable side effects, they were gaslit,
00:29:31.000ignored and censored. The link between the mRNA vaccines and menstrual changes or fertility
00:29:35.000has yet to be thoroughly investigated. This question remains relevant as the FDA and CDC
00:29:40.000recommend another new Covid shot this fall, especially since this boost has been approved
00:29:44.000without thorough human clinical trials. They're still doing it. Nevertheless,
00:29:47.000the self-proclaimed advocates for women's health and women's bodily autonomy are conspicuously
00:29:51.000absent from the conversation. It seems that as long as big pharma and legacy media are able to
00:29:57.000effectively control the conversation, there can be no dissent, there can be no opposition,
00:30:02.000there can be no reasonable conversation in a territory and area where you would imagine that
00:30:06.000ordinarily there would be outcry and outrage about the protection of vulnerable people. And indeed,
00:30:11.000who isn't vulnerable when it comes to a potentially intoxicating and, according to this,
00:30:17.000The Lancet breast milk study highlights the major flaws of the Covid-19 vaccine rollout and the ensuing mandates.
00:30:23.000Government officials, esteemed medical organisations, doctors from prestigious universities and experienced journalists told pregnant and nursing women that they should all get vaccinated and that there was no cause for worry.
00:30:34.000Only malign disinformation agents, they said, would suggest that there could be any problem.
00:30:41.000Those two terms are becoming the same.
00:30:43.000Legislation is being passed to make it impossible to discern the difference between misinformation, malinformation, and just opposing views and dissent.
00:31:00.000We can't have a conversation about how we found ourselves supporting a proxy war between Russia and Ukraine and whether or not there were opportunities of peace that have been passed up.
00:31:07.000All of this is regarded as enabling or apologising.
00:31:18.000And simple and obvious basic questions about whether or not there are reliable clinical trials will cause you to be called a conspiracy theorist when under ordinary circumstances a lack of clinical evidence to support breastfeeding mothers or be taking a medicine will be regarded as a significant piece of information.
00:31:33.000Fact checkers insisted that breast milk from vaccinated mothers was safe and that breastfeeding newborns never had reactions to the vaccines through their mothers.
00:31:41.000Even now, Facebook labels claims that breast milk from vaccinated people is harmful to babies, children as misinformation and the company continues to remove such claims on the basis that they discourage good health practices.
00:31:53.000This seems to me to be an extraordinary degree of cooperation in an area where inquiry, expertise, scientific trials, questioning and integrity would be very, very welcome.
00:32:06.000The sweeping censorship on social media often prevented people from discussing the adverse events they experienced after vaccination, as Facebook in particular removed such discussions.
00:32:15.000Without the ability to hear about and openly discuss side effects, many people get vaccinated without true informed consent, which is only possible when patients know the actual risks and benefits of a product.
00:32:24.000The Lancet study did not reveal evidence of severe harm to mothers or infants.
00:32:28.000It's possible that many breastfeeding women would still choose to get vaccinated, even knowing the results of the study.
00:32:34.000But those women had a right to know before getting vaccinated, not after.
00:32:37.000The CDC, the FDA, and the media actively misled these women, and there have been no repercussions, resignations, or apologies.
00:32:44.000Making scientific errors may be understandable, but the attempt to manipulate, deceive, and gaslight is not.
00:32:49.000The effort to convince pregnant and nursing women to get vaccinated was a well-orchestrated disinformation campaign.
00:32:54.000That it was paired with a government-sponsored censorship program makes it all the more Inexcusable.
00:32:59.000For a moment, just hold in your mind the certainty of those legacy media reports.
00:33:05.000And then align that with new, emergent information about a lack of study.
00:33:10.000The media, in conjunction with the state, in conjunction with Big Pharma, their biggest advertisers, were willing to convey a message that they just hoped was true and prevented opposing or dissenting voices from being in the conversation.
00:33:23.000Some social media sites, notably Facebook, continue to censor true information simply because it's inconvenient to that narrative.
00:33:31.000This appears to be the media landscape, the state landscape, the corporate landscape within which we continue to exist.
00:33:40.000How can that be called liberty or freedom?
00:33:42.000How can that be regarded as judicious and open?
00:33:44.000How can that information be so brightly and casually conveyed when there's clearly not only a conversation to be had, but clinical trials to be undertaken?
00:33:52.000How can we have any trust in these government agencies, in this legacy media, when it makes claims like these, which are still absolutely unproven?
00:34:11.000Another story where it seems that a little circumspection and analysis might have been helpful before blithely believing in what was called science but in retrospect looks more like orthodoxy and an attempt to profit and control.
00:35:00.000Thank you very much for offering me that opportunity.
00:35:04.000I wonder, to start Glenn, what your views are on the potential for the establishment to cooperate and collaborate when it comes to the stigmatisation and outlawing of dissenting voices.
00:35:17.000Is that something that's possible, plausible?
00:35:19.000Is it something that definitely happens?
00:35:21.000Is it something that in particular in your career as a journalist you've witnessed and experienced and can you give us examples of how that has happened if indeed you believe it does?
00:35:32.000I think the systemic attempt to stigmatize dissent, to outlaw it, to suppress it, has become, for me at least, the leading issue on which I most focus, because I think it's the most threatening one, I think it's the most significant one.
00:35:49.000I've been thinking about this a lot in terms of the work I did, but your reference of the
00:35:54.000start with Edward Snowden and Laura Poitras and the Guardian in 2013, where the story
00:35:59.000was essentially that the internet, which was this innovation that had the potential to
00:36:04.000be uniquely liberatory and emancipating.
00:36:07.000And the idea was we were going to be able to organize and communicate with one another
00:36:11.000freely without the interference of state and corporate authorities controlling and monitoring
00:36:18.000what we're doing, had instead been degraded into the exact opposite, namely this technological
00:36:24.000machine that permitted a level of surveillance and monitoring and spying that had been previously
00:36:31.000I remember during the reporting that we did, When we revealed a lot of the capabilities, not just the ones that were imagined aspirationally, but the ones that had been in fact achieved by the NSA and its partners in the UK, Australia, New Zealand and Canada in
00:36:46.000Very concrete ways that former members of the Stasi, the notorious East German spy agency, were expressing envy.
00:36:55.000Wow, this is something we only dreamed of, this level of ubiquitous surveillance, but only with the internet is it now really possible, not just to open the mail of, say, one out of every five people, 20%, but to store every email and have the ability to watch it and analyze and monitor it.
00:37:11.000And the reason that story resonated so much, the reason it was so significant, was because it reflected this successful attempt to take the internet and to turn it into the opposite of what it was supposed to be, from this liberatory technology into the greatest source of monitoring and coercion and control and surveillance ever created in history.
00:37:32.000And I think what you're seeing, especially after 2016 with the dual traumas of Brexit and then the election of Donald Trump at Hillary Clinton's expense, Was the conclusion on the part of the Western elite class that it wasn't just enough to use the internet any longer to mass surveil everybody, but that what was too dangerous was to allow free expression to flourish on the internet, that we couldn't afford any longer to allow people
00:38:00.000to communicate freely to speak their mind to challenge authority because that was too dangerous and they've said this explicitly you know they obviously don't admit they have malignant motives they'll say things like what ends up happening is that disinformation circulates and that's really dangerous by which of course they mean any views that deviate from their official decrees they leave there's a whole well-financed industry now to label that disinformation And not only do we have to alert people to its dangers, but we have to act to remove it from the internet, to censor it, to suppress it, to demand that big tech platforms remove it and that they now become punished in the event that they fail to censor in accordance with our wishes.
00:38:42.000That's The purpose of this new law in the UK, the Online Safety Act, which is essentially designed to say if big tech companies or tech platforms don't remove material we regard as dangerous, we meaning Western elites, they will be found to be in violation of the law and to be in all sorts of ways guilty of huge fines, liable for huge fines, and even criminal offenses.
00:39:04.000And all of this is about, of course, dissent is always something that power centers seek to stigmatize.
00:39:11.000If you're a dissident, you're going to be attacked, you're going to be maligned.
00:39:13.000What we're seeing though now is something way beyond that, which is a formalized attempt to ensure that dissent is Formerly banned from the internet.
00:39:22.000I remember the first time it was really tried on like a, in a concrete way, was the collusive depersonating of Milo Yiannopoulos and Alex Jones by Facebook and Google and all the internet giants.
00:39:34.000And some people at the time stood up and said, this is really dangerous.
00:39:38.000If we're going to start with Milo Yiannopoulos and Alex Jones, very shortly, it's going to move to other people.
00:39:43.000But most people weren't willing to defend Milo Yiannopoulos and Alex Jones.
00:39:46.000They purposely selected people most kind of alienating.
00:39:49.000And this system was allowed to take hold and now of course it's expanded well beyond those people and we're constantly seeing even senators and members of Congress having their videos removed or having their speech curtailed on the grounds that what they're saying is not permitted.
00:40:04.000And we have this censorship regime now, this whole industry that has been financed in order to justify it and now government attempts to codify it in law.
00:40:13.000That really is about policing and controlling speech on the internet in a way that I think is incomparably dangerous.
00:40:20.000It seems that what's required is an evolving set of systems and principles that might be enshrined in law, that reflect these new capacities and their dangers, and yet what's actually happening is the reverse of that.
00:40:34.000The unraveling of presumed ideas within judiciary, presumed processes that necessarily protect people from being unpersoned, It seems that the momentum is in exactly the opposite direction.
00:40:50.000You've already mentioned the UK Online Safety Act and the previous events and the brilliant examples that you gave of people that have previously been silenced and shut down.
00:41:01.000I remember thinking in earlier incarnations of mass media, print and television, That it was astonishing the capacity that they had to form public opinion, direct public opinion, to generally speaking get people to, as the famous saying goes, vote against their own interests.
00:41:20.000Now we have this sort of almost chrome sphere.
00:41:24.000that can entirely encapsulate a human's attention, can measure, manage, manipulate and direct
00:41:31.000attention and opinion in ways that are unprecedented, it seems that what's required is the
00:41:37.000opposite of what's happening. How can independent media voices even continue to exist in such a
00:41:46.000Isn't it likely that we're just going to see more and more erosion of voices that exist in that space?
00:41:54.000And that with something like the Online Safety Act, It's not even just individuals but potentially entire platforms that might find themselves unable to operate.
00:42:04.000Both of us work on Rumble and Rumble certainly receives a particular kind of assessment and attention within mainstream media circles.
00:42:13.000I wonder what you think The threats are to platforms that are unwilling to abide by and with this type of legislation and how this tendency is likely to increase unless there is opposition and eventually in the form of legislation.
00:42:32.000I think the ability to maintain, preserve, and fortify independent media is the single greatest challenge.
00:42:38.000This is the battle, the war, that I think is paramount in terms of whether we have basic liberties going forward.
00:42:46.000And by basic liberties, I mean the ability to contest Official propaganda that is constantly rained down upon us and bombarding entire populations using the internet.
00:42:58.000This is the entire point of the battle that we are currently undertaking, which is, it is so ironic, and obviously we've been doing a lot of reporting on your case, Russell, but not just your case in terms of the importance of due process and the refusal to believe accusations.
00:43:14.000that are currently nothing more than just assertions by anonymous people in the media
00:43:19.000who haven't even gone to the police. And even if they do go to the police and there's eventually
00:43:23.000charges, we're supposed to understand that charges are just allegations and we don't assume the
00:43:27.000person is guilty until actual evidence is presented in a fair judicial proceeding. And
00:43:34.000there's a finding of filter innocence one way or the other.
00:43:37.000This is something so important to battle for. And obviously, you've been advocating that a great
00:43:41.000deal, not just in your defense, but in defense of the principle itself that protects all of us.
00:43:46.000But I think even the more disturbing part of this has been that
00:43:50.000As you know, Rumble has, in this case, basically very flamboyantly expressed its defiance to attempts by these absurd people in the British government to Use and abuse their power, including threats of the Online Safety Act, to ban Rumble from the UK, to subject its executives to arrest if they try and enter the UK, things that have appeared in the British media, obviously as intimidations and threats, all to punish Rumble and make an example of it by essentially saying that if you're a platform that doesn't bow down to and obey
00:44:28.000the commands of this censorship regime, we're going to destroy you.
00:44:32.000We will not just destroy your reputation, but we will also use legal power now
00:44:39.000to prevent you from being in our country.
00:44:41.000Rumble, as you might know, is unavailable in France because the French government ordered Rumble to cease
00:44:49.000providing a platform to Russian media.
00:44:51.000And Rumble's view was, if we have adults who use our platform,
00:44:56.000who want to hear what RT and other Russian media is saying, we're not going to take orders from the French government
00:45:01.000about who we are allowed to air and who we're not allowed to air.
00:45:05.000And as a result, Rumble is unavailable in France because France was threatening to cut Rumble off at the IP level.
00:45:10.000So essentially saying, you either obey our censorship commands as a state about who you can allow to be heard and who you're not, or we will ban Your platform, we will control the internet more aggressively than the Chinese do to ensure that views that we find threatening can never be heard.
00:45:26.000That's what this battle is ultimately about.
00:45:29.000And I think the point that is so critical is, you know, the minute rumble in this case defied these censorship orders and issued this statement.
00:45:38.000about this baroness who sits on this committee saying we're not going to obey your commands to demonetize a creator based solely on unproven accusations and we're not going to take orders from you about what information we have to turn over and we're not going to sit in judgment of our creators and the behavior they supposedly allegedly engaged in off the platform as though we're now competent to judge guilt and innocence.
00:46:02.000The minute that happened, there was an attempt in one instance to say, well, Rumble is this despicable, untrustworthy vector of hate speech and disinformation.
00:46:12.000Instantly there appeared an article in the Associated Press and then a kind of resulting effort to say it's in violation of the Online Safety Act because it's allowing exactly the kind of content the Online Safety Act is designed to Prohibit.
00:46:25.000And of course, the Online Safety Act, the chief sponsor of it, was the same baroness, this Dane Dineage, who is the one writing these letters, not just to rumble, but TikTok and media outlets demanding that you be punished before there's any findings of guilt or even any formal accusations.
00:46:42.000This is the level of despotism that is driving these kinds of processes.
00:46:48.000And I think the important, crucial thing to understand here Is that it's so ironic for media outlets like the Associated Press to accuse others of circulating disinformation and conspiracy theories when these are the same media outlets that told the world that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction.
00:47:08.000And was in an alliance with Osama bin Laden to justify the invasion and destruction of Iraq.
00:47:13.000I don't recall any rumble creators doing that.
00:47:15.000I recall the New York Times and the Associated Press doing that.
00:47:18.000Or these are the same media outlets that spent years telling the public that Vladimir Putin had taken over control of the US levers of power because he had secret sex tapes that he was exploiting to blackmail Donald Trump with.
00:47:31.000Or that right before the 2020 election, These are those media outlets that told the public that the Hunter Biden laptop and the documents on it were fraudulent byproducts of Russian disinformation, rather than what they were, which was authentic.
00:47:43.000So these media outlets use disinformation campaigns and deceitful lies to manipulate public opinion all the time.
00:47:51.000That's what they exist to do, these large media corporations.
00:47:54.000And what they're saying, essentially, is that We know the public no longer trusts us because we've gotten caught so many times now telling lies and spreading disinformation.
00:48:04.000The public no longer listens to us and no longer believes what we're saying.
00:48:09.000So the only solution is for us, forcibly, to try and take any platforms that allow people to dissent from what we're saying, or challenge what we're saying, or offer alternative views, and ban them.
00:48:22.000So that it's not just that we're banning dissent, it's that we win the power to disseminate propaganda, our propaganda, on behalf of the Western intelligence agencies, and various states, and media corporations, without challenge.
00:48:36.000And if they succeed in that, Russell, in excluding independent platforms and free media, meaning independent media that's not beholden to any factions, from being able to exist, from being able to find an audience, the reason that's so dangerous is because they succeed in creating a closed information system that exists only of their propaganda and only their disinformation that is cleansed of all dissent and all dissidents.
00:49:00.000And that is absolutely their objective.
00:49:02.000That is exactly what this entire campaign is about, about cleansing the internet of hate speech
00:49:46.000...oddly gravitated towards a kind of totalitarianism and monopolisation that bypasses, as you earlier referred to, anything that a monolithic, eastern, communist, centralised modality could ever conjure up.
00:50:05.000I recognize that, you know, if it were we were talking about nutrition, if you had the monopolization of food, that would, generally speaking, lower the standard of food, because there is no competition, there is no alternative, there is no viable option.
00:50:17.000You're simply going to eat the food that you've been given.
00:50:20.000I wonder if you are familiar with, on what your thoughts are, of the Trusted News Initiative, something I recently learned about, which appears to be a set of relationships between big tech platforms and some legacy media outlets.
00:50:32.000That have a kind of agreement that they are no longer competing with one another for eyeballs or views or attention, but they are essentially competing with digital platforms and independent media.
00:50:44.000It's something that's been made explicit and overt.
00:50:48.000And the monopolization of information, particularly now that we have platforms like Google and Facebook with the incredible control that they are able to assert, means that in a way this is Almost ideologically, beyond the control of resources that you might have seen in the monopolies of a century ago and into a sphere that's almost impossible to imagine because it's consciousness, reality.
00:51:18.000Reality is being controlled and curated.
00:51:20.000Yeah, I mean if you look at the Just those two companies, Google and Facebook, and you might even throw Apple in there.
00:51:28.000There's no doubt that we're talking here about the richest and most powerful corporate entities ever to exist in human history.
00:51:38.000Way more lucrative, way more powerful than even the kind of anti-trust barons of the late 19th century and early 20th century.
00:51:47.000These trusts that ended up being broken up because they got too powerful.
00:51:51.000These are more powerful than most nation states, and in many senses, they are more powerful than almost every nation state.
00:51:58.000And that has been proven over and over by the unsuccessful attempts to try and break them down or weaken them or bring them under control.
00:52:05.000And I think two things are so crucial about this.
00:52:07.000Number one is, unlike, say, railroad trusts or oil monopolies, we're talking about just the distribution of Concrete material goods that obviously puts a huge amount of power in the hands of whoever controls it and that's bad enough We're really talking here is about
00:52:25.000data and information about pretty much everybody enormous amounts of just think about how much you do online and how much that reveals about yourself and how centralized that information is that everything you do is being stored what you choose to read with whom you choose to speak what you choose to look at the kinds of things that you pursue what you buy what you what you're interested in that puts an incredibly comprehensive picture of who you are, not just as a person,
00:52:53.000but as a mental entity, in the hands of these tiny number of
00:52:57.000corporations that are able to, I mean, the reason why artificial
00:53:02.000intelligence is now happening is because we've turned over so
00:53:05.000much data to these companies for so long about how our brains
00:53:09.000function and the things we respond to and the things that we look for, that they've been able to study the human
00:53:15.000brain and the ways in which it works to such an effective degree
00:53:18.000that they're able to actually not just replicate it, but in some
00:53:21.000sense, surpass it with technology that predicts everything that we want to say we've all had that
00:53:28.000And before we know it, Google has basically written the email for us and what it actually suggests.
00:53:33.000They're talking about a kind of information and insight into how our brains function and the corresponding ability to control and manipulate that, unlike anything ever seen before.
00:53:43.000And I think what we're now seeing is that for a long time, you kind of had these alarmingly powerful actors over here, Google and Facebook and Apple, Operating as their own power center is this kind of counterweight against the states.
00:53:58.000Oftentimes they work in partnership with the states on national security issues and on economic issues.
00:54:03.000So a lot of times there's a lot of kind of cooperation which makes the state and these corporations immensely even more powerful when they work hand in hand, which they often do.
00:54:13.000But at least sometimes there's some separation, as we see, for example, with the obsession now with governments to try and commandeer big tech's censorship power, to put it under their control, to say, you're permitting this information to be heard and we don't want that.
00:54:28.000And so what so many of these laws are designed to do, Russell, and they're taking place in every country, not just the UK, there's one in Ireland, there's one in Brazil, they're all throughout Western Europe, They're proliferating everywhere.
00:54:38.000They've already been in the Middle East for a long time.
00:54:40.000Hate speech laws or disinformation laws.
00:54:42.000that they're designed to take this immense power on the part of these monopolistic giants
00:54:48.000and transfer that power from the hands of these giant corporations into the hands of the state
00:54:55.000to essentially say, technically, you're gonna keep the delete button and the ban button
00:55:01.000and the content moderation buttons, but the ones who are actually gonna have power
00:55:07.000And that's what we're now seeing is this kind of frightening union
00:55:12.000using the force of law whereby the states commandeered this power and put it into their hands.
00:55:18.000And it's a kind of despotism, a kind of authoritarianism that we've been trained for so long to believe
00:55:26.000only exists in the bad countries, in China and in Iran and in Russia
00:55:29.000or wherever you think the bad countries are.
00:55:33.000That I think there's a natural tendency to believe, well, the words despotism and authoritarianism can never really apply to Western democracies.
00:55:40.000We don't actually, aren't capable of those sorts of characteristics.
00:55:44.000But if you look at the laws that are being enacted and the ways that they're being abused right now, not in the future, it's hard to use any terms other than those to describe what is taking place.
00:55:56.000It's extraordinary to see how this aggregation, that as it accrues, accumulates and grows, is usually presented as a tool of greater convenience, is creating, as you say, an unprecedented alliance and union and unprecedented power to manage information, to control dissent.
00:56:21.000It also seems to me It's evident that, concomitant with that, it has to be the provision and endless stoking of cultural division.
00:56:32.000Because it's now plainly observable, I think, to a significant number of people that you can't trust the legacy media.
00:56:40.000I believe there are numerous polls that point out that trust in UK media and US media is at an all-time low.
00:56:47.000Nobody has significant trust in the government of either parties.
00:56:52.000There are new populist voices, I think, coming from what would once have been regarded as both sides that, in a sense, are more popular and transcendent of the ordinary rhetoric and parameters of the political groups that they've emerged out of.
00:57:07.000Say someone like Tucker Carlson, for example, someone that sort of now broadly disavows both parties in a two-party system.
00:57:15.000If there is so much mistrust in institutions like government, like the media, like the judiciary, like the corporate world, when something as significant and as vast as the pandemic can take place and elicit such a cynical response, when there in a sense is no longer one public, when there are numerous publics, when you can have sort of interviews with someone making astonishing allegations about, for example, Barack Obama, and that will only exist in one particular media sphere.
00:57:44.000Is it likely that we're going to continue to see the rise of, call them demagogic or populist figures from across the political spectrum?
00:57:56.000And do you see a connection between something like Trump's popularity and the sort of earlier incarnations of populism in Europe, like through Syriza and Podemos and stuff?
00:58:06.000And do you think that there will be more of a demand for this kind of populism
00:58:11.000and will the possibility for this type of populism be maintained when the levers of control are
00:58:17.000plainly now, as you've just described, migrate into the state from these big tech organizations?
00:58:24.000First of all, I do think the most foundational fact in politics, in culture, in society,
00:58:33.000when you talk about the West, is the intense widespread and growing distrust of
00:58:40.000institutions of authority across demographic groups. It is really remarkable, Russell,
00:58:46.000if you think about it, that it was the case not all that long ago, like maybe five, ten
00:58:52.000years ago even, that if you were a major political figure preparing to run
00:58:58.000in a campaign and you were accused of a serious crime, let alone indicted as a felon,
00:59:04.000you would instantly drop out of the race, he would drop out of politics, he would have no
00:59:10.000Of course, nobody would ever vote for somebody who has been accused of serious crimes by media outlets.
00:59:17.000And then by legal authorities, they wouldn't even wait for the trial because the mere fact that there would be enough smoke to justify those kinds of allegations would be enough to destroy the reputation of that politician because people had a basic trust in the legitimacy of legal institutions that no such accusation would emerge unless there was some foundation for it.
00:59:38.000We've now just watched Donald Trump be indicted four separate times in two separate federal
00:59:45.000courts, in two separate state courts, on dozens of felony charges of every different conceivable
00:59:52.000One's involving his conduct after the 2020 election. One's involving his record keeping
00:59:58.000and bookkeeping in the Trump organization and the payments he made to a porn star.
01:00:03.000Others involving his alleged mishandling of classified information.
01:00:07.000They've thrown every conceivable accusation criminally that they can at him.
01:00:10.000He's facing jail time in multiple jurisdictions.
01:00:15.000And all that has happened since then is that his polling has increased, not just among Republicans, where his standing is, I mean, they've never seen a contestant primary with one candidate with such a gigantic lead that just doesn't waver.
01:00:33.000And that lead has grown ever since these indictments.
01:00:36.000But even when he's polling against Joe Biden among independents and even Democrats or people who are unaffiliated with the Trump movement, the level of contempt and distrust that people have for legal institutions is so high and for media institutions.
01:00:51.000That it's almost like the more they accuse him of being a criminal, the more faith and trust they put in him.
01:01:00.000Because there's almost no favor you can do better for somebody than for these media institutions that are so hated, and these governmental and legal institutions that are so despised, than to conspire against the person.
01:01:12.000And so, when you take that back, this unbelievably intense hatred for institutions of authority, Obviously, any politician, left or right, that is able to stand up and say, I share your antipathy towards these institutions, the contempt and distrust that you have, is completely valid.
01:01:35.000And what I'm going to do is get to Washington or Berlin or London or Paris or Athens or wherever, and I'm going to go to war against these institutions.
01:01:44.000And not just against them, but their dogma that has destroyed your lives for so long.
01:01:51.000Of course there's a gigantic opening for that kind of populist politics.
01:01:57.000There should be that kind of an opening because Western institutions are that corroded.
01:02:02.000They deserve all the hatred and the distress that they've earned and more.
01:02:07.000And yes, there are going to be times when demagogues or people who are dangerous end up exploiting that anti-establishment sentiment.
01:02:17.000But at the same time, I think these establishments themselves have proven to be very dangerous and very toxic and very destructive as well.
01:02:26.000And so in general, my That trick for understanding politics and where people fit on the political spectrum has become a lot less about left-wing versus right-wing or conservative versus liberal and much more about the central question of do you trust institutions of authority or do you distrust them?
01:02:46.000And I think if you're somebody who distrusts them, if you have an anti-authoritarian politics, you're going to end up having a lot more in common with other people who share contempt for those institutions than you are going to have with people who continue to believe these institutions are fundamentally good.
01:03:02.000And that to me is the key dichotomy in our politics now.
01:03:06.000If that dichotomy becomes instantiated at scale, if Brexit and Trump and some of the other examples outside of anglophonic countries become not outliers or anomalies but actually a trend, it sounds like what you are describing In spite of the attempts to control the public space, in spite of the attempts to shut down dissent, in spite of the new abilities suggested through legislature to absolutely control and shut down dissidents,
01:03:44.000Something that's tantamount to revolution.
01:03:47.000When there is that degree of, as you say, disdain, hatred, total mistrust for the media, that is a very, very powerful emotion.
01:03:59.000Because when I think of some of the resources that are used, I mean sort of, and I know this is not really a territory that I want to direct you to, you're such a diligent and brilliant man and I hate to sort of shepherd you towards woo-woo-ism, But when you think of this sort of puritanical, rootless, traditionless, ugliness that sometimes is used as an ersatz ideology in dominant culture,
01:04:31.000If these sort of feelings of deep antipathy, of fierce independence, of longing for control, indeed as expressed so many times in the maxims of these movements to take your country back or make America great, this kind of rhetorical power and what it refers to, this is a very strong resource and I again see the significance of keeping people divided along cultural lines, you know, all of the cultural lines that are obvious and the ones that are plainly used, exacerbated and amplified.
01:05:03.000If this was ever to become unleashed, it's a force that could completely, could reverberate throughout the entire political sphere, couldn't it Glenn?
01:05:13.000Yeah, and I think it's very important to recognize that as brilliant as we both are, it's not as though we're the only ones who see this.
01:05:22.000People who occupy positions of power, who depend upon the continuation of establishment authority and doctrine for their own self-interest, they see it just as clearly as we do.
01:05:34.000They understand that populations are turning against them in very intense and radical ways, and that they no longer can command trust and faith or anything else, and they see that as exactly as alarming and threatening to them as they should.
01:05:50.000And if you look at history, what happens with power centers and establishment forces is that when the population, the more out of control they get, the more rebellious they get, the more revolutionary they get, the more hostile they get, the more Authoritarian, these institutions of power will become in order to cling on to their power and control and constrain this anger.
01:06:14.000So if, for example, we're manifesting in more physical ways and say traditional street protests, and there have been a lot of street protests in a lot of these countries, leave aside the 2021 in the United States, because that was kind of a different nature.
01:06:27.000Talking about in Greece, in Spain, in places where you haven't seen, obviously in France, This level of kind of protest and just out in the street rage and anger that's not even that specific or about any particular cause is just more this kind of, you know, this directed but kind of ambiguous hatred toward people in power.
01:06:51.000They're going to crack down more and more.
01:06:53.000They're going to use police forces and military forces to crush any attempt to protest against them.
01:06:59.000You saw that with the Occupy Wall Street movement.
01:07:00.000The minute it got ground, the minute it got a little bit of a hold, they went to court.
01:07:05.000The mayors got orders ordering them dismantled.
01:07:08.000They sent the police in and just physically crushed them or legally crushed them.
01:07:11.000The minute that it got a little too threatening, that's what power centers do.
01:07:15.000In this case, it's not really manifesting so much as physical protest, because so much of what we do now is on the internet and online, and this is the way we organize and protest.
01:07:28.000And what they want to do is kind of go to the root of what is generating this empire establishment rage, which are people who are standing up and saying they're liars, they're corrupt, they're fundamentally against your interests, the things that they want you to believe are in fact totally false, and they want to be able to crush the ability To criticize them, to generate this kind of anti-establishment sentiment, to awaken people, to open their eyes.
01:07:58.000And that is what this war is about, this idea that we now have this well-financed industry that identifies disinformation and agents of disinformation and laws that are now in place that are designed to empower governments to remove that from the internet in the name of keeping everybody safe.
01:08:15.000I mean, remember the title of this bullshit law in the UK is the Online Safety
01:08:21.000And the baroness who sponsored it went around exploiting, disgustingly, this case of this 14-year-old girl who killed
01:08:28.000herself because of material to which she was exposed online and said, we want to turn the UK into the safest
01:08:35.000online experience of any country in the world, using the language of paternalism
01:08:41.000and talking about how children need to be kept safe, even though the first time they get their hands on this law,
01:08:46.000the minute that it's actually about to become enacted, they don't go and use it to protect children.
01:08:55.000They go and use it to demand that Rumble be banned from the UK because of its refusal to remove you from the airwaves and remove you from being able to be heard.
01:09:07.000These kind of things that are dressed up under these benevolent sounding campaigns of protecting us from disinformation and hate speech and keeping us safe is in fact about the realization that they have that there is this kind of quasi-revolutionary hatred toward them and this attempt to try and crush it by preventing those who are fueling it people like you and me and many others from being heard by implementing censorship laws by banning the platforms that are allowing us to speak freely and not only to speak freely but to reach millions of people
01:09:41.000Glenn, how is it possible that Julian Assange is still awaiting potential extradition?
01:09:48.000How likely is it that that will be avoided?
01:09:51.000What type of power can oppose these 17 Espionage Act Yeah, you know, I think it was really interesting to join us on this case.
01:10:01.000this is probably quite a big question. You know, given the, in a sense that yours is a parallel
01:10:05.000journey to his in some respects, what does it tell us that he's in the situation he is in? And the
01:10:12.000fact that it's so broadly speaking, seems somewhat like a lost cause? Yeah, you know, I think it was
01:10:19.000really interesting and Julian Assange's case, I've had obviously occasions to think about this over
01:10:23.000the last week or so, as I thought about your case as well, that when it came time to discredit
01:10:29.000Julian Assange, because of his groundbreaking historical leaks that he published and reported
01:10:37.000on, that enabled the exposure of war crimes and all kinds of deceit on the part of the US and
01:10:42.000its key allies around the world, there was an obvious need to destroy his reputation.
01:10:48.000And the very first tactic they used was the emergence of rape charges, ones that ended up never actually being proven, ones that he sought asylum and protection from in the Ecuadorian embassy, saying, I want to go to Sweden and contest them and I'll do so tomorrow as long as the Swedish government just promises they're not going to use my presence on Swedish soil.
01:11:12.000government wasn't trying to get a hold of him.
01:11:14.000And obviously, it turns out that they are.
01:11:16.000But it reminded me a lot, you know, when I was young, I used to have this kind of obsession with the Pentagon Papers case, and Danny Alsberg, as a result, became one of my childhood heroes.
01:11:26.000And in my naivete, the thing that really never made any sense to me was, for Danny Alsberg, the only reason why he ended up not going to prison for his whole life, he was on trial for espionage crimes, The judge had already ruled that the defenses he wanted to offer, which was that, look, I discovered proof that the U.S.
01:11:45.000government was lying about the Vietnam War, telling the public they were on the verge of winning when they knew they could never win, and it was my moral obligation.
01:11:52.000make this known to the public that the judge had ruled that that kind of a defense is not
01:12:27.000And Donald, Nan Ellsberg, was on his way to prison and would have spent decades, if not his life there, for this heroic act that we all now regard as heroic, which is the Pentagon Papers League.
01:12:38.000And the only reason he was safe from that was because the Nixon administration decided to break into the office of this psychoanalyst With the intention of stealing the psychoanalyst's notes and files so that it could make public all kinds of secrets about Danielsberg's psychosexual desires and fantasies and practices.
01:12:58.000In my naiveté, that never made sense to me.
01:13:00.000Like, Danielsberg proved the government was systematically lying about the Vietnam War.
01:13:05.000How would it be responsive to say, well, Danielsberg is like a pervert in his fantasies?
01:13:10.000And the reason I have come to understand is that there's nothing like sex scandals
01:13:17.000to destroy the reputation of any dissident because even if it's true, even if it's not true,
01:13:22.000it just makes the person, we don't kind of are uncomfortable with sex.
01:13:29.000And if you can force people to imagine the person in that context, in some sort of context of a sex scandal,
01:13:34.000it makes people just want to run away.
01:13:36.000And that was why the Nixon administration knew that being able to expose Daniels' sexual secrets
01:13:42.000would be the most effective way to destroy his reputation and distract attention from the revelations.
01:13:47.000And only because that was discovered and the judge ruled that was such an abuse and dismissed his case, that's the only reason he ended up going to prison.
01:13:55.000So you see this kind of through line in how he's being treated, how Julian Assange is being treated, the kind of allegations that are raised against you.
01:14:05.000And I think when it comes to Julian Assange, Between that kind of effort to destroy his reputation, combined with his paranoia about Russia that they successfully manufactured in 2016, where they blamed everything on Russia.
01:14:20.000You know, Justin Trudeau just got caught humiliatingly having a standing ovation with President Zelensky for an actual Nazi SS soldier.
01:14:29.000And in his remarks about it, he said, He started babbling about Russian disinformation and somehow tried to blame Russia.
01:14:36.000It's an all-purpose way to just blame everything used as a villainizer, everything having to do with Moscow.
01:14:43.000They turned Julian Assange, in the minds of most American liberals, into a Russian agent, and therefore everybody is content in the United States with watching him waste away in prison.
01:14:54.000And I think the one optimistic development is that the Australian government, responding to Australian public opinion, which is now overwhelmingly demanding that Australia finally protect its citizens, combined with a lot of international optimism, President Wu in Brazil and President Abloh in Mexico, have made Assange's case one of their priorities.
01:15:14.000There's a lot of international pressure being brought to bear now on the United States by countries that it needs to end this persecution.
01:15:22.000That I think there may end up finally being some sort of attempt to offer Assange a compromise and to finally have a way out of this, but only because they've succeeded in their real mission, which was not ever proving that he committed any crime, but destroying him physically and emotionally and psychologically and disabling and crippling weakly to such an extent that connected to everything that we've been discussing and kind of took off the chessboard one of their most effective Opponents and dissidents.
01:16:08.000I sincerely appreciate it, Glenn, and I'm grateful to you once more for your time, for your brilliance, for validating broadly my perspective on reality, which sometimes for me feels incredibly biased and instinctual and spontaneous and intuitive rather than journalistic and with Yeah, and you know you have a lot of support in everything that you're going through and I am among those supporters.
01:16:31.000Oh no, I'm more or less on track, even though I don't have as many receipts to show as you.
01:16:35.000It's certainly reassuring in a time when reassurance is what I need more than anything.
01:16:46.000I think you deserve and are entitled to all the rights that are going to be denied to
01:16:52.000And so I'm going to continue to advocate for those rights, not just because you deserve them, but because we all do, and the attempt to erode them is very dangerous.
01:17:01.000So I'm in solidarity with you, and thanks for having me on your show.
01:17:06.000You can catch Glenn Greenwald on System Update weeknights at 7pm eastern time on Rumble.
01:17:12.000So coming up on the show soon, can you believe it?
01:17:15.000We've got Stella Assange, we've got Lee Fang, we've got Tim Pool, we've got Tucker Carlson, we've got some fantastic guests joining us.
01:17:22.000You're not going to want to miss them.
01:17:23.000It is clear that we need your support now more than ever.
01:17:26.000Please press the red button, become an Awakened Wonder, Join what now has to be called the resistance, the rejection of a system that wants you tyrannized plainly and is well on its way to achieving that unless we become activated and awakened immediately.
01:17:43.000Welcome to some of the new members like Mish0403, Miss Pepper, Electric Steve1, Aerudite, Passive Spud, Lisa Burnett, Luke and Sy.