Stay Free - Russel Brand - IRAN WAR PENDING!? Is This What TRUMP’S Secrets REVEAL? - #149 - Stay Free With Russell Brand

00:00:00.000 I'm going to go ahead and get this.

00:00:22.000 In this video, I'm going to be showing you how to make a 3D model of a 3D model of a

00:00:50.000 In this video, you're going to see the future.

00:01:02.000 Hey! 0.99

00:01:03.000 Thanks for joining us, you Awakening Wonders.

00:01:05.000 This is Stay Free with Russell Brand.

00:01:07.000 Wherever you're watching this, you can only get the whole show on Rumble, and you are going to want to see all of it.

00:01:12.000 Why?

00:01:13.000 Because Michael Schellenberger will be joining us here, in this room, with a surprising array of information on censorship, surveillance, UFOs, and in particular, we're going to be talking about the Trump arraignment.

00:01:27.000 One of the things that is not being discussed enough is what's in those boxes.

00:01:31.000 Let me know in the chat if you've considered the significance of what the boxes themselves contain.

00:01:36.000 Some people believe that what is in there reveals that the US had plans for a war with Iran.

00:01:44.000 Allegedly.

00:01:45.000 And part of what's happening now is an attempt to distract us from that significant fact.

00:01:50.000 We'll also be talking to you on the other side, on what some people would call the dark side, but others would see as a portal for great and limitless light on Rumble about how the lockdown and other regulatory measures affected the victims of heart attacks.

00:02:03.000 Obviously we can't Talk about that on YouTube.

00:02:05.000 But I think a lot of the questions that we're going to ask Michael Schellenberger would simply be subject to censorship, which is ironic because he spends so much of his time exposing censorship and the censorship industrial complex.

00:02:14.000 In fact, he's in the country to participate in a talk that I am... What am I doing?

00:02:18.000 I'm emceeing, I'm curating.

00:02:20.000 Yeah, emceeing sounds pretty cool.

00:02:21.000 I'll be emceeing that chat.

00:02:24.000 Gareth, you're my on-screen assistant.

00:02:26.000 There I'll be on stage.

00:02:27.000 I wonder if you'll be attending the event at all?

00:02:29.000 Will I be assisting you in some way still?

00:02:31.000 I'd like you to, in some way.

00:02:33.000 And this first story that we're covering is fantastic because it's a media story.

00:02:38.000 The MSNBC are refusing to cover Trump's post-arraignment speech because MSNBC says Rachel Maddow, who you know I have no axe to grind with.

00:02:48.000 I think Rachel Maddow seems like a really nice person.

00:02:51.000 Let me know in the chat if you agree.

00:02:53.000 I feel like that Rachel Maddow says it'll be irresponsible of her to broadcast Trump's post-arraignment chat because he'll say things that are disinformation, malinformation, and yet we know that MSNBC have broadcast So many examples of misinformation in the past.

00:03:10.000 Let me know in the comments in the chat what examples you come up with.

00:03:13.000 A few clues.

00:03:13.000 Russia going, that's one.

00:03:15.000 The medication.

00:03:15.000 But you, tell us your own.

00:03:16.000 Tell us your own right now.

00:03:17.000 And if you're watching this on Rumble right now, press the red button and join us on Locals.

00:03:21.000 That's a vast and thriving community.

00:03:24.000 The things they talk about in there.

00:03:26.000 It bends your bones, doesn't it, Gal?

00:03:27.000 It certainly does.

00:03:28.000 But at least it's not misinformation.

00:03:31.000 Look at Rachel Maddow on MSNBC saying that they have to censor Trump for... I don't actually know why, because there used to be a time when we were considered capable to discern for ourselves the nature of truth and fiction.

00:03:43.000 Let's have a look.

00:03:44.000 Now tonight, after his arraignment on federal felony charges, he's speaking again, this time to an audience of his supporters that's gathered for a campaign fundraiser tonight at his golf club and summer home in New Jersey.

00:03:58.000 We knew heading into this that he was planning to make these remarks.

00:04:01.000 We are prepared for his pre-fundraiser remarks tonight to again be essentially a Trump campaign speech.

00:04:07.000 Because of that, we do not intend to carry these remarks live.

00:04:11.000 What I think is interesting is it's now become overt.

00:04:13.000 The process of censorship has become explicit and is being legitimized as it happens.

00:04:18.000 We cannot show you Trump because he's going to be campaigning.

00:04:22.000 But America is supposed to be a free country.

00:04:25.000 We're supposed to be able to ascertain for ourselves whether or not we want to take Donald

00:04:29.000 Trump seriously, to dismiss him, to arraign him, to lock him up.

00:04:33.000 But of course the great hypocrisy at the heart of this is we know that MSNBC has previously

00:04:38.000 published untrue information.

00:04:40.000 And remember, and let me know in the chat if you agree with this, part of what we feel

00:04:43.000 is significant is that we're not talking about the contents of the boxes.

00:04:49.000 Did Trump have vital information that proves that the US have been planning a war with

00:04:56.000 Let me know in the chat what you think about that.

00:04:58.000 Let's have a look at the rest of this from Rachel Maddow before demonstrating other clear examples of MSNBC broadcasting untrue information which shows, look... 0.98

00:05:07.000 If they won't broadcast some information because it's untrue, that's the reason they're giving it, and yet they broadcast other information that we know to be untrue, that shows you there's an agenda.

00:05:17.000 I guess our key point is, what is the agenda that MSNBC are carrying?

00:05:21.000 Let's look.

00:05:23.000 As we have said before in these circumstances, There is a cost to us as a news organization to knowingly broadcast untrue things.

00:05:31.000 We are here to bring you the news.

00:05:33.000 It hurts our ability to do that.

00:05:35.000 I can't take any more of that.

00:05:36.000 Let's have a look at Rachel Maddow on COVID-19 vaccines. 0.93

00:05:39.000 If you're watching this on YouTube, obviously I'm not saying whether this is true or not.

00:05:44.000 You can decide for yourself using the WHO's guidelines which they still use on YouTube.

00:05:49.000 Have a look.

00:05:50.000 Join us on Rumble if you want to see a more exclusive insightful take on this.

00:05:52.000 We'll be talking to Michael Schellenberger about this in a minute.

00:05:55.000 Let's have a look.

00:05:56.000 Instead of the virus being able to hop from person to person to person, potentially mutating and becoming more virulent and drug-resistant along the way, now we know that the vaccines work well enough that the virus stops with every vaccinated person.

00:06:13.000 A vaccinated person gets exposed to the virus, the virus does not infect them, the virus cannot then use that person to go anywhere else.

00:06:23.000 As of today, that information is still on YouTube.

00:06:26.000 As of today, MSNBC have not retracted that information.

00:06:30.000 Now, if that were one isolated example, you could say that we're cherry-picking, and indeed, to a point, we are narrativizing.

00:06:37.000 But let's move now to the subject of war.

00:06:39.000 Many people say that the Democratic Party have become the de facto party of war.

00:06:42.000 That's why Tulsi Gabbard, who's coming on the show soon, says she left the Democrat Party.

00:06:46.000 Now, another thing we've done content on before is MSNBC's framing of military-industrial complex Employees as experts without declaring their ties and relationships with organisations like Raytheon and Lockheed Martin who obviously benefit from ongoing war.

00:07:04.000 Many of the retired military leaders employed by MSNBC are paid contributors and have secondary affiliations that are rarely, if ever, mentioned, leaving viewers in the dark about whose interests they're promoting.

00:07:13.000 None of the leading networks, including obviously MSNBC, makes a regular practice of announcing its military analysts' financial ties to the Pentagon, connections that could colour their on-air comments, As documented in a Pulitzer Prize-winning series by the New York Times in 2008, the Pentagon orchestrated the commentary of 75 former officers who served as radio and TV analysts.

00:07:32.000 So that's one example.

00:07:34.000 I know what you lot are typing in the comments now, and if you're not joining us on Locals yet, press that red button and join us there now.

00:07:39.000 Russiagate, that's what you're going to be talking about.

00:07:41.000 You're going to be talking about The way that MSNBC and the mainstream media at large covered the allegations that Trump was a Russian asset, which we now know was completely untrue and understood to be true by the Deep State and the government themselves from very early on in the process.

00:07:57.000 Here's Rachel Maddow, by coincidence, reporting on that very subject.

00:08:00.000 Let's have a look.

00:08:01.000 If the presidency is effectively a Russian op, right? 0.70

00:08:05.000 If the American presidency right now is the product of collusion between the Russian intelligence services and an American campaign.

00:08:11.000 I mean, that is so profoundly big.

00:08:16.000 We not only need to stay focused on figuring it out.

00:08:19.000 We need to start preparing for what the consequences are going to be if it proves to be true.

00:08:24.000 Now I know that Rachel Maddow is acting in good faith even though we know that she appeared at an event sponsored by Lockheed Martin very recently to promote, I don't know, diversity or something extraordinary, important, but perhaps something that could do without the funding of Lockheed Martin.

00:08:39.000 But if she's acting in good faith it just shows you that the need for transparency and a lack of censorship is paramount because here is someone reporting in good faith things that have been proven to be completely untrue and participating in the censorship.

00:08:53.000 Would you call it censorship?

00:08:54.000 Let me know in the chat of Trump's post-arraignment speech making a decision For MSNBC viewers on their behalf of what information to take seriously and what information to ignore.

00:09:04.000 Now this is where we on Stay Free want to broaden out your perspective a little wider by using this article by Branko Markicic talking about the contents of those boxes.

00:09:16.000 You know, remember, we've asked you before, we just accept as a matter of course that there's information that's kept

00:09:22.000 from us and we're supposed not to question what the contents of top secret information and

00:09:27.000 dossiers might be. Is it that UFOs are real and have been collaborating and communicating

00:09:33.000 diplomatically with our governments for potentially 50, 60 years, at least since

00:09:38.000 Roswell?

00:09:39.000 Are there plans for forever wars?

00:09:41.000 Ongoing, expedient conflicts that are beneficial financially to the establishment, but not beneficial to the people of Middle Eastern nations in particular?

00:09:50.000 Now look at what some people allege are in those boxes.

00:09:53.000 This is from Branko Markatic's sub stack.

00:09:55.000 Is that right, Gareth?

00:09:57.000 It's on Jacobin, actually.

00:09:58.000 It's on Jacobin, which I believe to be a left-wing publication.

00:10:02.000 Again, this is one of our key points.

00:10:04.000 Right-wing, left-wing, it doesn't matter anymore.

00:10:06.000 We've got to find new anti-establishment alliances from across the spectrum.

00:10:11.000 We can't get caught up in these identity wars.

00:10:13.000 We can't get trapped in these old categories because we won't be able to move forward together.

00:10:17.000 That's another one of the things I'll be talking to Michael Schellenberger about in a minute.

00:10:21.000 Get your questions ready for him, for heaven's sake.

00:10:24.000 In a detail that's been almost entirely glossed over, central to this case are a set of secret government plans for attacking Iran.

00:10:31.000 Other than as a purely factual matter, or how to stress how recklessly Trump treated classified information, this has been little remarked upon.

00:10:40.000 Let me know in the chat, do you think that's more significant than the fact he took boxes?

00:10:45.000 What's contained in the boxes?

00:10:46.000 Remember with the recent Pentagon Papers Part 2, released by buddy boy Taxera, we were all focusing on him and what his political views were.

00:10:55.000 He's just a kid who cares what his political views are. 0.99

00:10:57.000 He's a nitwit. 0.98

00:10:58.000 No one knows anything about age anyway, do they? 1.00

00:11:00.000 Let me know in the chat.

00:11:01.000 Instead of focusing on the fact that he revealed there were boots on the ground, tootsies on the floor over there in Ukraine, that the war was widely regarded to be unwinnable, this is important vital information, certainly more important than personal information about the whistleblower.

00:11:14.000 The issue stems from Trump's apparent frustration with what he claimed was a false narrative being pushed by the press that after losing the 2020 election under the advice of Benjamin Netanyahu, Trump was dangerously close to ordering strikes on Iran that could have triggered full-scale war and had to be talked down from it By the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Mark Milley.

00:11:34.000 So I suppose what is being claimed by Trump, or what potentially is true, is that this documentation proves which side of that argument he was on.

00:11:44.000 Was Trump trying to prevent an attack on Iran, or was Trump Agitate for an attack on Iran.

00:11:50.000 You know what you know about the establishment.

00:11:52.000 Let us know what you think in the chat.

00:11:54.000 And let me know why it's become so important to pursue Trump and why it's become so important to distract us, the public, from the contents of these boxes.

00:12:03.000 What do you think about all this, Gareth?

00:12:05.000 I mean I think it comes down to with MSNBC credibility at the end of the day.

00:12:10.000 I mean when we're talking about, I mean Michael himself will be on soon as written about the

00:12:14.000 fact that when it comes to, we saw the clip about talking about the vaccine, Pfizer itself

00:12:19.000 has poured money into news media organisations to promote not just the vaccine itself but

00:12:24.000 the crackdown on disfavoured speech.

00:12:26.000 So we already know there's not a credibility there.

00:12:28.000 When you know that this organisation is receiving millions of dollars from companies such as

00:12:33.000 Pfizer you know there's conflict of interest there.

00:12:36.000 So Pfizer promote their own product and also fund the censorship of information that's

00:12:41.000 not favourable for them.

00:12:42.000 Now Schellenberger if you've heard of him it's probably because of his great work on

00:12:45.000 the Twitter files which itself was the great revelation that the deep state and social

00:12:51.000 media platforms are more involved with one another than was previously admitted and maybe

00:12:55.000 more than was previously imagined.

00:12:57.000 In order to censor sometimes true information like Zuckerberg himself admitted true information

00:13:03.000 was taken down.

00:13:04.000 Why?

00:13:05.000 And how can these claims be made by MSNBC now?

00:13:07.000 What credibility does the mainstream have left when we know how they're funded, when

00:13:11.000 we know how they position pundits and experts, when we know which team they are batting for?

00:13:16.000 Now you know us, we don't care about the Republicans or the Democrats.

00:13:19.000 I don't think that the Republicans are meaningfully better than the Democrat Party.

00:13:22.000 Let me know in the chat if you disagree with that.

00:13:24.000 With relation to the vaccine, you can give the argument of the science was evolving and changing all the time, and I think that's a valid argument.

00:13:32.000 It was.

00:13:33.000 It was shifting all the time, and Rachel Maddow could say, well, at one time we thought this, and then it shifted.

00:13:37.000 But when it came to Russiagate and the Steele dossier, this is from the Washington Post, the FBI concluded that the dossier was mostly a jumble of claims that were inaccurate, unconfirmed, or already publicly reported.

00:13:49.000 Sourcing for the dossier was threadbare in the most charitable of depictions.

00:13:52.000 So this is a time when Rachel Maddow and everyone else at MSNBC was going on air to say, this is definitely true, Trump's affiliated with Russia, there's collusion going on, when we now know from the FBI that this was all unsubstantiated at the time.

00:14:07.000 They believe that they believed the information was true or that they wanted it to be true and reported it on that basis, whether that's on the subjects that coalesced around the pandemic period or indeed around advocating and agitating for war or Russiagate.

00:14:24.000 How do MSNBC treat the information that they convey?

00:14:28.000 How do they treat you as an audience member?

00:14:30.000 Are they interested in an ongoing discourse?

00:14:33.000 Are they interested in presenting information in a fair and balanced way, or are they interested

00:14:38.000 in supporting particular ideas, particular candidates, and conveying particular propaganda?

00:14:44.000 These questions and so many more are going to be answered, but only on Rumble.

00:14:47.000 If you're watching us on YouTube now, there's a link in the description.

00:14:50.000 Click on that.

00:14:51.000 Join us on Rumble to hear our exclusive conversation with Michael Schellenberger.

00:14:54.000 I've been talking to him before.

00:14:56.000 He's obviously fascinated on the subject of lab leaks.

00:14:58.000 He recently broke the story that the first people to be infected, allegedly, were all employees of the Wuhan Institute of Virology.

00:15:05.000 And I've learned their names because they're all brilliant.

00:15:07.000 You, Hu, and Zhu.

00:15:10.000 Those were the first three.

00:15:11.000 Can you imagine the kind of childish jokes?

00:15:13.000 He's also incredibly, I would say, robust and bold on the subject of UFOs.

00:15:21.000 You're going to love the content there and we're going to be talking to him about this story, our main story today.

00:15:26.000 Is it the contents of those boxes that are important?

00:15:29.000 Has Trump got information to reveal that the USA was planning a war against Iran?

00:15:35.000 And of course, this being Michael Schellenberger, someone who I'm doing a live talk with.

00:15:39.000 There's a link in the chat and the description if you want to join us for that, by the way.

00:15:41.000 Me, Matt Taibbi and Michael Schellenberger in London talking about the censorship industrial complex, which obviously we're going to talk about.

00:15:48.000 He wouldn't... He's got to play his hits.

00:15:50.000 Got it.

00:15:50.000 Oh yeah.

00:15:51.000 Yeah.

00:15:51.000 It's like if you see Rod Stewart and he didn't do Maggie Mae, what are you gonna think? Do Maggie Mae?

00:15:55.000 Yeah, do the censorship industrial complex. That's your hits, isn't it? You don't want to hear like some b-side 1.00

00:16:01.000 No, you don't hear something off. Oh, it's my latest album.

00:16:04.000 I'm interested in this now. Yeah, we don't care. No, wake up darling

00:16:07.000 I think I've got something to say to you.

00:16:09.000 Wake up!

00:16:09.000 That's it.

00:16:10.000 Darling! 0.96

00:16:11.000 Darling! 0.96

00:16:12.000 Okay, join us.

00:16:13.000 There's a link in the description.

00:16:14.000 Join us over there.

00:16:16.000 Do you care about free speech, Gareth?

00:16:19.000 No.

00:16:19.000 Remotely.

00:16:20.000 It's important, though.

00:16:21.000 Even if Darren, Gareth, he can't be made to care.

00:16:24.000 Darren?

00:16:25.000 I think I remember what I said.

00:16:25.000 Who's Darren?

00:16:26.000 How long have we worked together?

00:16:28.000 Who are you again?

00:16:29.000 Garen.

00:16:30.000 Even if Garen here, a fine fellow, doesn't care a jot about freedom of speech or free speech, I do.

00:16:36.000 And where free speech and speech meet, you get freech.

00:16:42.000 I didn't want my voice over both of them.

00:16:47.000 Handsome Jack, the bad graphic blag.

00:16:49.000 He's done it again, hasn't he?

00:16:50.000 He's off to pursue his dreams as an actor and if he's acting as even half as appalling as his graphics making, we're in for some wooden appearances in soap commercials.

00:17:00.000 Should do great in Hollywood, eh?

00:17:03.000 I don't know.

00:17:04.000 about me and I would though. I was a very nuanced. One of the best. Oi! I left there

00:17:04.000 Never did.

00:17:10.000 willingly. I wouldn't wear the hats, I wouldn't do it.

00:17:12.000 Wouldn't keep down all of the conspiracies they wanted me to keep down. I came over here to give you

00:17:16.000 free speech right where it hurts, up the ghoulies. Now where is this free speech? Right, so 1.00

00:17:22.000 here we go.

00:17:22.000 Uh, not Putin.

00:17:24.000 Russell, what the F, says not Putin, and this is about me on a mobility scooter, which is something that we should be cautious broadcasters.

00:17:31.000 I've been in trouble for this before because an activist for a disability group said that they didn't like that I did it, but this particular person on a mobility scooter, well, they didn't like it much either.

00:17:39.000 Have a look.

00:17:41.000 There you go, that's just me over in America helping others as usual.

00:17:49.000 Yeah, we're off YouTube at this point, aren't we?

00:17:55.000 There you go, that's just me over in America helping others as usual.

00:18:02.000 Yeah, we're off YouTube at this point, aren't we?

00:18:04.000 That's right.

00:18:05.000 Probably best, I would say.

00:18:08.000 Yeah, some people don't like that.

00:18:10.000 This is Prime7.

00:18:11.000 I noticed you're revealing more flesh each day.

00:18:13.000 How far are you planning to go?

00:18:15.000 Pants and socks?

00:18:16.000 Possibly.

00:18:18.000 Oh yeah, that looks alright though, doesn't it?

00:18:19.000 Is that what I was doing?

00:18:19.000 What was I doing there?

00:18:20.000 Happy birthday, Mr. President, to Donald Trump?

00:18:22.000 It could be any time, to be honest.

00:18:26.000 I'm amazed you've got that much on.

00:18:28.000 In some ways, overdressed.

00:18:31.000 Here's some of your reactions on the Trump arraignment.

00:18:33.000 LadyGrey312, she says, political persecution is clear when you see Clinton and Biden were not charged for the same or worse crimes.

00:18:41.000 I saw Jon Stewart do a piece the other day about Trump's alleged embezzlement from his own charity foundation.

00:18:48.000 He was saying that Trump is treated differently, favourably by the establishment And perhaps there are examples of that being true, if indeed what Jon Stewart's saying about the embezzlement.

00:18:57.000 Let me know in the chat if you know about that story.

00:18:59.000 But when it comes to this stuff, I mean... Look, I get that, and that might be true, but when you take an example like MSNBC or, you know, CNN did the same thing.

00:19:09.000 They refused to air the speech.

00:19:11.000 Following the arraignment.

00:19:13.000 Like we're making a stand.

00:19:14.000 The same CNN who literally four ratings, we know, got Trump and did that town hall speech a couple of weeks beforehand.

00:19:21.000 It's not consistent.

00:19:22.000 They both, both of those networks made billions and billions of dollars when Trump got into power by airing him.

00:19:28.000 We know the MSNBC and both again working with kind of Hillary Clinton and the DNC to push Trump and elevate him in the kind of Pied Piper strategy.

00:19:37.000 You know, because he'd be an easier candidate to beat.

00:19:40.000 They're not, you know, they're being disingenuous with all of this I feel.

00:19:45.000 I don't think that the Pied Piper strategy went very well because even with the original

00:19:49.000 Pied Piper, I like him, even though what he did was he killed those children, didn't he?

00:19:55.000 Firstly he led the rats out of Hamelin, great job, don't knock him on his bill.

00:19:59.000 Then he led all the children out.

00:20:00.000 Now this Pied Piper strategy, if backing candidates that you feel that your candidate will do

00:20:04.000 well against, like Donald Trump, who turned into sort of some gargantuan portal for the

00:20:08.000 nation's emotions, whether for good or for ill, has failed and yet are they doing it

00:20:13.000 Let us know in the chat if you think the mainstream media is still trying to frame Trump as a favoured opponent, or are they trying to bring him down because he is the Great Swamp Drainer?

00:20:23.000 And if you believe he is the man that drains the swamp, how come that swamp didn't get drained more during that four years?

00:20:28.000 Do you think that the deep state controlled him?

00:20:29.000 Do you think that's what's in those boxes?

00:20:31.000 What is in those boxes?

00:20:33.000 Open the lid!

00:20:34.000 Stare deep, deep inside that box, and if the last three years brought to you incomparable peril and doubt, then you might want to take a

00:20:42.000 glance in the direction of some good humor. I made a special during that time. Brandemic is

00:20:47.000 premiering on Moment from the 25th of June. It's uncensored, it's self-funded, it's having a

00:20:54.000 laugh about a period that many of us found tragic and filled with deception. It's called

00:20:57.000 Brandemic. Have a look now.

00:20:59.000 It's been a weird couple of years, let's face it.

00:21:06.000 This is the COVID-19 timeline.

00:21:09.000 January 2020!

00:21:10.000 Patients in Wuhan are infected with a new form of coronavirus.

00:21:15.000 I remember that bit. 0.98

00:21:16.000 I remember thinking, who gives a f***ing s***? 0.97

00:21:18.000 Tell me when it gets to a bit of China I'm f***ing heard of, then I might start caring. 0.98

00:21:22.000 LISTEN! 0.98

00:21:25.000 HOW MUCH F***ING SP- What on a f***ing bat do you need before you start understanding science? 0.98

00:21:38.000 Yeah, but... What? 0.98

00:21:40.000 But... What?

00:21:41.000 What?

00:21:42.000 Well, it's just over here, the Wuhan Institute of Virology,

00:21:46.000 where they're doing gain-of-function research on bat coronaviruses.

00:21:51.000 Yeah!

00:21:52.000 ♪♪ I stood there like an obedient prisoner of the state 0.97

00:22:00.000 on my little f****** sticker circle. 0.98

00:22:03.000 Then I took my turn nicely, like Twister for wankers. 0.97

00:22:09.000 Listen to what some people said on the surveys we give out when you get tickets.

00:22:13.000 Where are you Mr. John?

00:22:15.000 There he is Mr. John, Mr. John.

00:22:17.000 Response to the question, what's the naughtiest thing you did during lockdown?

00:22:19.000 telling all my neighbors I was a medical worker so they would direct their applause at me during claps for carers

00:22:24.000 some have called it a masterpiece It premieres on the 25th of June.

00:22:33.000 There's a link in your description.

00:22:35.000 You can get it now.

00:22:36.000 Hello there.

00:22:37.000 Be calm, be still.

00:22:38.000 Surely the reason you've become so priapic, so prehensile, so mobile, oh microphone of mine, is because you have understood that in the studio with me right now, oh yeah, Michael Schellenberger is present.

00:22:51.000 Is he the Bob Woodward of his time?

00:22:54.000 Is he a dazzling devil with a washboard belly?

00:22:58.000 Are you happy to be here in the UK, Michael?

00:23:00.000 Thanks for joining us.

00:23:00.000 So happy.

00:23:01.000 Thanks for having me.

00:23:02.000 How was customs?

00:23:03.000 Did they give you any trouble?

00:23:04.000 Sailed through.

00:23:05.000 Just sailed through?

00:23:06.000 The machines didn't work, but I went through with people.

00:23:06.000 It was fine.

00:23:09.000 Did you have to do that bit where you put your hands like that?

00:23:12.000 No, it was very easy.

00:23:13.000 Did they say, no, come this way, sir?

00:23:14.000 Yeah.

00:23:15.000 None of this?

00:23:16.000 The biometric devices failed on me, so I had to get through the people, but it worked great.

00:23:20.000 Michael, before we get into our interview, tell us why you are here at the moment in London.

00:23:26.000 I'm here to launch the campaign against the censorship industrial complex with you and Matt Taibbi this Thursday 7pm Central Hall Westminster.

00:23:36.000 How are we going to create a campaign and a movement around such a complex system that has the obvious advantage as conveyed in its name of being able to shut down opposition?

00:23:49.000 Firstly, how?

00:23:50.000 And secondly, why is it... See, I'm a proper journalist now.

00:23:54.000 And why is it so important that we do that?

00:23:57.000 The most important thing is just to expose it.

00:24:00.000 Just drag it into the light.

00:24:01.000 That's what we did in Congress.

00:24:02.000 That's what you've been doing.

00:24:03.000 And then I think the other part of it is just to make fun of it.

00:24:06.000 It's just absurd that here we are, 250 years after the Constitution of the United States puts as our First Amendment free speech, that we're having to defend free speech and make the case for free speech in our societies.

00:24:17.000 And then we need a global movement.

00:24:19.000 That's the third part.

00:24:20.000 It's not just in the United States.

00:24:21.000 It's in Britain, the EU, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Brazil, Ireland are all places where we see an attack on free speech.

00:24:29.000 We have to stand together.

00:24:30.000 There's a global war on free speech.

00:24:32.000 We need the global resistance.

00:24:33.000 And it's not just a rhetorical attack on free speech, is it, Michael?

00:24:35.000 It's a legal and regulatory attack on free speech.

00:24:39.000 First, ideologically, free speech is being conflated with a whole host of nefarious ideas such as racism and the subcategory, I suppose, of antisemitism and hatred.

00:24:51.000 But I've noticed lately a tendency, when there is an appetite within the establishment to control or shut something down, that the first thing they do is conflate it with something that is demonstrably Evil.

00:25:04.000 Is that why it's important to have free speech as a principle that is somehow unencroachable?

00:25:09.000 That's right.

00:25:09.000 I mean, we saw, I mean, for years, right, we had cancel culture.

00:25:12.000 So we had a culture that said people should self-censor.

00:25:15.000 We see people trying to get cancelled their comedy acts or their speeches in the university.

00:25:20.000 Now we see the censorship industrial complex using that sort of woke culture and tapping into it to suggest that People are engaged in hate speech.

00:25:28.000 They're tapping into fears of COVID.

00:25:31.000 We saw climate change, trans issues. 0.90

00:25:34.000 So they just keep finding more justifications, more reasons to censor you.

00:25:38.000 I think we have to remind people that our societies have never been more tolerant of racial, religious, and sexual minorities than they are today.

00:25:45.000 Over 95% of Americans support the right of black and white people to get married, up from just about 4% in the 1950s.

00:25:52.000 I mean, compare how much more tolerant we are to how people were 50 years ago, 100 years ago.

00:25:58.000 So this idea that there's more hatred in this society is itself a hateful idea.

00:26:03.000 It stems right out of the Hillary Clinton idea that there's these deplorables, these terrible people that support Trump, that there's somehow some rise in these hateful attitudes.

00:26:12.000 There's no evidence for it.

00:26:13.000 In fact, it's just the opposite.

00:26:14.000 We're more tolerant, we're more loving as a people than we've ever been.

00:26:18.000 In the way that free speech is being framed as a right-wing issue, it sometimes feels to me, like within the spaces in media that we all operate in, like here on Rumble, you know, click the red button, join us on Locals, that there is almost a a tendency and a trend for the right to actually to be advocating on behalf of these issues so but you don't strike me as a person that would be traditionally affiliated with the republican party or right-wing movements you strike me as i guess you'd be old-fashioned metropolitan liberal type of a person i mean these are just guesses i'm basing on having spoken to for sure i mean i was a democrat until about a year and a half ago i'm an independent now

00:27:02.000 But yeah, when I was growing up, when I graduated from high school, the Supreme Court ruled that you could burn the American flag.

00:27:07.000 It was Republicans and conservatives who thought that should be prohibited.

00:27:11.000 The ACLU was a defender of the right of neo-Nazis to build a march through Jewish neighborhoods, including neighborhoods of Holocaust survivors.

00:27:19.000 It was the left that was the defender of free speech.

00:27:21.000 That's basically reversed itself.

00:27:23.000 So when we were antagonized in front of Congress, Matt Taibbi and me, we were being criticized by Democrats who have been demanding more censorship.

00:27:30.000 I think it's because Republicans are now in the minority, they're feeling persecuted, and the Democrats and progressives are really on this holy war of wokeism, and it's just stemmed right out of that.

00:27:40.000 So you have cancel culture from the bottom, censorship industrial complex from the top.

00:27:45.000 That's why it's important to have principles that are transcendent of usual political affiliations, I suppose.

00:27:51.000 Is there a figure in political and public life who, more than Donald Trump, somehow exemplifies these new differences, this demagoguery?

00:27:59.000 And what do you think in particular about this latest round of... Are they attacks on Trump, indeed?

00:28:05.000 Let me know in the chat if that's how you regard it.

00:28:07.000 Or is Trump a felon?

00:28:09.000 Is Trump a danger to democracy?

00:28:12.000 Is Trump an enemy of the state?

00:28:14.000 Or is Trump being curtailed and controlled precisely because he's a kind of berserker bull in the china shop? 0.88

00:28:21.000 And also, if you could cover in this rather corroming question, what do you, not what do you imagine is in these boxes, Branko Makaric has said that They potentially contain US plans to attack Iran, and is that in particular part of the problem here?

00:28:36.000 And more generally, when dealing with whistleblowers, shouldn't we be talking about the content of what they're conveying, rather than the individuals themselves?

00:28:43.000 I mean, what I think people have to understand is that we have this amazing system in the United States.

00:28:47.000 We have checks and balances, we have a Supreme Court.

00:28:50.000 When people saw the riot at the Capitol on January 6th, which was a total disaster, it was terrible, you have to remember that that's not the same as a coup.

00:28:57.000 I've lived in Latin America, I've seen what coups look like. It's when the military takes over the

00:29:02.000 Supreme Court, it's when they dissolve Congress, it's when they take over the newspapers.

00:29:06.000 The idea that our system is so fragile that a president who denies the results of the

00:29:10.000 elections, if that's what you think happened, or expresses skepticism, the idea that that

00:29:15.000 somehow would result in the overthrow of the government is bizarre.

00:29:19.000 So there's some sense among a lot of progressives in the United States right now that our system is fragile.

00:29:25.000 And so we've seen that in the culture too.

00:29:27.000 This treatment of children is fragile.

00:29:29.000 The democracy is fragile.

00:29:31.000 Everybody is fragile.

00:29:32.000 And I think we have to get back to the sense in which we're resilient, we're strong.

00:29:36.000 Our country is capable of dealing with different opinions.

00:29:38.000 That's the heart of what it means to live in a liberal democracy.

00:29:41.000 There's an interesting piece of cultural diagnosis that you've just offered there.

00:29:44.000 The Romantic period, perhaps, was defined by art and poetry that portrayed nature herself as a vital goddess that could hold, herald, contain, destroy us all.

00:29:58.000 And then nature, too, has become subject to this framing of fragility, and perhaps deeper psychic wounds are being worked through at this time.

00:30:11.000 When the news cycle starts to seriously carry stories about UFOs, which I know a lot of our viewers think are false flags, they think we're being fed these stories to distract us, that there's no truth to them.

00:30:23.000 For me it feels like this is something seismic, this is something epochal is happening.

00:30:28.000 Our framing of reality is starting to glitch and alter, even if the stories are being used somehow as a distraction.

00:30:35.000 What's your take on on these stories Michael? I mean what I'll say so I wrote a

00:30:38.000 Twitter files thread about the Hunter Biden laptop and what we saw was a genuine operation

00:30:44.000 by retired CIA people, retired or so-called retired FBI people, spreading disinformation

00:30:50.000 about the Hunter Biden laptop suggesting that it was a result of Russian disinformation.

00:30:54.000 Same thing with Russiagate around Trump, the idea that he was somehow a Russian asset

00:30:58.000 despite no evidence for that.

00:30:59.000 What you're seeing with UFOs is the exact opposite.

00:31:02.000 The whistleblowers are themselves fearful and persecuted.

00:31:10.000 The people off the record, they were terrified to talk.

00:31:13.000 They did not want their names being used.

00:31:15.000 They were not part of some orchestrated disinformation campaign.

00:31:18.000 We should never rule out that there's some possibility that's what's going on.

00:31:21.000 Certainly the military has used UFOs in the past to sort of distract people's attention from secret spy activities.

00:31:28.000 But what we've seen here is the whistleblower that came forward, this person, David Grush, very highly rated, had

00:31:34.000 top secret clearance.

00:31:36.000 He went to the Defense Department office to study UFOs called Aero.

00:31:41.000 They were not passing the information on to Congress.

00:31:43.000 He then went to Congress because they had set aside a special whistleblower program for him.

00:31:48.000 And then various people came forward.

00:31:49.000 I spoke to them after our testimony.

00:31:51.000 People trusted us and said, we want to go to you and talk to you about what's really going on.

00:31:55.000 And they said, David Grush is the real deal.

00:31:57.000 This is really happening.

00:31:58.000 We do have UFOs that we've captured over the years.

00:32:02.000 It sounds totally crazy.

00:32:04.000 I'm just reporting what people have told me and these are people that were very fearful.

00:32:08.000 This was not coming from official sources in contrast to Russiagate and the Hunter Biden laptop where it was official people publicly saying this is Russian disinformation.

00:32:17.000 That's not what's going on here with UFOs.

00:32:19.000 Right, so to you these seem like legitimate stories and I suppose the re- like prior- it's interesting Michael because we're talking to you already we can see how there's been cultural shifts around what have been regarded as Almost defining issues, free speech, I just sort of assume free speech, that's a left-wing thing, because free speech, because of alternative lifestyles, alternative forms of identity, free speech, the right to speak out against power, that's what free speech is.

00:32:48.000 This peculiar reversal of the magnetism No, no, no.

00:32:52.000 Your free speech is dangerous and it's threatening and it's the role of the state to shut down this hateful speech.

00:32:59.000 Now that the state has plainly rejected any role to oppose corporate power, globalist hegemony.

00:33:07.000 Let me know in the chat if you think that that shift has occurred.

00:33:09.000 Similarly, we're seeing a shift in a subject like UFOs, which was the preserve of nut jobs, crackpots, potheads and crack house denizens, becoming something that's seriously discussed by credible journalists.

00:33:21.000 Like me, and amateur hobbyist journalists like credible journalists like you.

00:33:26.000 So do you ever step back and even postulate or imagine what the broader themes here might be in the same way that you've suggested that fragility appears to be an underlying idea when it comes to democracy?

00:33:40.000 Yeah, for sure.

00:33:40.000 I mean, I think that what we saw with the Twitter files is that it wasn't just about sort of woke culture demanding censorship.

00:33:46.000 It was also about former FBI, CIA, DOD, Department of Homeland Security demanding censorship by Twitter.

00:33:53.000 So what you're really seeing is after the war on terrorism, because it was very successful, the United States basically succeeded, you had this huge infrastructure built up to fight the war on terror.

00:34:04.000 Many of those people then Turned their guns domestically toward towards inward.

00:34:09.000 So you saw in the Obama years this transition occurred and then really it was the revolutions of 2016.

00:34:14.000 It was Brexit. 0.68

00:34:16.000 It was the election of Trump and the establishment got very freaked out that they were going to see basically an unraveling of the liberal world order of NATO of the Western Alliance Britain pulling out of the EU.

00:34:28.000 And they panicked.

00:34:29.000 And they said, we've got to turn these very powerful weapons of disinformation and censorship that we've been using in other countries against the American people.

00:34:38.000 And that's what's been going on.

00:34:40.000 So the censorship itself, it's not often just about preventing us from seeing the information.

00:34:44.000 It's also about spreading disinformation.

00:34:47.000 So the Hunter Biden laptop, it wasn't that people didn't hear about the story, but it's that people like myself, because I thought, I believed it.

00:34:53.000 I thought it was Russian disinformation because that's That's what Twitter said.

00:34:57.000 That's what Facebook said.

00:34:57.000 That's what all the mainstream media said.

00:34:59.000 So what you're seeing is an orchestrated influence operation, they call it.

00:35:03.000 They used to call it PSYOPs or an information operation being waged against the American people.

00:35:08.000 You mentioned before the vaccines.

00:35:11.000 They were censoring true stories of vaccine side effects because they were worried it would lead to an outcome they didn't want, which was vaccine hesitancy.

00:35:18.000 So what we're seeing, experiencing and living in is a highly curated public space where the principle of freedom, not only freedom of speech but freedom itself, is being incrementally eroded.

00:35:33.000 We're seeing a rise of authoritarianism but with a new aesthetic.

00:35:38.000 And in a sense it's quite obvious after the despotism of the previous century that it wouldn't be a militaristic veiled version of fascism or the centralised authority that we would see, but this new emergent phenomena where we're being told that we're being cared for, that there's this sort of extraordinary aesthetic of protection Yeah, you got it.

00:36:07.000 Yeah, you absolutely got it.

00:36:08.000 It's done in the name of taking care.

00:36:10.000 But look, they're chasing us all around.

00:36:11.000 I mean, they're chasing you, chasing people off of YouTube.

00:36:13.000 Now you got to go to Rumble.

00:36:14.000 They chased us off of Facebook.

00:36:16.000 We broke the story where we found the first three people to get sick from COVID on Twitter.

00:36:22.000 It had been viewed five million times and we put it on Facebook.

00:36:25.000 It had been shared five times.

00:36:27.000 Not 5,000 times.

00:36:28.000 Not 5,000 times.

00:36:29.000 Shared five times because they are clearly throttling us on Facebook about this.

00:36:35.000 So, you know, it's, I mean, if Elon Musk hadn't taken over Twitter, and people have a lot of criticisms of Elon, some of them fair, some unfair, but if he hadn't taken over Twitter, we wouldn't have known about the extent of the censorship.

00:36:45.000 And now we're able to get this information out about COVID origins, about vaccine side effects, a whole set of other issues.

00:36:52.000 And they're just not done.

00:36:52.000 They keep trying to censor him.

00:36:54.000 You know, you may have seen when he was off in China taking care of his Tesla plants, his own people at Twitter censored this movie, What Is A Woman?

00:37:02.000 He came back, he had to fire his top censor from Twitter.

00:37:05.000 So it's just, it's everywhere.

00:37:07.000 And this is why it requires a movement that's across borders.

00:37:10.000 We have to fight on all fronts because they are actually cracking down Everywhere at the same time, including on YouTube.

00:37:16.000 How can this movement...

00:37:19.000 Deny and in fact countenance the charge that it is one-sided without ensuring that there are voices from across the political spectrum and in particular around the issues and movements that are being used to legitimize censorship.

00:37:39.000 Isn't it important that the presentation of this movement necessarily includes voices from across the spectrum because In this sort of highly tribalised environment, I feel like, just with you, Harold Dinson, let us know if you agree, that there's almost an appetite to turn it into a us versus them war, to sort of lean into a sort of something that's simple, like the argument around Bud Light, or the argument around what is a woman, where, like, me, personally, I don't care how people identify, I feel like people should be able to do whatever they want.

00:38:09.000 It's when it comes down to censorship and the inability of people to have opposing views that I feel like we're in difficult situations.

00:38:15.000 Yeah, and we have seen that now.

00:38:16.000 So the Guardian yesterday reported that the head of the Green Party, Caroline Lucas in Britain, had been surveilled and watched for her tweets on COVID.

00:38:27.000 We know that also they're cracking down on critics of the war in Ukraine.

00:38:31.000 So it's not a left-right thing, but it's definitely an elite populist thing.

00:38:36.000 What you're seeing is really a big concern from the establishment, from elites, to control the information that we're able to receive and also to control whether we perceive it as accurate or inaccurate.

00:38:45.000 It's interesting that you use the term populism at this point, Michael, because I have a sense that what's required is a new mass movement more broadly that's international, trans-political, and is indeed populist.

00:39:00.000 But populism has become something of a dirty word.

00:39:03.000 in politics. But for me, the idea that ordinary people ought be able to democratically decide

00:39:10.000 for themselves how their communities are run, what kind of legislation they're subject to,

00:39:14.000 without the assumption that there is the requirement for a technocratic cadre to legislate, to

00:39:19.000 control information. Elitism is the key word, isn't it?

00:39:23.000 It's determined that there is an expert class that ought be able to control information.

00:39:28.000 And when they use one dialectic to shut down discourse, like, oh, these people are right-wing, that's why we have to censor them, then a figure like RFK emerges.

00:39:39.000 Ah, well, you see, he's anti-vax, so we have to shut him down.

00:39:42.000 And in the end, what you see is that there's only a very narrow window within which we're allowed to converse at all.

00:39:50.000 That's right, and when they're engaged in a cover-up, like they were doing around the lab leak, they say anybody who says there's a potential lab leak is engaged in a conspiracy theory.

00:39:59.000 You have to see it all as a kind of psychological projection.

00:40:02.000 People that are conspiring or accusing others of engaging in a conspiracy theory, The people that are waging campaigns of disinformation are accusing us of the disinformation.

00:40:10.000 But I think you're absolutely right.

00:40:11.000 I mean, at bottom, there is just a kind of snobbery here.

00:40:15.000 There's some sense in which I should decide what you should be able to read.

00:40:19.000 I should decide what you should be able to... It's very old.

00:40:21.000 It goes back to Plato wanting to have control over the information the public received.

00:40:25.000 We rejected that.

00:40:26.000 We got rid of that 250 years ago.

00:40:28.000 The people that created the United States of America, there were some people who said,

00:40:31.000 hey, you need free speech so you can have a democracy and you can have free markets.

00:40:34.000 But there were other people, and I think they really got more into the spirit of it, who

00:40:38.000 said to have free speech is to be fully human.

00:40:41.000 It's to be able to breathe and to eat and to live.

00:40:43.000 You're not fully a human being without your ability to express your own views, right or

00:40:49.000 I mean, often we don't know what the right answer is until you have a chance to have an argument.

00:40:54.000 You need to be comfortable, and this is the saddest thing with woke culture, you have to feel free to be wrong and express some half-baked idea in order to get your head right.

00:41:04.000 You can't do that without, you often can't be right without being wrong.

00:41:08.000 Even though within the woke culture, if it's fair to use that term, I sense ideas that are really valuable about protecting people's rights to be who they are and nurture and care, and even a term as broad and potentially unhelpful as love could be identified as what's beneath this movement.

00:41:30.000 The problem is, of course, is that it extracts the ability for salvation, redemption, forgiveness, communication it becomes ultimately a bad faith argument.

00:41:39.000 The assumption that people are negative and ought be maligned and will be shut

00:41:43.000 down and that the answer is increasing control. I'm sure you're familiar

00:41:47.000 with in fact you're probably the person who introduced me to the Gurry's book

00:41:51.000 there, The Revolt of the Public and he's broader perspective is as you just outlined

00:41:55.000 these old establishment models are under threat whether it's NATO or

00:42:01.000 CNN or the BBC whether they're media, government or global organizations

00:42:06.000 they are becoming untenable because of the miracle of the communications

00:42:11.000 miracle that's taken place in the last 20 years.

00:42:15.000 One pathway leads to more self-organisation, more democracy, an ability to curate from a variety of different views, a good faith conversation.

00:42:25.000 I almost sort of sometimes contemplate an alternative recent past where at the beginning they were

00:42:31.000 able to go, oh Joe Rogan's got some interesting stuff to say and he's bringing on this guy

00:42:35.000 Robert Malone and he did invent this particular aspect of it and these people have got an

00:42:39.000 interesting view about lab leagues.

00:42:41.000 But it seemed like authority itself was the aim, to regulate itself was the aim.

00:42:48.000 Even something as plainly observable as the profits of Pfizer, the increased power of big tech, the wealth transfer of trillions, don't seem to be the master plan, merely tendrils that hang from its undercarriage.

00:43:03.000 It's the beast of authority itself that's slouching towards it.

00:43:07.000 Yeah, we're seeing this right now.

00:43:08.000 I mean, the big debate over the last 48 hours on Twitter was because a vaccine advocate named Peter Hotez criticized Joe Rogan for having Robert F. Kennedy on, and then later said something to the effect of, well, science isn't about having debate.

00:43:22.000 Well, science is absolutely about having debate.

00:43:24.000 I mean, that's how you figure out the right answer.

00:43:26.000 You have hypotheses.

00:43:28.000 You test them.

00:43:28.000 You subject them to argument.

00:43:30.000 If you're afraid, I mean there's a weird mixture of arrogance and insecurity here.

00:43:35.000 On the one hand it's arrogance to say, I know the right answer and you should not be allowed to express your opinion.

00:43:40.000 But there's also some insecurity that you're so fragile that you can't actually subject your ideas to some sort of debate.

00:43:47.000 Joe Rogan, like, he hosts podcasts that go for like three hours.

00:43:50.000 There's plenty of time in three hours to be able to surface your ideas.

00:43:54.000 So what are you so afraid of?

00:43:55.000 And so really, again, once again, you see this idea that the public or that democracy is too fragile to allow debate is itself a kind of projection from, I think, very fragile people.

00:44:06.000 Also that neglects to acknowledge that when we're talking about science, you can't just have that as like an orb of language that conveys veracity, experimentation, double-blind clinical trials.

00:44:19.000 Science often is a subset of a deeper ideology.

00:44:24.000 Particularly and observably, science was utilised, and let me know if you agree with this in the chat, science was utilised as a sort of a measure of authoritarianism.

00:44:33.000 That you cannot argue with this particular bit of science.

00:44:36.000 And, like, my God, like, Gareth and I do this show five times a week.

00:44:40.000 It's almost impossible to track the number of arguments that began at position A, which legitimised authoritarianism, and we found our way all the way to Zed, not Zee, and you cannot countenance these arguments.

00:44:54.000 Lockdowns may not have worked, masks may not have worked, the vaccines were not effective in the ways they were initially argued, Well that's right and also people have a very simplistic idea sometimes about what the truth is or about what the facts are.

00:45:04.000 It just again, they said they weren't going to profit, they did profit.

00:45:07.000 In the end it just becomes a sort of a real time example of how new authoritarianism functions.

00:45:13.000 Well that's right and also people have a very simplistic idea sometimes about what the truth

00:45:18.000 is or what the facts are.

00:45:19.000 If you just look at the COVID crisis, at the vaccine, the COVID variants kept evolving

00:45:26.000 and changing and the vaccine had changing efficacy with different variants over time

00:45:31.000 and ultimately it was the Omicron variant that resulted in really the end of the pandemic.

00:45:36.000 So we had a very that it was a very simplistic picture at the beginning which was we're going to lock everybody down and then everybody will get these vaccines and then we'll have herd immunity.

00:45:44.000 It didn't work that way at all.

00:45:45.000 It didn't work at all how they predicted it.

00:45:47.000 So the idea that Truth doesn't stand still.

00:45:51.000 It's constantly evolving.

00:45:52.000 Reality is constantly changing and that means that the explanations of reality and the knowledge has to keep evolving with it.

00:45:58.000 I sensed your argument about terrorism and the measures that were undertaken in order to oppose terrorism and how they were later utilized and repurposed in order to create this sort of domestic control.

00:46:09.000 Might be prevalent here.

00:46:10.000 Once you evoke these powers, it's difficult to put these powers down.

00:46:14.000 It's difficult to acknowledge that you're no longer in the climate where that's required.

00:46:18.000 It's like there's some invisible momentum behind these ideas.

00:46:20.000 Now, returning to this censorship industrial complex, what does a movement that opposes it look like?

00:46:25.000 You've said initially exposure, laughing about it, being clear about it.

00:46:30.000 How do we, you know, with this event we've got coming up in London, with presumably this being some contract that's going to be carried out over time, Michael, because you can't just show up in London Like this is some one night stand between you, me and Matt Tybee.

00:46:44.000 Otherwise I'm going to revert to the side of Debbie Wasserman Schultz and see you as so-called journalists, Flybernites, Twitter exploiters and charlatans. 1.00

00:46:52.000 How does this become something that plays out over time?

00:46:56.000 How does it become something that essentially opposes the legislation that's being passed in the Five Eyes countries?

00:47:01.000 To penalise platforms that house free speech.

00:47:05.000 And how do we ensure that we are able to say free speech is everybody's free speech.

00:47:09.000 It's the free speech of people that are all over the spectrum when it comes to even issues of identity politics.

00:47:16.000 And with this being, I believe, the 10th year anniversary.

00:47:20.000 I suppose anniversary means 10 years.

00:47:22.000 10th anniversary of Snowden being charged with espionage.

00:47:25.000 With Trump being charged with espionage right now.

00:47:27.000 With free speech seeming to be under more threat now than ever before.

00:47:31.000 With Snowden himself saying that the measures and surveillance capabilities that are available now dwarf what was going on when he made those exposures.

00:47:39.000 How robust and inclusive must a movement to oppose it be?

00:47:44.000 Well, I think the most important thing is that we need to go on the offensive.

00:47:47.000 And so we're tired of defending our strong First Amendment protections of free speech from other countries.

00:47:53.000 So what we want to do is work with these new friends.

00:47:56.000 It was just very exciting.

00:47:57.000 People are coming from around the world to join our movement here.

00:48:00.000 And we're going to help everybody to go on the offensive.

00:48:02.000 They should have more free speech rights in other countries.

00:48:06.000 We should not have fewer.

00:48:07.000 So we're going to help them to change their laws around the world to expand free speech so that it's closer to the very high golden standard of First Amendment rights in the United States.

00:48:19.000 That's the first thing.

00:48:20.000 The second thing is that we just have to expose these organizations and defund them and then dismantle them.

00:48:27.000 Many of these organizations are... Matt Taibbi created a report of 50 of the most important censorship organizations.

00:48:36.000 These are non-governmental organizations, government contractors.

00:48:39.000 He created a report of them so we know their names, we know where they are, so we can just go to lawmakers in the United States and other countries and say, please stop funding this group.

00:48:49.000 Or if this group is doing other good work, as it may be the case, then fund that, but tell them they must no longer engage in censorship activities.

00:48:57.000 You mentioned Snowden.

00:48:59.000 Even in that case, I think people thought at the time that it was just about surveillance.

00:49:02.000 But what we've seen that the surveillance, it doesn't stop with surveillance.

00:49:06.000 The surveillance continues and then it turns into censorship.

00:49:09.000 So you're monitoring somebody, monitoring it seems innocent enough, I'm just reading their tweets.

00:49:13.000 Well no, then quickly you're going to Twitter and you're saying, please, you need to stop that Russell Brand social media post from going viral, or you need to make sure that Michael Schellenberger is on a blacklist so that anytime he posts something it doesn't go viral, it doesn't get fed into other people's feeds.

00:49:28.000 So we need to build that global movement, demand greater free speech rights, expose the censorship industrial complex, and then defund and dismantle them.

00:49:37.000 God, you have got a manifesto, that's good that you've done one of those.

00:49:40.000 Also, I think we should defund and disband Matt Taibbi himself.

00:49:44.000 Disband him, defund him, break him up into all his component parts and release him back into the wild.

00:49:49.000 It will be unfair, Michael Schellenberger, to bring you all this way to the United Kingdom to conduct our conference in London, there's a link in the description and in the chat if you want to get tickets, without exposing you to Britain's best investigative journalist who needs no introduction, except perhaps this one.

00:50:08.000 Gareth's in, yeah, that's him over there. He's got a link.

00:50:14.000 I get to ask a question. It's not patronising, it's got a jingle.

00:50:18.000 I just wondered what you thought about the policies around disinformation in terms of

00:50:24.000 how they relate to the lack of populist policies around economy now. I read an article by Lee

00:50:32.000 Fang this week about Obama taking advantage of tax loopholes that he campaigned against

00:50:39.000 and during his presidency spoke about against and is now using them to pay half the amount

00:50:45.000 of tax that normal everyday Americans pay.

00:50:47.000 I just thought it was interesting that at a time when we go through the pandemic and a wealth transfer that occurs, When we go through the Ukraine war at the moment, where companies are making, you know, record profits, the way that people are being shut down around disinformation, and Obama himself is someone who has, as Lee Fang writes himself, stopped populist economic arguments altogether, in favor of talking about disinformation.

00:51:11.000 That seems to be his thing now, disinformation the same way that Joe Biden's doing it.

00:51:15.000 I just wonder if you think that there's a kind of correlation with the idea that we need to be shutting down people around Disinformation and not remotely talking about economic populist theories and arguments anymore, redistribution of wealth, about what to do, about the fact that all these companies during the pandemic made ludicrous and record profits.

00:51:35.000 Do you think that's something that plays into the use of disinformation policies?

00:51:40.000 Oh, absolutely.

00:51:40.000 I would say they're just two sides of the same coin.

00:51:42.000 I mean, so you saw that one of the threats that the censorship industrial complex emerged to combat was Brexit and the labeling.

00:51:50.000 So you saw with Brexit, the labeling of the supporters of Brexit who wanted greater control over Britain's future, but it was the labeling of supporters of Brexit as racists, as nationalists.

00:52:00.000 You see this strong emphasis on anti-Semitism, a clear Uh, attempt to sort of call everybody fascists who support these policies.

00:52:09.000 So I do think there's a very strong relation.

00:52:11.000 Same thing with Trump.

00:52:12.000 The idea was that it's not populism, it's actually fascism.

00:52:16.000 But no, it's clear.

00:52:17.000 I mean, the beneficiaries of globalization overwhelmingly were the upper 1%, top 10%.

00:52:23.000 Those were the folks that were pushing back against Brexit, that wanted the globalization.

00:52:27.000 There's a lot of benefits to globalization.

00:52:29.000 I've certainly benefited Many of us have benefited from many aspects of it, but I think it got to a point where we started to lose control over it.

00:52:37.000 We didn't really feel like, in all of our countries, that we had much say in it.

00:52:42.000 And it became clear with the censorship that the elites didn't want us to have much say over it.

00:52:47.000 And when we did have say over it, we were saying all the wrong things.

00:52:51.000 Any form of aggregation centralizes power and will require some form of distribution and potentially redistribution.

00:52:59.000 We've seen already that most systems of government do incorporate redistribution of assets and wealth through subsidy, through maintenance of Dead systems.

00:53:11.000 The phrase zombie capitalism is one that describes an economic system that's already in decline and perhaps has already experienced collapse.

00:53:17.000 So, ultimately, the censorship industrial complex itself is simply a tool to maintain the power of the elite.

00:53:23.000 So, Gareth's question was an excellent one that brought together the incentive for the censorship industrial complex.

00:53:31.000 It just helped us. 0.98

00:53:32.000 Why the fuck to have this thing in the first place? 0.93

00:53:34.000 Well, in order to maintain those systems, right? 0.98

00:53:36.000 Well, yeah, I mean, look at this issue of the moving of the... Obama, to his great credit, banned gain-of-function research in 2014, OK?

00:53:45.000 Cambridge, there's a Cambridge working group, they said, this is really dangerous, we can't see any clear benefits to this kind of research.

00:53:52.000 No clear benefits?

00:53:53.000 What if there was a pandemic one day?

00:53:54.000 Yeah, well, yeah, so, I mean, exactly.

00:53:57.000 So, yeah, but then Fauci and Collins and this guy Peter Doszak with Eco Hollow Lines, they moved it to China, They then said, oh it's not really gain-of-function research, it's chimeric research, and they made up some justification for it.

00:54:09.000 These are unelected officials who are making decisions that ultimately affected everybody on earth.

00:54:14.000 So I think that's the kind of arrogance, the lack of accountability, Are you suggesting that that gain-of-function research that was conducted in China, because it was banned in the US, had some consequences that we might be aware of?

00:54:26.000 I thought you were going to say Fauci, Daszak and Collins, they moved it to China, where they conducted some research in Wuhan, and that was the last anyone heard of it.

00:54:35.000 No further problems.

00:54:36.000 And now, if you get a bat coronavirus, you can go to bed at night safe in the knowledge, as Rachel Maddow said, you take one jab and that's it.

00:54:44.000 That's it.

00:54:45.000 You'll be fit as a fiddle.

00:54:46.000 I mean, and there's a technocratic response where they go, well, it was at a too low of a security level lab.

00:54:52.000 It was at BSL 2.

00:54:52.000 It should have been at BSL 4.

00:54:53.000 But the fundamental issue is that these were not issues that were properly debated.

00:54:57.000 It was not decided by Congress.

00:54:59.000 Rand Paul's done a great job drawing attention to this.

00:55:02.000 Yeah, he really has.

00:55:02.000 He has, hasn't he?

00:55:03.000 I mean, when I first heard him talking about it, I thought he sounded like a conspiracy theorist.

00:55:07.000 And now I'm finding that he was spot on from the beginning to be alarmed about this.

00:55:11.000 So we do have dangerous things in the world that we have a lot of care to manage.

00:55:16.000 Radiological, nuclear, chemical, biological.

00:55:20.000 Sometimes they have benefits.

00:55:21.000 There's reasons to keep smallpox, some amount of it around, experiment with it.

00:55:25.000 But the public should have a say in that.

00:55:27.000 We had a huge debate over nuclear power for like 50 years in the Western world.

00:55:32.000 And now we have cameras in every nuclear facility.

00:55:35.000 And I'm a big advocate of nuclear power, but I'm shocked when I look at the lack of regulation for coronavirus research.

00:55:43.000 I mean, if they had the level of regulation for nuclear, it might be a different story.

00:55:47.000 That's fantastic.

00:55:47.000 Wow.

00:55:48.000 Thank you, Michael, for pulling together such a vast array of complex subjects, from UFOs, from the microbial, from the microscopic, to the cosmic and cosmological.

00:55:58.000 Michael Schellenberger can be relied on to create true narratives.

00:56:02.000 And alongside his oppo, Matt Taibbi, who can't be here for... What's he doing?

00:56:06.000 Warming his voice up?

00:56:07.000 Finally having some honey and lemon for the voice that he's got, that bloody time. 0.69

00:56:11.000 Will be appearing.

00:56:12.000 Look, there's an image there of us, me.

00:56:14.000 That was taken just yesterday, wasn't it, Gareth, that photograph of me?

00:56:16.000 I like it!

00:56:17.000 That's just more than there I am staring Koresh like out into the future I simply wasn't prepared for. 1.00

00:56:23.000 Join us if you wanna live in London at Central Hall Westminster there's a link in the description

00:56:28.000 but I think we're forming lifelong bonds here to oppose the censorship industrial complex aren't we?

00:56:34.000 Well let's hope we can shut it down before our lifelong bonds expire.

00:56:38.000 I've got the wrong attitude, I saw it after it was like one before it was to keep it going.

00:56:42.000 I like it, it's lucrative as hell!

00:56:46.000 We'll shut it down in a few weeks, then we can get the old aliens down and start working out what's going on with that. 0.99

00:56:46.000 Shut it down. 0.99

00:56:50.000 Sounds pretty sexy to me.

00:56:51.000 Get your tickets at censorshipindustrialcomplex.com.

00:56:55.000 That's the name of your website.

00:56:56.000 Dot org.

00:56:57.000 All right.

00:56:58.000 That's the distinction.

00:56:59.000 You can learn more from Michael by checking out Public on Substack.

00:57:02.000 I'm a subscriber myself, and I enjoy it.

00:57:04.000 I'm always, when I get that email, I'm always, I enjoy that, don't you?

00:57:07.000 Send that across to me.

00:57:08.000 Sometimes I say, oh, I'm in there.

00:57:09.000 I'll scan it for that.

00:57:09.000 Look.

00:57:10.000 No, that's not me.

00:57:11.000 That's not me.

00:57:12.000 Ah, there's me there.

00:57:12.000 Oh no, it's someone else's email.

00:57:14.000 Okay, listen, we're gonna leave it now, but we've got a fantastic week.

00:57:17.000 We've got James O'Keefe, him that did that Big Pharma thing, and also he was in a musical of Oklahoma.

00:57:22.000 Who else we got this week?

00:57:23.000 We've got some fantastic people.

00:57:24.000 Oh, the people that... We've got bloody Yoga with Adrian coming on here.

00:57:28.000 I'm gonna do actual yoga.

00:57:29.000 There's no point freeing yourself from censorship and then having a lower back issue.

00:57:34.000 Is there? Also you've got to awaken your most dormant systems.

00:57:37.000 We're going to be talking about BlackRock, WFU, Crane, as well as getting in touch with some pretty powerful lower

00:57:42.000 chakra energy over the course of the week.

00:57:44.000 Remember, join our locals community. We're just one red button away.

00:57:48.000 That includes you, Michael. I expect to see you jabbing away at that red button.

00:57:51.000 You can see all of the interviews we've done already with RFK, Richard Dawkins, Jordan Peterson, Marianne Williamson.

00:57:56.000 They're all on there.

00:57:58.000 Also remember my stand-up special Brandemic is premiering on the 25th of June on Moment.

00:58:02.000 Pre-order your tickets now.

00:58:03.000 There's a link in the description.

00:58:05.000 But now...

00:58:07.000 In order to celebrate Michael Schellenberger even further, we are covering yet more of the consequences of that pandemic period.

00:58:13.000 During the first month of lockdown, it's been conjectured 18 months was slashed from the life of heart attack victims, who've already been suffering enough, ain't they?

00:58:22.000 Join us tomorrow here, not for more of the same, but for more of the different.

00:58:24.000 Until then, here's the news.

00:58:26.000 No, here's the effing news.

00:58:27.000 Stay free.

00:58:29.000 Thanks for refusing Fox News.

00:58:31.000 You're the dude. 1.00

00:58:32.000 No, he's the fucking loser. 1.00

00:58:35.000 New study suggests lockdowns robbed heart attack sufferers of one and a half years of their life on average. 1.00

00:58:43.000 Zuckerberg admits that true and debatable information was censored.

00:58:47.000 Who then is responsible for these deaths and shortened lives?

00:58:53.000 Did you know that a new study has revealed that during lockdown many people had heart attacks, didn't call it in because they were told there's more important things happening.

00:59:02.000 Were those things more important?

00:59:03.000 Let me know what you think. 0.90

00:59:04.000 What's more likely to kill you?

00:59:06.000 A heart attack or coronavirus?

00:59:09.000 Also, what's the relationship between heart attacks and coronavirus?

00:59:13.000 This we will get into in time.

00:59:15.000 Let's unpack this so we can understand it better together.

00:59:17.000 If true information was being censored, if people suffering from genuine life-threatening illnesses were not getting the care they needed, what was the point of lockdown?

00:59:25.000 What was the point of lockdown?

00:59:28.000 This is from those whack-a-doodle conspiracy theorists over at the fuddy-duddy establishment newspaper, The Telegraph.

00:59:34.000 The first month of lockdown cut a year and a half off the lives of heart attack victims in the UK, a major study suggests.

00:59:41.000 The international research published in the European Heart Journal, what do they know about the hearts of Europe?

00:59:47.000 Those crackpot hobbyists.

00:59:49.000 All they want to do really is just analyse the journal and study the hearts of Europe.

00:59:53.000 That's all we really do.

00:59:55.000 You're a conspiracy theorist!

00:59:57.000 The European Heart Journal tracked the care of patients who suffered major heart attacks in the four weeks following lockdown with a similar group the year before.

01:00:05.000 After Boris Johnson issued the order to stay home, protect the NHS and save lives, advice that he simply didn't follow himself.

01:00:11.000 He went out, had parties and did what the hell ever he fancied doing, as usual, and currently is over in your country, America, lobbying to continue the war between Ukraine and Russia.

01:00:23.000 So, there's a guy whose opinion to take pretty seriously.

01:00:26.000 After Boris Johnson issued the order to stay home, protect the NHS and save lives, the number of heart attack patients admitted to hospital plummeted.

01:00:34.000 Research published in The Lancet... Oh yeah, The Lancet.

01:00:38.000 Run by Alex Jones?

01:00:38.000 What's that?

01:00:39.000 No, no, actually we're just trying to learn about medicine and the efficacy of pharmacology.

01:00:44.000 Yeah, you're a conspiracy theorist.

01:00:46.000 Has previously shown a 40% fall in such admissions in the first weeks of the pandemic with patients staying away for fear of being a burden or catching the virus while some treatment was stopped.

01:00:57.000 Wow, I wonder if anyone was saying stuff like that.

01:00:59.000 During the lockdown, hey, what are going to be the implications on cancer, heart disease, diabetes, and other conditions caused by that bad food you keep advertising at us all the time?

01:01:09.000 The new study, which examined published data, estimates the impact of lack of care on life expectancy for patients who suffered major heart attacks.

01:01:17.000 I wonder what the impact is of a lack of care on people who have suffered major heart attacks.

01:01:22.000 That's not important right now.

01:01:24.000 What we've got to deal with is conspiracy theories.

01:01:26.000 The lack of care on a major heart attack is second to the idea that someone might, I don't know, be in a park less than two meters away from another person, or not take exactly the medicine at exactly the time that makes the most profit.

01:01:41.000 I mean, has the maximum benefit on the people that it's so clear we care so much about from our attitude towards

01:01:48.000 heart attacks.

01:01:48.000 Overall it suggests that just 44% of such patients were hospitalised in the UK in the

01:01:54.000 four weeks from March 23rd 2020 compared with around 77% in the same month the previous

01:02:00.000 year.

01:02:01.000 The international team of researchers modelled the long term impact of this and found it

01:02:05.000 is likely to have reduced the life expectancy of such patients by an average of 18 months.

01:02:10.000 Researchers said the findings showed the public will pay the price of lockdown for years to come, saying restrictions to life-threatening conditions must never be allowed.

01:02:19.000 Oh, forget about it.

01:02:20.000 Oh, it's just a conspiracy theory.

01:02:22.000 Let's move on.

01:02:23.000 There's other things we're being lied to and surveilled about and censored around now.

01:02:28.000 Move on to those.

01:02:29.000 Why don't you support whatever it is we care about now?

01:02:32.000 Forget about that.

01:02:32.000 That was years ago.

01:02:33.000 It's not years ago for those people that have got heart conditions.

01:02:36.000 Have you got a heart condition?

01:02:37.000 Do you know someone who has?

01:02:38.000 Was your cancer treatment interrupted?

01:02:40.000 Was your mental health affected?

01:02:41.000 Let me know right now in the comments.

01:02:43.000 I want to hear from you.

01:02:44.000 Your information is vital.

01:02:45.000 The study, which involved researchers from Spain, Italy and other European nations, also examined the impact of Spain's lockdown, where the modelling estimators Two year loss in life expectancy for victims of major heart attacks.

01:02:56.000 Remember, when people were modelling data, many people were saying, but what about the implications elsewhere?

01:03:02.000 But that information wasn't beneficial, perhaps it could be argued, to the interests of the people that were regulating and legislating.

01:03:09.000 And if you want more evidence of the inconsistency around this issue, where's the rainbows now when doctors are on strike in the UK?

01:03:16.000 Where's the rainbows now when key workers are striking all over the world because they're not being paid what they deserve to be paid?

01:03:23.000 Oh, suddenly their work's not so significant.

01:03:25.000 Where are the rainbows on the windows for nurses and doctors striking in this country right now?

01:03:30.000 If what they did was important then, surely what they're doing now deserves to be properly paid for.

01:03:34.000 Let me know in the comments.

01:03:34.000 comments. Last week, the Telegraph reported that the benefits of lockdown policy were

01:03:38.000 a drop in the bucket compared to the staggering collateral costs imposed. Scientists from

01:03:44.000 Johns Hopkins University and Lund University examined almost 20,000 studies on measures

01:03:49.000 taken to protect populations against COVID across the world.

01:03:52.000 Follow the science. Do you Analyse the data.

01:03:56.000 The science suggests.

01:03:57.000 Don't be so selfish.

01:03:58.000 Investigate what these terms mean now.

01:04:01.000 Is anyone saying follow the science now?

01:04:03.000 Can you hear people?

01:04:04.000 Suddenly, it's time for an amnesty.

01:04:06.000 It's time to forget about... Oh, I see.

01:04:08.000 It's almost like you just say what's convenient to you when it's convenient, that you've got no morals.

01:04:13.000 No principles, no vision, no idea how to change the world.

01:04:16.000 So it's probably time to start listening to the rest of us who have some fantastic ideas about how things could change.

01:04:21.000 Let me know in the comments what your ideas are.

01:04:23.000 We value you.

01:04:24.000 Their findings suggest that lockdowns in response to the first wave of the pandemic, when compared with less strict policies adopted by the likes of Sweden, prevented as few as 1,700 deaths in England and Wales.

01:04:35.000 In an average week, there are around 11,000 deaths in England and Wales.

01:04:38.000 Of course, any deaths are sad and tragic, but some deaths appear to be more important than others, more expedient, more profitable, more beneficial to state and corporate power.

01:04:48.000 That's at least how it seems to me.

01:04:49.000 Let me know in the comments what you think.

01:04:50.000 The report authors said their findings showed that the draconian measures had a negligible impact on COVID mortality and were a policy failure of gigantic proportions.

01:04:59.000 So we have a decision to make.

01:05:01.000 Was it a policy failure of gigantic proportions underwritten by absolute ineptitude, which means we should never trust them again?

01:05:09.000 Or was it mendacity that means we should never trust them again?

01:05:13.000 Johns Hopkins is one of the most respected medical schools in the world and became known during the pandemic for its COVID dashboard measuring cases and deaths all over the world.

01:05:22.000 The study's authors conclude the science of lockdowns is clear, the data are in, the deaths saved were a drop in the bucket compared to the staggering collateral costs imposed.

01:05:30.000 The detrimental impact of lockdown on children's health and education, on economic growth and its contribution to large increases in public debt has become increasingly clear since the policy was introduced.

01:05:40.000 Check out this!

01:05:41.000 During the pandemic a secretive government unit worked with social media companies in an attempt to curtail discussion of controversial lockdown policies.

01:05:48.000 So it wasn't just ineptitude then was it?

01:05:50.000 Because if it's just ineptitude you wouldn't have the time to set up a secret government unit that censors information.

01:05:55.000 Bear this in mind when for example the BSBC sets up their Hello, we're your new agency that are going to shut down dissenting views.

01:06:02.000 Wait, what if these dissenting views are correct, like they were last time?

01:06:06.000 Wait, what if voices that are conveying truthful information are being censored and shut down?

01:06:11.000 Wait, what if the truth is a complex thing that requires nuance and conversation, good faith and an open heart?

01:06:18.000 Well, many people are having open heart surgery right now because of the way we behaved last time.

01:06:22.000 Perhaps we could look at their open hearts.

01:06:24.000 Maybe I'm not going to trust you as much as I might have done a few years ago.

01:06:27.000 The Counter Disinformation Unit?

01:06:29.000 I mean, that is straight out of Kafka.

01:06:31.000 You have upset the Counter Disinformation Unit.

01:06:34.000 The Counter Disinformation Unit.

01:06:36.000 Don't worry about our name. 0.99

01:06:37.000 Just shut up and do as you're told. 0.99

01:06:39.000 Otherwise, we're going to turn into a stag beetle. 0.97

01:06:42.000 The Counter Disinformation Unit was set up by ministers to tackle supposed domestic threats.

01:06:47.000 But what is it that's being threatened really?

01:06:49.000 Let me know in the comments.

01:06:50.000 And was used to target those critical of lockdowns and questioning the mass vaccination of children.

01:06:55.000 You're questioning the mass vaccination of children!

01:06:58.000 Oh my God, it turns out legitimately.

01:07:01.000 What else?

01:07:01.000 You're questioning whether or not heart attack victims are going to have 18 months slashed off their lives.

01:07:07.000 How dare you question it?

01:07:08.000 But it's true.

01:07:09.000 Truth doesn't matter anymore, Stag Beetle.

01:07:12.000 Read Metamorphosis.

01:07:13.000 Critics of lockdown had posts removed from social media.

01:07:16.000 Let me know in the comments if you had posts removed.

01:07:18.000 There is growing suspicion that social media firms use technology to stop the posts being promoted, circulated, or widely shared after being flagged by the CDU or its counterpart in the cabinet office.

01:07:28.000 Let me know if you want more collaboration between big tech and social media in the government.

01:07:31.000 Let me know if you want the CIA and the FBI more heavily involved in censoring true information.

01:07:36.000 It seems to be an important issue these days.

01:07:38.000 Documents revealed under Freedom of Information, FOI and Data Protection requests showed that the activities of prominent critics of the government's Covid policies were secretly monitored.

01:07:47.000 An artificial intelligence firm, AI, was used by the government to scour social media sites.

01:07:52.000 The company flagged discussions opposing vaccine passports.

01:07:56.000 Some people said that these vaccine passports will be set up and then they won't be rescinded or relinquished after the requirement for them has receded.

01:08:04.000 Then other people said if there haven't been clinical trials for transmission, what is the point of these vaccine passports?

01:08:10.000 Other people said if 96% of people that are asymptomatic cannot spread the virus, what is the point?

01:08:16.000 Other people said if there is a test available that can identify whether or not you're infectious, what's the point?

01:08:21.000 These questions, I think, are all valuable.

01:08:23.000 Do you?

01:08:24.000 Many of the issues being raised were valid at the time and have since been proven to be well-founded.

01:08:28.000 Well-founded, absolutely true, legitimate, and completely collapse the counter-argument.

01:08:34.000 The BBC also took part in secretive meetings of a government policy forum to address the so-called disinformation.

01:08:40.000 Oh, the state media and the state collaborated in controlling the information that you have access to.

01:08:46.000 But the good news is both of those organizations are independently funded by this business they run somewhere else.

01:08:51.000 They sort of sell cars and they've got a vineyard.

01:08:53.000 That's your money!

01:08:54.000 They're using your money to control you! 0.90

01:08:56.000 It's beyond irony.

01:08:58.000 It's tyranny.

01:08:58.000 In America, Twitter has released similar information showing how the US government also introduced a secretive program to curtail discussion of COVID lockdowns.

01:09:06.000 Almost as if the world's most powerful governments are all using the same playbook.

01:09:12.000 Almost as if, if you were to look into it right now, you'd find that Canada, America, New Zealand, Australia and the UK, coincidentally known as the Five Eyes countries that Edward Snowden revealed were sharing data Secret data by the way are all setting up new quirky peculiar little surveillance laws that enable them to spy on you, surveil you and prevent you from accessing information that might be sensitive.

01:09:36.000 But hopefully that's not happening right now.

01:09:38.000 So those of you that during the pandemic were concerned about the consequences of lockdown and indeed medication on other health conditions appear now to be verified in your concerns.

01:09:48.000 Let me know if you've been affected by heart disease or many of the other conditions that were likely exacerbated by measures that were taken by your government that you were prevented from publicly discussing which doubtless prolonged the unnecessary process and led to many unnecessary deaths.

01:10:04.000 Do you believe the government and the corporatized state act entirely for your benefit?

01:10:09.000 Or do you think you would like to be involved in that process yourself just in case there's a tiny chance that they don't have your best interest in your now potential Well, that's all we've got time for today.

01:10:21.000 Thank you for watching another fantastic episode of Stay Free with Russell Brand.

01:10:25.000 Until next time, stay free with Russell Brand.

Stay Free - Russel Brand - June 19, 2023

IRAN WAR PENDING!? Is This What TRUMP’S Secrets REVEAL? - #149 - Stay Free With Russell Brand

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript