Stay Free - Russel Brand - Here’s the News: Gain Of Function A BIO-WEAPON?! Fauci KNEW All Along?!

The Wuhan lab leak was probably real. Deep state agencies helped to downplay it, and maybe cover it up. The COVID inquiry in the UK only asks questions that are basically irrelevant in an attempt to continue to control the narrative. Otherwise, why do they ask about the lab leak? Why don t they ask whether or not lockdowns were successful? Is it because they plan to use these techniques, lockdowns in particular, again? And if they ever get anywhere near the truth, people will go, that s not what we're discussing. What's needed is a true reckoning because as conspiracy theories become conspiracy facts, we're awakening to the role of independent media and independent politics. And the establishment can't allow that to happen. They can t allow the truth to be heard, and if they do, they'll amplify establishment messages and not tell you the truth about what's going on in the world and in their everyday lives. - This episode is brought to you by AWakening Wonders, a podcast that educates and elevates our consciousness to elevate our consciousness together. Stay free, and enjoy the ride. - Rachit Vaidyanathan. If you like what you hear, please leave us a five star review on Apple Podcasts and we'll be giving you a shoutout on the next episode of AWakened Wonders. We really appreciate you, our listeners, and want to bring you more content that's better than that! - Rachel Maddow, Jordan Peterson, Sam Harris, Veena Shiva, Gabor Mate, and many more. - R.K. Jr., Sam Harris. And many more! - Raffael Fauci Jr., Jr., etc. - The Dark Side of the Story? - The Truth is Out There? We bring you in depth conversations with guests like Jordan Peterson? - And a podcast delivering the truth that s better than the rest of the stuff you need to know about it? And so on and so on... - And so much more. R. is a podcast delivered by R. Is it possible to help you get a chance to know the truth and more? . So help us make it so that you can be more like that? , can you help us help us do it so it can be so that we can help you be better like that, can you be more of that, right in a place that helps us do that, more like it?

00:00:00.000 Hello there you Awakening Wonders on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you download your podcasts.

00:00:05.000 We really appreciate you, our listeners, and want to bring you more content.

00:00:08.000 We will be delivering a podcast every day, seven days a week, every single day.

00:00:13.000 You'll get a detailed breakdown of current topics that the mainstream media should be covering, but if they are covering, they're amplifying establishment messages and not telling you the truth.

00:00:23.000 Once a week we bring you in-depth conversations with guests like Jordan Peterson, RFK Jr, Sam Harris, Vandana Shiva, Gabor Mate and many more.

00:00:31.000 Now enjoy this episode of Stay Free with Russell Brand.

00:00:34.000 Remember, there's an episode every single day to educate and elevate our consciousness together.

00:00:40.000 Stay free and enjoy the episode.

00:00:42.000 Thanks for watching.

00:00:55.000 The Wuhan lab leak was probably real.

00:00:57.000 Deep state agencies helped to downplay it and maybe even cover it up.

00:01:02.000 The COVID inquiry in the UK only asks questions that are basically irrelevant in an attempt to continue to control the narrative.

00:01:09.000 Otherwise, why don't they ask about the lab leak?

00:01:11.000 Why don't they ask whether or not lockdowns were successful?

00:01:14.000 Is it because they plan to use these techniques, lockdowns in particular, again?

00:01:21.000 Hello there you Awakening Wonders, thanks for joining me on this voyage to truth and freedom.

00:01:25.000 And it's a voyage where we have to avoid avalanches of deception, step over landmines of pure lies.

00:01:31.000 In the UK they're conducting a Covid inquiry but it's a very managed affair.

00:01:35.000 Also there are continuing revelations about Wuhan, the safety in that laboratory, the degree to which US health agencies are Let me know in the chat in the comments if you think that's what's happened and if you've noticed that when there's inquiries they deliberately only ask questions that lead down blind alleys.

00:02:01.000 Of course the COVID inquiry in the UK wouldn't be happening without independent media voices and independent minds like yours.

00:02:07.000 That's why the COVID inquiry will be a facade, a charade, Limited to just condemning one or two bad actors and one or two earnest mistakes.

00:02:15.000 What's needed is a true reckoning because as conspiracy theories become conspiracy facts, we're awakening to the role of independent media and independent politics and the necessity for radical change.

00:02:26.000 They can't allow that to happen.

00:02:28.000 So let's have a look at the most recent revelations around Wuhan and the fact that it's been deliberately downplayed.

00:02:33.000 And then we'll have a little look at some episodes from the UK COVID inquiry and you'll note how muted it is.

00:02:38.000 And if they ever get anywhere near the truth, people go, that's not what we're discussing.

00:02:42.000 Top US health official has admitted he and a team of other leading scientists deliberately chose to downplay suggestions the COVID-19 pandemic originated in a Chinese lab leak.

00:02:53.000 You and Fauci in those discussions just wanted to turn the rhetoric down.

00:02:58.000 Is that correct?

00:02:59.000 That was it.

00:03:01.000 The doco what really happened in Wuhan the next chapter also exposes extensive attempts to make the public think it was a natural virus.

00:03:09.000 For a moment try to recall the passionate enthusiasm around Anthony Fauci at that time. 0.98

00:03:15.000 The late night talk show parades, people dressed in vaccine costumes, the oh thank god for Fauci because you know Trump's such a lunatic.

00:03:23.000 When you analyse that news coverage now, there are a lot more questions that emerge.

00:03:27.000 If Fauci and the NIH deliberately intervened to suppress and control that information, why was it they were doing that?

00:03:34.000 What are the financial ties between the NIH and the pharmaceutical industry?

00:03:37.000 What other information is being concealed?

00:03:39.000 What health measures at Wuhan were ignored?

00:03:41.000 Where does Wuhan get its funding from?

00:03:43.000 Why was it so important to control that narrative?

00:03:45.000 Why are these questions still not able to be asked?

00:03:48.000 That's before we get into the area of adverse injuries and excess deaths and the impact of lockdown and the efficacy of lockdown and how quickly it was understood that lockdown wouldn't work and the voices in science like Peter McCulloch and Jay Bhattacharya that said from the beginning that lockdown would not All these questions were being asked by some people at the beginning of the pandemic and that information and those questions were censored by the same interests that are right now saying you should be able to censor information because of hate speech in Ireland, you should be able to censor in the UK because of safety, you should be able to censor in the EU because of hate speech or whatever it is.

00:04:29.000 They are desperate To prevent these kind of conversations and this kind of connection taking place because it is a threat to their control.

00:04:36.000 So the COVID inquiry will be a kind of performance and information will be meted out, dribbled out as slowly as possible so that we as a population, we as people, don't have the chance to organize or properly respond because the information just comes out so slowly, discredited, slowed down, bogged down in controversy, like they did at the beginning of the pandemic, like they're still trying to do right now.

00:04:58.000 So US Chief Medical Officer Anthony Fauci, at the time of course, what did he stand to gain by covering it up?

00:05:05.000 Well his agency had been among several United States agencies that were funding the research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology.

00:05:14.000 So Robert Kadlec, that health official, told us last night that Fauci would have been concerned for his own reputation and that of his institute.

00:05:22.000 If you'd said that those agencies were involved in the funding of Wuhan and that it was likely that the virus had emerged from the laboratory in early 2020, or midway through 2020, you would have been kicked off the internet.

00:05:36.000 You might even have been dragged out of your home.

00:05:38.000 If you'd have said, I wonder if these lockdowns work, I wonder if these masks work, that was akin to saying, you might as well fly a confederate flag.

00:05:46.000 That's the way that this was conveyed in the mainstream media.

00:05:49.000 Now, what they're saying is, that was correct. 0.98

00:05:51.000 If it eventuated that his agency had funded the very research that sparked this pandemic, and that is a live possibility.

00:05:59.000 That was one of the worst conspiracy theories.

00:06:02.000 Hey, what if Anthony Fauci is involved in the funding of the very research that led to the outbreak?

00:06:07.000 Why on earth would someone go to incredible lengths to cover that up?

00:06:10.000 And if we don't learn the lessons, if we don't start to regulate this very risky gain of function

00:06:15.000 research in laboratories globally, we could have another pandemic happen again. And that's what

00:06:21.000 the experts I speak to in this documentary warn. Now, the reason I think that this is connected

00:06:26.000 to the COVID inquiry in the UK and the lack of significant inquiry within that inquiry is

00:06:32.000 because they are still trying to keep their powder dry in a number of ways.

00:06:35.000 One, they don't want to entirely discredit the government, which is basically what should happen.

00:06:38.000 Not just, oh, this party or these few individuals.

00:06:40.000 entire institution. They don't want to entirely discredit the legacy media, which is totally

00:06:45.000 what should happen, and they don't want to prevent the opportunity of imposing those

00:06:49.000 measures again for a variety of reasons, because remember right now the WHO are pushing for

00:06:54.000 a treaty that would enable them to impose those measures on any member country in the

00:06:58.000 event of another pandemic, and the description or criteria for what a pandemic could be is

00:07:02.000 pretty loose, let me tell you. It would include giving them the ability to tax your country

00:07:06.000 or take tax from your country and to impose medical measures like vaccines or what they

00:07:10.000 call vaccines. This is not stuff I'm making up, this is simply stuff that in a few years

00:07:15.000 you might be able to watch on the legacy media, if the legacy media have to report on this

00:07:19.000 stuff because an independent media pushes them. If the censorship laws that are currently

00:07:22.000 being pushed are all successful, then the legacy media will not report on this stuff.

00:07:26.000 They only report on this stuff because independent media forces it.

00:07:30.000 We've narrowed down two scientists in China whose actual research might have started COVID-19.

00:07:37.000 We explain in this documentary how it could have been their work.

00:07:41.000 One of them, a Chinese military scientist, was working on a vaccine for COVID-19 back in October 2019.

00:07:49.000 And his research could have led to the pandemic.

00:07:51.000 He was then believed to be killed by the Chinese People's Liberation Army.

00:07:55.000 So what?

00:07:56.000 I mean, this is like a few years ago, you'd have to go to Alex Jones or David Icke to get that kind of information.

00:08:02.000 This is extraordinary.

00:08:03.000 Someone was murdered.

00:08:04.000 What are they going to tell us next?

00:08:05.000 That it was actually a weapon, that it's actual biotechnology that was being used potentially to create weapons, like in RFK's book that was basically banned when it was the number one seller in the New York Times.

00:08:15.000 They just went, there is no number one this week.

00:08:17.000 We are getting closer.

00:08:18.000 Unfortunately, there's been no international inquiry.

00:08:22.000 It shouldn't be left up to journalists to investigate this.

00:08:25.000 Perhaps this is all a terrible mishap and the Wuhan Institute of Virology just suddenly became a little bit slapdash and it was an error.

00:08:31.000 No.

00:08:31.000 Apparently, there have been concerns about safety in the Wuhan Institute of Virology for some time that was well reported and well understood, extraordinarily, and suspicions that this research is actually about bio-weaponry.

00:08:44.000 Which, when I first heard it a couple of years ago, I was like, oh no, that's a little bit far-fetched.

00:08:47.000 We're almost into clichéd conspiratorial territory.

00:08:51.000 What's next?

00:08:51.000 That UFOs are real and that the government killed JFK?

00:08:54.000 What my article uncovers is a almost decade-long trail of warnings issued by the Department of Energy to the National Institutes of Health and other government agencies This is significant because it's a report from Vanity Fair.

00:09:11.000 When this stuff was first reported on, it was like just passed around on the periphery of the internet.

00:09:15.000 The sort of thing that you would get kicked off of social media for.

00:09:18.000 These are the kind of arguments that the misinformation, disinformation bills are based on.

00:09:22.000 We can't have all this misinformation around COVID.

00:09:25.000 It's going to cost people their lives.

00:09:26.000 The misinformation was the stuff that the legacy media was peddling.

00:09:30.000 I don't want to be reductive, but I do want to draw your attention to the significance of the repression of the Wuhan lab leak.

00:09:36.000 These are extraordinary revelations.

00:09:38.000 And remember, we're still not at the point where the legacy media are able to talk about excess deaths and adverse events as a result of certain medications.

00:09:46.000 So imagine where we're going to get to.

00:09:48.000 About the risks of what's called dual use research of concern.

00:09:53.000 That biology research that was being funded by the National Institutes of Health overseas could be misappropriated and possibly used for harm.

00:10:05.000 That's extraordinary, isn't it?

00:10:06.000 Dual use.

00:10:07.000 Even when we were reporting on UFOs, we noted that the CIA retrieve crashed UFOs and then give them to Lockheed Martin because Lockheed Martin don't have to keep as detailed records as government agencies.

00:10:20.000 Look here at this curious relationship between the NIH and foreign research laboratories for dual use products.

00:10:27.000 We are already so deep into conspiracy theory territory of 20 months ago that a COVID inquiry in the UK would have to be asking questions like, is this a bioweapon?

00:10:37.000 What's going on?

00:10:38.000 How much did you know?

00:10:39.000 Why are people that work for the government now working for Moderna?

00:10:42.000 That's what a serious inquiry would sound like.

00:10:44.000 But this is not a serious inquiry.

00:10:45.000 This is to aid the transition of power from one political party to another political party and say, well, that's that all dealt with.

00:10:51.000 Guess where we'll be in a couple of years.

00:10:53.000 But those warnings got even more specific As close to the pandemic as mid-2019, when the Deputy Energy Secretary Dan Brouillette warned an associate and advisor to Dr. Anthony Fauci specifically about the coronavirus research that was being funded at the Wuhan Institute of Virology.

00:11:20.000 Is it me or does the future feel more insecure and uncertain?

00:11:23.000 Wars, pandemics, lies, trickery.

00:11:27.000 My cats keep having kittens.

00:11:28.000 The last one's personal.

00:11:29.000 For those who are in the United States, there is a way to secure your hard-earned nest egg.

00:11:34.000 American Heart for Gold make it easy to protect your savings and retirement accounts with physical gold and silver.

00:11:40.000 With one phone call, they can have physical gold and silver delivered right to your door or inside a qualifying retirement account like your IRA or 401k.

00:11:50.000 American Hartford Gold is the highest-rated firm in the US with an A-plus rating from the BBB and thousands of satisfied clients.

00:11:57.000 Right now, they will give you up to $5,000 of free silver on your first qualifying order.

00:12:02.000 This offer is only for US customers.

00:12:05.000 866 505 8315.

00:12:08.000 That's 866 505 8315.

00:12:11.000 Or simply text "BRAND" to 99 88 99.

00:12:16.000 Get up to $5,000 of silver and protect your future in this crazy,

00:12:20.000 crazy world with some solid, precious metals, literally made in stars.

00:12:24.000 You know, the concern was that there were basically tools and techniques being used in that research that could be

00:12:35.000 potentially misappropriated for military use or for malign use by the Chinese government.

00:12:44.000 So I think what's significant here is that, you know, that research as well as the kind of research being funded was really of contention for almost a decade before the pandemic even began.

00:12:58.000 For ten years prior to the pandemic, people were going, you shouldn't be doing this, this is dangerous.

00:13:04.000 How then?

00:13:05.000 At very best, this shows incredible ineptitude and a connection between the NIH and Anthony Fauci prior to the pandemic and the Wuhan Institute of Virology.

00:13:16.000 We also know, it seems as a result of other whistleblowers, that Fauci went around various agencies saying, hey, listen, when you're reporting on this, don't talk about the lab leak theory.

00:13:24.000 Why was that?

00:13:25.000 It's racist.

00:13:26.000 It's racist.

00:13:27.000 Do you remember that?

00:13:27.000 You've got to say it came from a wet market.

00:13:30.000 Extraordinary.

00:13:31.000 Look at where we are now and contrast that with the mealy mouth and limited questions that emerge in the inquiry.

00:13:37.000 Could that be because ultimately the establishment is one mechanic and these legacy media interests, state interests, these government agency interests all align.

00:13:44.000 And if people got the Actual information that they should be privy to.

00:13:49.000 When I say people, I mean us.

00:13:50.000 We would become non-compliant and disobedient and would demand real change.

00:13:55.000 One of the scientists who stood alongside Boris Johnson in those Covid briefings night after night during the pandemic has questioned how much the then Prime Minister understood of what was actually going on.

00:14:07.000 Chief Scientific Advisor at the time, Sir Patrick Vallance, wrote in his diaries back then that Mr Johnson was bamboozled by the graphs Oh, so it's Boris Johnson.

00:14:18.000 Boris Johnson.

00:14:18.000 He was bamboozled by Grafton.

00:14:20.000 Oh, Boris Johnson.

00:14:22.000 Well, we've got rid of him now, so everything's OK.

00:14:24.000 Currently, we've got a prime minister whose wife has strong connections to the WEF, who happens to have invested in a hedge fund that invested in Moderna.

00:14:31.000 So that problem's been dealt with.

00:14:32.000 What they're presenting you is a paradigm where it's suggested you can solve this problem by shuffling the individuals within the very system that caused the problem.

00:14:42.000 We were not as well prepared as we should have been.

00:14:46.000 This is a British politician answering questions in the inquiry.

00:14:49.000 A fascinating thing occurs.

00:14:51.000 There is a significant body of judgment that believes that the virus itself was man-made.

00:15:04.000 Let's shut that down pretty swiftly because otherwise, hold on a minute, if it was man-made, it was made in a lab, can't trust the pharmaceutical industry, funded by Anthony Fauci, they did the lockdown anyway, we turned that guy into a hero, can't trust the state, can't trust the system, gonna need to dismantle the machinery of democracy and have to create new democratic communities that are decentralised but, you know, No, no, wait!

00:15:29.000 Stop! 1.00

00:15:29.000 Just answer these simple questions and we'll blame one or two bad apples and carry on with what we do best, tyrannizing people with lies and deception. 1.00

00:15:37.000 So, let's look at how the system maintains control and maintains narratives even while conducting inquiries.

00:15:44.000 And I would say that the point of the inquiry is to achieve the impression of inquiry rather than inquiry itself.

00:15:49.000 Look at the information that's already available.

00:15:51.000 Look at how that information was repressed and controlled.

00:15:53.000 Oh yeah, we were trying to help, we were trying to help.

00:15:55.000 Well, in trying to help, it seems that things were made a lot, lot worse.

00:15:59.000 So why is there not a proper interrogation inquiry now?

00:16:01.000 Is it because to have a proper inquiry you'd have to dismantle the machinery that created the problem in the first place?

00:16:06.000 The answer to that is yes.

00:16:07.000 Let's get into it.

00:16:07.000 What on earth is the point of the COVID inquiry?

00:16:10.000 Lockdown was arguably the most controversial policy to be implemented in British peacetime history.

00:16:15.000 It had huge ramifications for the nation's health, its economy and for an entire generation of children.

00:16:20.000 Let me know in the chat how quickly you were asking those questions and seeing those questions being asked online and being censored online.

00:16:27.000 The impact is still being felt with nearly 7.8 million patients languishing on National Health Service waiting lists.

00:16:34.000 Wednesday's autumn statement laid bare the stultifying effect it's had on the UK's growth rate and the eye-watering sums it has added to our national debt.

00:16:43.000 We needed a thorough investigation into whether the coronavirus cure was worse than the disease.

00:16:48.000 A forensic cost-benefit analysis of whether shutting down the country for months on end was the right policy.

00:16:53.000 But we haven't got that.

00:16:54.000 Far from it.

00:16:55.000 Instead, we've got an embarrassing merry-go-round of blame that is repeatedly failing to answer the central and most important question of all.

00:17:01.000 How many lives were actually saved by lockdown, and was it really worth it?

00:17:05.000 And you know, because you're informed, how obfuscated and confusing that data has always been.

00:17:10.000 People that died in extraordinary circumstances, like literal accidents, being marked down as having COVID at the time that they died, and therefore another COVID statistic.

00:17:18.000 You're already aware of that.

00:17:19.000 Remember, we're not straying into conspiratorial territory, although I can't even envisage what that Might be anymore.

00:17:25.000 What we're saying is, was the data managed in order to expedite certain decisions and outcomes that were favourable to what you might call establishment interests?

00:17:33.000 And for clarity, I mean the state's ability to regulate, the corporate world's ability to profit, globalist interests, ability to assert power beyond the remit of sovereign nations.

00:17:42.000 In June, researchers from Johns Hopkins University and Lund University examined almost 20,000 studies on measures taken to protect populations against COVID across the world.

00:17:51.000 Their findings suggested that lockdown in spring 2020, when compared with less strict policies adopted by nations like Sweden, prevented as few as 1,700 deaths in England and Wales.

00:18:02.000 To put that into context, in an average week there are around 11,000 deaths in England and Wales.

00:18:07.000 Flu deaths hit a five-year high of 15,000 in England last winter.

00:18:11.000 When you're dealing with death, it's obviously a very important subject.

00:18:15.000 And remember that when the coronavirus pandemic first began, there was this idea that we're protecting the sanctity of life, which is an important spiritual humanitarian idea.

00:18:23.000 All life is sacred.

00:18:24.000 Not at the very beginning, many of us questioned, but is sanctity of life the guiding principle elsewhere?

00:18:29.000 If sanctity of life were, then you would see a very different world, wouldn't you?

00:18:33.000 You'd see people cared for, treasured.

00:18:35.000 You wouldn't see army veterans homeless on the street, for example.

00:18:38.000 You wouldn't see people allowed to die because of the high cost of certain types of medical care.

00:18:42.000 So those questions were always present.

00:18:44.000 Now what we're starting to understand is that death was used to mobilise measures that were effective and successful, but for who?

00:18:50.000 Whose interests were being served?

00:18:51.000 Let me know in the chat, let me know in the comments.

00:18:53.000 The report's author said their study showed that the draconian measures had a negligible impact on COVID mortality and were a policy failure of gigantic proportions.

00:19:02.000 They concluded, the data are in.

00:19:04.000 The deaths saved were a drop in the bucket compared to the staggering collateral costs imposed.

00:19:09.000 The data are in.

00:19:10.000 Information we desperately lacked at the start of the pandemic we now have in droves.

00:19:14.000 Yet is any of it being properly poured over by the inquiry?

00:19:17.000 No.

00:19:18.000 Are any lessons being learned or meaningful conclusions being drawn?

00:19:21.000 It appears not.

00:19:22.000 This week, we've heard evidence from Sir Patrick Vallance, the government's former Chief Scientific Advisor, Professor Sir Chris Whitty, the Chief Medical Officer for England, and his deputy, Jonathan Van Tam, taking some time off from his new job at Moderna to participate in the COVID inquiry.

00:19:38.000 Even if you ask the question, where do you work now?

00:19:40.000 That would be a more meaningful inquiry, wouldn't it?

00:19:43.000 Let me know in the chat if you agree.

00:19:44.000 Sadly, it disclosed nothing we didn't know already.

00:19:48.000 Obviously!

00:19:48.000 That shows you the level of corruption we're dealing with.

00:19:50.000 An inquiry is designed to unveil no new information and to essentially create one or two, oh this person and this person.

00:19:57.000 We were told the government was woefully ill-prepared for a pandemic.

00:20:00.000 We will hear from the politicians next who will doubtlessly blame the scientists and on and on it will tirelessly go as the main protagonists desperately try to cover their backs.

00:20:09.000 Tens of millions of pounds of taxpayer money have been spent on this exercise so far and the British people are none the wiser.

00:20:15.000 Just the little the poorer notice that.

00:20:16.000 Your taxpayer dollars and your taxpayer pounds pay for research that ends up in the hands of pharmaceutical companies, which is then sold back to you, or your taxpayer dollars or pounds again pay for those measures.

00:20:28.000 It's an extraordinary, almost beautiful system, were it not for its cruelty.

00:20:32.000 Rather than asking difficult questions, as did the researchers at Johns Hopkins, or exploring important issues like the origins of the virus, the inquiry appears to be operating on the foregone conclusion that if we'd locked down earlier, longer and harder, we would have been better off, despite mounting evidence to the contrary.

00:20:48.000 The inquiry then is not only designed to not reveal new information, but to ensure that future lockdowns can be facilitated so it remains prominent In the minds of the British public and the global public that there will be more lockdowns if only we'd locked down earlier.

00:21:02.000 Well, that's convenient.

00:21:03.000 What you mean?

00:21:04.000 Lock people in their homes.

00:21:05.000 Find reasons to assert authoritarian, centralised control on populations.

00:21:09.000 You can almost see it coming.

00:21:11.000 It'll be for climate change.

00:21:12.000 It'll be because of some natural disaster or some new pandemic.

00:21:16.000 But they won't say in an inquiry, stop We're doing gain of function research right now.

00:21:21.000 Ban it.

00:21:22.000 Find the people that perpetuated it when it had already been exposed as dangerous.

00:21:25.000 Oh, that includes people like Charles Fauci.

00:21:27.000 Where's that inquiry?

00:21:28.000 That inquiry has yet to take place.

00:21:30.000 Let me know in the chat if you agree.

00:21:31.000 The probe seems to be firmly set within the bounds of a centrist political consensus that the dysfunctional government and its former prime minister messed it all up and should be held responsible.

00:21:41.000 Yet, even on this point, its exploration of the advice structure around Boris Johnson appears wholly inadequate.

00:21:46.000 We have heard virtually nothing on why scientists with opposing views on lockdown were shut out of the decision process inside Number 10.

00:21:53.000 Not only on Number 10.

00:21:54.000 Across the world.

00:21:55.000 Across the internet.

00:21:56.000 Scientists like Robert Malone, who contributed to the advent and invention of mRNA.

00:22:01.000 Peter McCulloch, whose wisdom is invaluable and has been ahead of the curve throughout this.

00:22:04.000 Jay Patacharia of Stanford.

00:22:06.000 credible scientists who had their reputations attacked, who were banned, who were censored.

00:22:10.000 It was revealed in the Twitter files the depth to which deep state agencies within your country,

00:22:14.000 the United States, went to shut down these voices.

00:22:17.000 And now we get to a public inquiry.

00:22:18.000 Let's get Jay Bacharya, let's get Peter McCulloch, let's get Robert Malone.

00:22:22.000 Where are they? Are they participating in the inquiry?

00:22:23.000 Of course they're not.

00:22:24.000 You've got Jonathan Van Tam, used to work for the government, now works for Moderna.

00:22:28.000 Hmm.

00:22:29.000 The inquiry appears obsessed with the importance of following the science.

00:22:33.000 It is unwilling to entertain the notion that some of that science may have been flawed or wrong altogether.

00:22:38.000 There has similarly been scant scrutiny of supposedly science-led decisions which seem to have been made on the basis of little or no evidence at all.

00:22:45.000 Is the inquiry going to examine the extent to which the modelling was wrong and unpick why it was so heavily relied upon?

00:22:51.000 The modelling suggested, oh no, to stop the spread you have to isolate people from one another, so they went with that.

00:22:57.000 If you look at the graphs of infection and hospitalisation and death, some have pointed out that to a large extent they seem to rise and fall in natural geometric curves.

00:23:06.000 The inquiry should therefore surely be clarifying which interventions worked and which didn't.

00:23:11.000 It should be sharing everything it knows about the efficacy of different measures, including social distancing, contact tracing and mask wearing.

00:23:18.000 Social distancing, that places the responsibility on the individual and offers the opportunity to control.

00:23:22.000 Contact tracing facilitates digital exploration and data harvesting and mask wearing.

00:23:28.000 I would say, look, I don't want to be too conspiratorial, ironically, about this, but measures of social control are inherently beneficial.

00:23:35.000 Just look at some BF Skinner stuff.

00:23:37.000 If you give people behavioral nudges, indeed, like they plainly did with young people.

00:23:41.000 You know, you were allowed into nightclubs if you have the medication, even though we now know that it was not clinically trialled, or clinically trialled at all in some cases, for transmission.

00:23:51.000 So what was the benefit of telling young people that they could go to nightclubs if they had been vaccinated?

00:23:56.000 What was the legitimacy of saying, in order to protect older, more vulnerable people, you should take the medication?

00:24:00.000 The answer to that rhetorical question is there was none.

00:24:03.000 So that's where we uncover the malfeasance, and that's where the COVID inquiry will not take you, because it's a type of performance, a type of theatre, a part of a spectacle.

00:24:10.000 Like I argue, much of this power is.

00:24:13.000 Should be drawing lessons from the care home scandal and explaining how we should protect the elderly and vulnerable in future.

00:24:19.000 That's indeed what Jay Bhattacharya said from the outset.

00:24:21.000 He said there are vulnerable communities who probably should get vaccinated, who should certainly be protected and shielded.

00:24:27.000 He said that, he was called a maniac, he was shut down.

00:24:29.000 You can go back and look at it unless those things have been raised from the internet.

00:24:32.000 It should be carrying out a comprehensive audit on how badly children were affected by lockdown, both educationally and psychologically, and drawing a conclusion on whether schools should ever be closed again.

00:24:43.000 That's an interesting question.

00:24:44.000 Any parent will be asking the same questions, I imagine.

00:24:47.000 Let me know in the chat how you were affected by that.

00:24:49.000 Fundamentally, it should be telling us whether lockdown worked and to an extent, rather than getting lost in a trivial maze of pointless tittle tattle and name calling, none of which proves anything about government efficiency or decision making, but does show you the function of government and its relationship with its own subsidiary agencies and inquiries and indeed the legacy media and global power more broadly.

00:25:09.000 It was estimated in 2020 that the average age of a death from COVID was 82.4 years old.

00:25:15.000 Any death is a tragedy and that means we should also be examining whether the young mums who succumbed to breast cancer because people were staying at home saving lives and protecting the NHS could have been avoided.

00:25:25.000 The inquiry should look as closely at excess deaths as it has COVID deaths.

00:25:30.000 And yet excess deaths is still a phrase that I feel nervous using.

00:25:34.000 We necessarily impose lockdown on the basis of provisional or hypothetical evidence.

00:25:38.000 Now that we have hard data, that should surely be the chief focus of the inquiry.

00:25:43.000 Or follow the science, as people used to say.

00:25:45.000 How accurate did the models turn out to be?

00:25:47.000 Did non-pharmaceutical interventions work?

00:25:49.000 Like vitamin D, sunshine, regular exercise, healthy eating and natural immunity.

00:25:54.000 How many lives did they save?

00:25:55.000 How many did they cost through missed medical procedures?

00:25:58.000 The deleterious impact of being cooped up inside and not least the lower life expectancy that tends to go with lower income.

00:26:04.000 We can now look at the overall death rates in countries that apply different levels of intervention.

00:26:08.000 Australia, where lockdowns were severe, seemed to have ended up with a higher excess mortality rate than Sweden, where restrictions were far lesser.

00:26:14.000 Does that suggest that lockdowns killed more people than they saved?

00:26:17.000 Surely it's worth at least asking.

00:26:19.000 Surely a legitimate inquiry would ask those questions, particularly when you see what the lag is behind independent media reporting, then legacy media reporting, then government inquiries.

00:26:29.000 It's almost as if they want power to ultimately be maintained and nothing to really change, and to be able to continue to deploy the same measures in the event of some other comparable crisis, rather than have a genuine inquiry which empowers people to make choices for themselves.

00:26:41.000 And if this was happening simultaneously to dissenting voices being shut down and smeared, and new censorship laws being introduced, then you'd really have to start getting suspicious.

00:26:49.000 More depressing is that the whole process teaches us about how Whitehall works.

00:26:54.000 In a crisis, the bureaucracy's first instinct is to centralise, regulate and ban, and then defend its stance regardless of changed circumstances.

00:27:03.000 Not just Whitehall, which is one of the power centres in the UK, but power across the world.

00:27:07.000 It could have said Washington there.

00:27:08.000 It could have said the WHO there.

00:27:10.000 It could have said any one of a number of very influential and powerful NGOs and the individuals that you know already fund those agencies.

00:27:17.000 The question of how to avoid lockdown was never asked of us, and I find that extraordinary, said Professor Mark Woodhouse of Edinburgh, one of a handful of dissenting voices at the inquiry.

00:27:25.000 Watch out, Mark!

00:27:27.000 Quite.

00:27:27.000 And now it seems it never will be.

00:27:28.000 What a wasted opportunity.

00:27:30.000 Although, of course, it was not a wasted opportunity.

00:27:32.000 It's a performance.

00:27:33.000 the same way that throughout the lockdown period and the pandemic era, there were several

00:27:38.000 performances, actual, literal performances on talk shows, chat shows, mainstream media,

00:27:43.000 the shaming and condemnation of people that were hesitant or suspicious about the medications

00:27:47.000 that were being offered, the shutting down of dissenting voices. I'm not just talking

00:27:50.000 about myself, although I am talking about myself. More importantly, I'm talking about

00:27:53.000 the legitimate scientific voices of Bacharya, McCulloch, a whole host of others, Dave Mine,

00:27:58.000 all voices that you can see on our channel every day.

00:28:01.000 Because what's being ignored in the inquiry is being undertaken by us in independent media and our movement.

00:28:07.000 And let me tell you, there is a high cost for it, but it's a cost worth paying because it's a cost that must be paid.

00:28:12.000 If you're interested in truth, you have to ask difficult questions.

00:28:15.000 You have to be willing to confront authority.

00:28:17.000 Otherwise, what you'll be given is COVID inquiries where people go, well, I don't think we're interested in that.

00:28:21.000 You'll have a legacy media that's like two years behind the curve only asking those questions in my humble opinion because independent media and you and your independent thought have already pondered the answers to those questions.

00:28:31.000 When did you first hear of some of the names that I've said?

00:28:33.000 When have you ever heard those voices on legacy media?

00:28:37.000 When have you ever seen those voices in a Senate Inquiry or Congressional Inquiry or indeed in the UK Inquiry?

00:28:42.000 So, the legacy media of course amplifies the message of the powerful.

00:28:46.000 The Covid Inquiry is essentially a piece of theatre.

00:28:48.000 The function of it is to ensure that these measures remain on the table for any future crisis where having authority, centralising authority, shutting down people's lives, controlling for, surveilling, censoring, social credit scoring all remain options for a power structure that is quaking, shaking and knows its days are numbered.

00:29:06.000 But that's just what I think.

00:29:07.000 Remember, we stream every single day.

00:29:09.000 You can join a chat that is bizarre, has a variety of views in it, some of them not to my taste, but all of them worth hearing in a world that values free speech.

Stay Free - Russel Brand - December 05, 2023

Here’s the News: Gain Of Function A BIO-WEAPON?! Fauci KNEW All Along?!

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript