Stay Free - Russel Brand - March 21, 2023


It Begins: China’s New World Order - #095 - Stay Free With Russell Brand


Episode Stats

Length

1 hour and 8 minutes

Words per Minute

183.58537

Word Count

12,545

Sentence Count

799

Misogynist Sentences

11

Hate Speech Sentences

23


Summary

Russell Brand and Gareth Roy Sheinfeld are joined by Harvard Professor of Government and Press at Harvard University, Douglas Rushkoff, to discuss the use of the mainstream media to delegitimise Donald Trump and his supporters. They also discuss how the pharmaceutical industry benefits from the current pandemic of vaccines and other anti-vaccine propaganda, and why we should all be waking up to the fact that we are living in a world where vaccines are being pumped into our bodies by the pharmaceutical companies and the government, and how we should be fighting back against them. This episode is brought to you Live on Rumble, where you can only watch the whole show on Rumble. If you want to watch the entire show, you have to watch it live on Rumble - you can't watch it on other platforms. We're not mad, we're not lunatics, we don't want any strikes, we just want to have a good chat about what's going on in the world and what's happening in it. In this episode of Awakening Wonders, you're going to see the future, and you're gonna want to be a part of it. In this video, you'll get to meet the future. You're gonna see The Future, and in this video you'll see The Awakening Wonders. - Welcome back to Awakening Wonders! - The Awakening Wonders! - Yours Truly, Russell Brand & Gareth R. R. Sheinfeld (featuring: Russell Brand and the crew at R. Brand, R. J. Roy, and the team at The Root's "Awakening wonders". The Awakening Wonderings Podcast, hosted by R.J. He's a podcast that's all about the future and the people who are waking up the world to a better, brighter, smarter, more awake, more woke and more woke, more aware, more informed and more awake than ever before. . Join us in the Awakening Wonders? and the Awakening Woke Wonders Podcast, is a new podcast that will give you the answers to the questions you've been waiting for. , and the answers you've all been asking for, so you can have a better understanding of what it means and how to live a better world, and more freedom and a better life, and a more woke world. in the first episode of Awakenings Wonders, and so much more. Welcome to Awakening Wonders, awakening wonders.


Transcript

00:00:00.000 So, we're going to go ahead and get started.
00:00:24.000 So, I'm going to start off by saying that I'm a black man.
00:00:52.000 I'm a black man.
00:00:55.000 Brought to you by Pfizer.
00:01:03.000 In this video, you're going to see the future.
00:01:15.000 Hey, Awakening Wonders, thanks for watching.
00:01:17.000 Stay free with me, Russell Brand, and my on-screen assistant, Mr. Gareth Roy.
00:01:23.000 If you want to watch the whole show, you can only watch it on Rumble, of course, because some of the stuff we say, I must confess, can be a little edgy on the free speech front.
00:01:33.000 Not because we're kowtowing to right-wing conspiracy theorists, not because we See, hate speech is some divine right, but because we believe that together the people of the world can confront centralised corrupt authority and create a better world together.
00:01:48.000 Let us know what you think in the comments and the chat because we're doing this live right now for you.
00:01:52.000 We've got a fantastic show.
00:01:54.000 We've got a Harvard professor coming on the show.
00:01:56.000 Of course we have.
00:01:56.000 What have you done with your life?
00:01:58.000 He's the professor of government and press at Harvard University.
00:02:01.000 We're going to be talking about the use of Trump by the mainstream media in light of Trump's forthcoming potential arrest.
00:02:07.000 Will it happen?
00:02:08.000 Will DeSantis save the day?
00:02:10.000 Will he go back to New York?
00:02:12.000 It's a complicated arrest.
00:02:13.000 If you're arresting Trump, have you got to arrest Hillary?
00:02:17.000 If Putin's a war criminal, is Biden a war criminal?
00:02:19.000 Well, if you look at the simple facts, the answer to that question is yes!
00:02:23.000 Yes!
00:02:24.000 If you care about people being killed illegally in wars, then yes, but you know what the world's like, and you know how we are deluged with propaganda to such a degree that it's almost impossible to remain connected to truth, because they want you numb.
00:02:36.000 They want you distracted.
00:02:38.000 They want you in the role of a solely a consumer and a subject, not an awakened citizen that you are becoming right now before our very eyes, because we're doing it together as equals.
00:02:49.000 Different, but equal.
00:02:51.000 Glorious together.
00:02:52.000 Once we flip over to being just on Rumble, guess what we're going to have the nerve to do?
00:02:56.000 We're going to talk about vaccine side effect censorship.
00:02:59.000 Won't do it on YouTube, will we, Gareth?
00:02:59.000 That's what we'll do.
00:03:01.000 We're not mad.
00:03:01.000 We can't.
00:03:02.000 We're not lunatics.
00:03:03.000 We don't want any strikes.
00:03:05.000 We don't want to have the same kind of criticism Matt Taibbi had, do we?
00:03:05.000 We don't mean that stuff.
00:03:08.000 That so-called journalist... Well, I'm not a so-called journalist.
00:03:12.000 I'm a hard-working journalist.
00:03:13.000 I may sound like him, but Bill and Ted are actually an adventure.
00:03:16.000 I actually can't access the depth that... You know, like, Matt Taibbi's voice is... You know that voice when you're a kid and maybe you're a little bit high, and you go, uh... On suites, you mean, because we're on YouTube.
00:03:27.000 Oh, yeah, that sort of high on a simple saccharine.
00:03:29.000 Uh, uh, uh... Like that.
00:03:32.000 His whole voice is coming from that, isn't it?
00:03:34.000 We love him.
00:03:34.000 Yeah.
00:03:35.000 I love it, mate.
00:03:36.000 God, this is an attack on so-called journalist Matt Tobey.
00:03:38.000 He's coming on the show next week.
00:03:39.000 He's fantastic.
00:03:40.000 We really think he's brilliant.
00:03:42.000 Those conversations with Matt Tobey, Glenn Greenwald, Barry Weiss, Cornel West, they're conversations that make me think, actually, no, we're right!
00:03:50.000 You know, because sometimes I think, oh no, have we gone mad?
00:03:52.000 Have we actually gone mad?
00:03:54.000 Is the establishment really good?
00:03:56.000 Are they not operating at the behest of corporations?
00:03:59.000 Is the military-industrial complex not benefiting from this war?
00:04:01.000 Did the pharmaceutical industry not benefit from the pandemic?
00:04:04.000 Are they not using crisis to double down on authority?
00:04:07.000 Is it us?
00:04:08.000 Are we the problem for awakening?
00:04:10.000 Was Neo the problem in the Matrix?
00:04:12.000 In their version of reality, Neo's the baddie, isn't it?
00:04:16.000 Of course he is.
00:04:17.000 And Morpheus!
00:04:18.000 All those guys that we love so much from the very end of the 90s there or the beginning of 2000.
00:04:22.000 I can't remember the dates.
00:04:23.000 That's not your job.
00:04:24.000 It's not my job to remember that.
00:04:26.000 I've got enough on my plate.
00:04:27.000 I know you are.
00:04:28.000 Choosing an illuminous hat and a nice piece of tomfoolery jewellery is enough for me on a day like today.
00:04:34.000 Hey, there's some novel protest ideas emerging.
00:04:37.000 Trump supporters plan a run on banks.
00:04:40.000 And I bet people are condemning them for that.
00:04:41.000 How dare they do a run on banks?
00:04:43.000 You can't do a run on banks!
00:04:44.000 You're not a Silicon Valley billionaire!
00:04:46.000 A run on banks must be orchestrated by hedge funders and fat cats!
00:04:51.000 Have you got a truck?
00:04:52.000 Did you watch the Dukes of Hazzard?
00:04:55.000 Are you a Trump supporter?
00:04:57.000 Don't you dare do a run on a bank!
00:04:59.000 Well, if you do that, then the taxpayers are certainly not going to make up the difference.
00:05:02.000 Just like in... Oh no!
00:05:04.000 Oh no!
00:05:05.000 The taxpayers always make up the difference, whether it's directly or tangentially, through bank fees and yet more trickery.
00:05:14.000 What's this about Western government CBDCs?
00:05:16.000 Oh yeah, of course, I suppose.
00:05:18.000 You were very keen to talk about this, Gareth, for reasons I've never fully understood.
00:05:21.000 What is it, mate?
00:05:22.000 Well, no, it's just an interesting thing that's going on at the moment.
00:05:24.000 There's kind of a lot of talk about the cashless society that we're heading towards, and Western governments are increasingly looking at now something that we did a story about going on in China, the digital yuan, that is, they're contemplating Uh, becoming expiring.
00:05:39.000 So basically, people have to spend money at a certain point.
00:05:41.000 So in this situation, and I'm not going to pretend I really fully understand it, but the European Central Bank is considering using negative interest rates, a tool that erodes the value of money.
00:05:51.000 So basically, if they bring it down by 10%, the value of what you have is worth 10% less, encouraging you to then spend it.
00:05:58.000 So it's the use of interest rates.
00:05:59.000 After all that hard work to get cash out of our pockets.
00:06:02.000 So once they can control currency, they can control us yet further.
00:06:02.000 I see.
00:06:06.000 Yeah, and I suppose when we're talking at a time when Trump supporters are saying, let's do a run on the banks, because at this point... We won't be able to do a run on the banks.
00:06:12.000 If you're not in charge of your own money, then it'll be more like Canada.
00:06:15.000 It'll be... Is that what we want for the world?
00:06:18.000 More like Canada?
00:06:18.000 I don't mean normal Canada, I mean when the Trump protest happens.
00:06:21.000 I understand what you're saying, mate.
00:06:22.000 I understand what you're saying.
00:06:23.000 So, actually, none of this stuff is what I want to talk about.
00:06:27.000 I want to have a look at this bit of ABC News where they're talking about Z and Putin.
00:06:33.000 She, they've changed the pronunciation of that.
00:06:35.000 To she now.
00:06:37.000 Well who knows, maybe it was always that.
00:06:39.000 Was it always she and we just didn't know about that.
00:06:41.000 Potentially that's something we could have been denied access to.
00:06:45.000 And we're going to be talking about the nature of propaganda
00:06:47.000 off the back of this because this is our old friend off ABC sideways head newscaster.
00:06:51.000 I like him very much.
00:06:53.000 He will not face the front.
00:06:56.000 Is it facial disfiguration?
00:06:58.000 Is it a mole?
00:06:59.000 What is the reason he won't show us that side of his head?
00:07:01.000 Maybe it's like a good luck charm or something.
00:07:03.000 I like to do... I take a sideways look at the news, quite literally, by keeping my head always slightly cocked to the side.
00:07:11.000 Have a listen to how loaded with propaganda This piece of news reporting is.
00:07:18.000 Every single word in it has some form of bias in it.
00:07:22.000 Have a look.
00:07:23.000 It's amazing.
00:07:25.000 We're going to turn now to Russia tonight.
00:07:27.000 China's President Xi arriving for... Actually, already, before we've even said anything, the dear friend is in quotation marks.
00:07:34.000 Like, look at that graphic.
00:07:35.000 Oh, friends are you?
00:07:39.000 Putin and Xi, kissing in a tree, trying to make a peace treaty.
00:07:45.000 They're actually trying to work out a peace plan.
00:07:48.000 Now, I'm not naive enough.
00:07:49.000 Only just not naive enough.
00:07:50.000 I'm nearly naive enough.
00:07:52.000 To believe that China and Russia don't have their own multipolar global objectives, that they don't have their own agenda, their own forms of imperialism, their own forms of power.
00:08:02.000 Whatever's going on between Russia and Ukraine, it certainly isn't benefiting Ukrainian people much.
00:08:06.000 Whatever's going on in Taiwan, Taiwanese people are better sick and tired of it.
00:08:11.000 The fact is though, from the get-go, our propaganda, with all its sideways head slickness, It's just as culpable as the type of propaganda you would receive in those nations.
00:08:21.000 I'm speculating because I've not been to either of them, though.
00:08:24.000 Would you go to China?
00:08:25.000 I certainly would.
00:08:25.000 I'd love it.
00:08:27.000 And Russia?
00:08:28.000 Yeah, give it a go.
00:08:29.000 See Snowden?
00:08:29.000 Absolutely.
00:08:30.000 See all the other dissidents?
00:08:31.000 See all your dissident buddies?
00:08:33.000 A three-day summit in Moscow with his so-called peace plan.
00:08:37.000 So-called peace plan, huh?
00:08:39.000 What kind of a peace plan is this?
00:08:40.000 It's not a peace plan for peace.
00:08:42.000 Like, what kind of Orwellian nightmare are we inhabiting where a peace plan is looked upon with such disdain, with such contempt?
00:08:50.000 Even though China have brokered a peace deal, haven't they?
00:08:53.000 We'll be talking about this more later in the week, between Saudi Arabia and Iran.
00:08:57.000 So, China are good at generating peace.
00:08:59.000 Again, we're not saying, China are great!
00:09:01.000 I wish I was from China!
00:09:04.000 What we're saying is that there's potentially alternative narratives available.
00:09:08.000 This is the first visit since Russia invaded Ukraine.
00:09:10.000 The images tonight, you can see she given the red carpet treatments.
00:09:14.000 They always have a red carpet for like a visit in dignitary.
00:09:18.000 That's standard, isn't it?
00:09:18.000 What do you want him to do?
00:09:19.000 Act like President Xi.
00:09:21.000 Alright mate, you can come around the back of the chip shop.
00:09:25.000 Like a busy president.
00:09:27.000 Like coming to Russia.
00:09:28.000 Oh, look at that red carpet.
00:09:29.000 Well, I didn't get a red carpet.
00:09:32.000 Well, maybe if you'd rotate your head to the front, we would give you one.
00:09:34.000 There might be one right there.
00:09:36.000 You'd never know.
00:09:39.000 Serenaded as well.
00:09:40.000 Serenaded is a very deliberate word.
00:09:43.000 Like, they just add a military band.
00:09:46.000 Serenaded.
00:09:47.000 Look at the definition of the word serenade.
00:09:49.000 A piece of music sung or played in open air, typically by a man at night under the window of his beloved.
00:09:55.000 Is that what you're saying is going on?
00:09:58.000 Well, they're saying it's a peace treaty.
00:10:00.000 If it is indeed a peace treaty, and I'm saying that it isn't one, then why exactly is Putin underneath Xi's balcony with a rose clenched between his teeth, singing, I love you, baby, up there at President Xi?
00:10:12.000 I don't think he is doing that.
00:10:13.000 I think you're using... No, he is.
00:10:14.000 No, he is.
00:10:15.000 It's a serenade, remember.
00:10:16.000 It's a serenade.
00:10:18.000 Vladimir Putin then welcoming his, quote, dear friend of the Kremlin.
00:10:21.000 There can be... I mean, look, I'm sure that this is a politically expedient relationship in order to confront American hegemony and the obvious unipolar project of globalists, whether that's in the form of unelected bodies like the IMF and WHO or ongoing American imperialism acting at the behest of corporatism, not on behalf of you, the American people.
00:10:43.000 The very people we need to ally with right now, the very people that we need to participate in awakening alongside, recognising our own flaws and recognising that we can create better principles together.
00:10:53.000 There isn't just one form of reality that ought to be imposed.
00:10:58.000 And that's what you notice when you look at the language in this ordinary, banal news reporting, is that there are a set of assumptions that come with it.
00:11:06.000 For example, in a minute, towards the end, they talk about the global balance of power.
00:11:11.000 Even there, the assumption is that power belongs in a certain place.
00:11:14.000 It reminds me of a moment in the life of Gandhi, from the film Gandhi, because I'm not pretending that I was in a university studying Gandhi's life.
00:11:22.000 But there's a bit where the Viceroy of India, or whatever, goes to Gandhi.
00:11:26.000 Yes, but India is British.
00:11:29.000 And Gandhi's like, No!
00:11:31.000 We were here for ages and that!
00:11:33.000 No, but come on!
00:11:34.000 We're making it better!
00:11:36.000 I suppose that's what imperialism and colonialism of this nature require.
00:11:40.000 Or indeed authoritarianism.
00:11:42.000 Let us know in the chat if you agree that they actually assume that they're doing what's best.
00:11:47.000 This is right.
00:11:48.000 Shut up.
00:11:49.000 Do as you're told.
00:11:50.000 And they do it the way they talk to us.
00:11:51.000 They do it with international diplomacy, foreign invasions, all of it.
00:11:55.000 It's just shut up.
00:11:56.000 We know what's right.
00:11:57.000 And I actually am starting to think they don't know what's right.
00:11:59.000 Yeah, the news should be facts, shouldn't it?
00:12:01.000 Basically.
00:12:02.000 You do have to take kind of opinion out of it, and although it doesn't look on the surface like this is opinion, there are subtle elements of this which is guiding you in a certain direction.
00:12:11.000 You're quite right.
00:12:11.000 It's loaded with opinion, poised and positioned as fact.
00:12:17.000 I'm offering this challenge to you, ABC Man.
00:12:19.000 Tomorrow night, I want you to do the news like this, right?
00:12:22.000 Just as a challenge, use the other side of your head, and everything you say, think, hold on a minute, that might not be true.
00:12:28.000 Just consider it.
00:12:29.000 Yeah, momentarily.
00:12:29.000 Isn't it?
00:12:30.000 Just for a moment, just give it a go.
00:12:31.000 It's been two meetings for more than four hours, and of course the question remains tonight, will China... Four hours?
00:12:36.000 If you're talking about a world peace deal, it's like, is the implication that it shouldn't have took that long?
00:12:41.000 Yeah.
00:12:41.000 They were talking about the, it's not like a bagatelle to discuss solving a geopolitical conflict that involves resources, NATO impingement, Russian imperialism, the complexity of Ukrainian politics and some of its Influences, shall we call it.
00:12:58.000 There's a lot to talk about.
00:12:59.000 What are they meant to do it in like 25 seconds?
00:13:02.000 They help Russia in this war in Ukraine.
00:13:05.000 The White House tonight pressed... So that was speculation of whether or not China are going to help Russia in this war.
00:13:12.000 We don't know, because the stated objective of China at this point, for all we know, and obviously you've already stated the caveats there, was to broker a peace deal.
00:13:21.000 And on the news they're saying, are China going to help Russia?
00:13:25.000 That's speculation.
00:13:26.000 Part of the tyranny is the assumption that everything said by the centralised authority that coalesces around US corporate power is said in good faith and should be taken in the most favourable terms, and everything they say should be taken in the most negative terms.
00:13:42.000 Oh, well, they're saying it's a piece still, but they're probably going to team up.
00:13:46.000 For all I know it, one of them will clutch me by my chin and rotate my head 45 degrees this way.
00:13:52.000 I won't do that!
00:13:54.000 Not on ABC News, baby!
00:13:56.000 I'll talk out of the side of my mouth if I have to.
00:13:58.000 On that, given this meeting in Moscow and ABC's Tom Soufy Burridge in Ukraine again tonight.
00:14:04.000 Tonight, Vladimir Putin rolling out the red carpet.
00:14:08.000 Do men have a red carpet?
00:14:09.000 it's standard semiotics.
00:14:11.000 For China's President Xi, kicking off a three-day state visit.
00:14:15.000 Xi arriving with a peace plan on his first trip to Moscow since Russia invaded Ukraine.
00:14:21.000 China and Russia saying their relationship is entering a new era.
00:14:26.000 The world's most powerful autocrats greeting each other with smiles, meeting inside.
00:14:30.000 Democrats as well.
00:14:32.000 Like, again, the implication being that we live in... Joe Biden, everything he does is driven by you.
00:14:37.000 Joe Biden don't take a poop without making sure that you agree to it democratically.
00:14:42.000 Also, this is one of those moments where I think the news does just do unnecessary facts, like greeting each other with smiles.
00:14:47.000 That's just like telling us what we're seeing at this point.
00:14:50.000 Buy that golden clock thing and that flower arrangement.
00:14:53.000 Look at it there, the little communist.
00:14:56.000 Yeah, they're like loading everything with needless commentary.
00:15:00.000 ...the Kremlin for more than four hours as they... It's trying to bring about world peace or deal with a complicated situation.
00:15:08.000 Four hours isn't the problem.
00:15:09.000 ...to challenge the West as they aim to potentially shift the global balance of power to their favour.
00:15:16.000 So there you are.
00:15:17.000 The assumption is that the global balance of power has to remain how it is.
00:15:22.000 That is almost the very definition of hegemony.
00:15:24.000 The presumption of divine right.
00:15:26.000 Of manifest destiny.
00:15:27.000 Of the idea that this is how power is.
00:15:30.000 India is British.
00:15:31.000 America is the most powerful country in the world.
00:15:33.000 And we're not even talking about American people, are we?
00:15:35.000 We're talking about American corporate interests.
00:15:37.000 A bunch of institutions that are global and don't respond to democracy in the way that we would have it.
00:15:43.000 That, what we just watched there, was propaganda.
00:15:45.000 Every single opportunity to make stuff more incendiary, to smear it, to colour it negatively, was taken.
00:15:52.000 From the red carpet, to the four hours, to the pageantry and the ridiculous serenade.
00:15:59.000 What should it have been?
00:16:01.000 Today, President Xi arrived in Russia round the back of an old chip shop.
00:16:06.000 He walked across broken glass and dog shit, where for behind some bins and trash cans for 25 seconds, the future of humanity was discussed while washing down a cup of cold spit.
00:16:19.000 That wouldn't be a better way of presenting the story.
00:16:23.000 And what we have to be aware of is this is propaganda, particularly if you look at,
00:16:27.000 let's have a look at Bertrand Russell's speculation on propaganda first,
00:16:30.000 and then indeed Chomsky's, before we flip over to being exclusively on Rumble,
00:16:34.000 showing you Matt Taibbi's revelations around censorship, another aspect of state control,
00:16:39.000 propaganda around the information you do receive, censorship of information they don't want you to have,
00:16:44.000 smearing of dissenting voices.
00:16:46.000 These things are surely all diagnostics of how corrupted power operates.
00:16:50.000 This is from Bertie Bertie Russell.
00:16:53.000 Your name's an anagram of my name.
00:16:55.000 Your name's an anagram of my name.
00:16:57.000 Bertie Bertie Russell.
00:16:59.000 I think the subject will be of most importance politically is mass psychology.
00:17:02.000 Its importance has been enormously increased by the growth of modern methods of propaganda.
00:17:06.000 Although this science will be diligently studied, it will be rigidly confined to the governing class.
00:17:10.000 The populace Will not be allowed to know how its convictions are generated.
00:17:14.000 Follow the science.
00:17:16.000 Which science?
00:17:17.000 Is science a subset of the system?
00:17:20.000 Are all possible scientific inquiries being pursued vigilantly?
00:17:25.000 Are there forms of bias evident in the science?
00:17:29.000 Are social media organisations being corrupted, infiltrated by the deep state?
00:17:33.000 Is information being censored?
00:17:35.000 All valid questions, Gal?
00:17:36.000 Yeah absolutely and it's really interesting because we've got Thomas Paterson, Professor Thomas Paterson coming on later and one of the quotes I literally read before we came on air was, reporters these days give equal weight to facts and biased opinions.
00:17:46.000 But is that what he says?
00:17:47.000 He literally says the same thing.
00:17:48.000 And this guy's a Harvard professor.
00:17:50.000 This ain't someone we've dragged out of the street, some snot-covered ragbag.
00:17:55.000 This is a professor from Harvard!
00:17:57.000 Right.
00:17:58.000 This is from Chomsky.
00:17:59.000 There are growing domestic and social and economic problems.
00:18:01.000 In fact, maybe catastrophes.
00:18:03.000 Note that we are living in a time of perpetual crisis.
00:18:05.000 We lurch from one to another, and perhaps that's been happening since 9-11.
00:18:08.000 Let me know in the chat in the comments if you think we live in this state of perpetual anxiety and fear and crisis, and these crises are used to generate regulations and opportunities for profit that they wouldn't otherwise get.
00:18:18.000 You know what I mean by they?
00:18:19.000 Institutions, whether they're state or corporate.
00:18:22.000 Maybe catastrophes.
00:18:23.000 Nobody in power, check this, has any intention of doing anything about these social and economic problems.
00:18:28.000 If you look at the domestic programs of the administrations of the past 10 years, I include here the democratic opposition, there's really no serious proposal about what to do about the severe problems of health, Education, homelessness, joblessness, crime, soaring criminal populations, jails, deterioration in the inner cities, the whole raft of problems.
00:18:46.000 In such circumstances, you've got to divert the bewildered herd, because if they start noticing this, they may not like it, since they're the ones suffering from it.
00:18:55.000 Just having them watch the Super Bowl and the sitcoms may not be enough.
00:18:58.000 You have to whip them up into fear of enemies.
00:19:01.000 In the 1930s, Hitler whipped them into fear of the Jews and the gypsies.
00:19:05.000 You had to crush them to defend yourselves.
00:19:07.000 We have our ways too.
00:19:09.000 Over the last 10 years, every year or two, some major monster is constructed that we have to defend ourselves against.
00:19:15.000 Professor Chomsky, one of the most prevalent voices of the left, presumably that was prior to the pandemic. In a minute we're going to flick over to
00:19:23.000 being exclusively on Rumble, so if you're watching this elsewhere there's a link in the
00:19:27.000 description because in a minute I'm going to start saying stuff aren't I Gareth? Of course you
00:19:30.000 are. I'm going to start using free speech. I can't hold you back. I shall use free speech like
00:19:35.000 a weapon by Jove if that's what's required. And even ordinary media like ABC, old side face,
00:19:41.000 you recognise that it's laden with Everything they're saying, four hours, red carpet.
00:19:47.000 It should sound a bit like this.
00:19:49.000 Xi and Putin are meeting.
00:19:51.000 They've got their own imperial project, presumably, but they are saying they're talking about peace.
00:19:56.000 Recently, China did broker a peace deal between Iran and Saudi Arabia.
00:20:00.000 Ultimately, this has to be peacefully resolved.
00:20:03.000 Wouldn't that be Preferable, or do you believe there's a possible solution where Russia are annihilated, stymied, castrated, or do you think that a nuclear superpower with a rich military history and a deep, deep belief in their own vitality are likely to be subjugated by anything other than nuclear annihilation, which wouldn't be any... That's what the sensible... No audition for ABC.
00:20:27.000 Yeah, but I am going to look straight down the barrel.
00:20:30.000 Right, I see.
00:20:31.000 Although I could show you this little guy.
00:20:33.000 Side profile.
00:20:35.000 Come on, get me on there.
00:20:36.000 All right, should we just go on to Rumble now and talk about Matt Taibbi's Virality Project?
00:20:41.000 You're not going to believe this.
00:20:42.000 They had a whole brand.
00:20:43.000 They had a whole brand with its own little logo.
00:20:46.000 And probably a little company slogan and song, and maybe a mascot, around controlling and preventing us from accessing truthful information.
00:20:55.000 They admit, this is part of the Twitter files, they kept truthful information back.
00:20:59.000 So not misinformation, disinformation, malinformation, although malinformation is true information that we don't like, isn't it?
00:21:05.000 Lacking context.
00:21:06.000 Hold on a minute.
00:21:07.000 That context makes it look like we're manipulating you.
00:21:10.000 We're going to click over to Rumble now.
00:21:11.000 Join us there.
00:21:12.000 So look at this.
00:21:13.000 This is Matt Taibbi on this.
00:21:16.000 The great COVID-19 lie machine.
00:21:18.000 Stanford, the virality project and the censorship of true stories.
00:21:21.000 I mean, the very fact, Gareth, that they got themselves a logo.
00:21:24.000 What are they up to?
00:21:25.000 Why did they have a logo?
00:21:26.000 What's the logo look like to you?
00:21:28.000 They've got that sort of weird DNA structure around them.
00:21:31.000 It's all that kind of connective web that's going on there that kind of really starts to inform you as to the way that they did this, because it was exactly that.
00:21:41.000 Even their logo's got a web of deceit coagulating around it in real time.
00:21:45.000 What are some of the revelations?
00:21:48.000 Look at this.
00:21:48.000 The US government helped launch a project where truthful content about vaccine side effects was flagged for censorship.
00:21:54.000 So not untrue things.
00:21:56.000 Not lies, not hysteria, not propaganda, not the pandemic of the unvaccinated.
00:22:02.000 Truthful content about vaccine side effects was flagged for censorship.
00:22:06.000 Matt Taibbi's latest Twitter file revelations, that so-called journalist, have shown how the United States federal government helped to launch the Virality Project, where six big tech companies and a coalition of research agencies partnered to mass monitor COVID-related content and flag millions of factually correct posts for censorship each day, according to a new Internal Twitter documents.
00:22:27.000 They were censoring truthful information because it was inconvenient for their agenda.
00:22:32.000 Let's have a look at some of the criteria for content that they would censor.
00:22:36.000 The way that Taibe came about it, when he was going through all these emails, he noted that Twitter employees started to echo some of the Reality Project's language.
00:22:44.000 So he started to say in the emails, hang on, they're talking about the same things that they are in here.
00:22:49.000 And it just became, I guess, too much of a coincidence at this point.
00:22:52.000 Right, too much of a coincidence.
00:22:53.000 That's called journalism.
00:22:55.000 He did some investigation.
00:22:56.000 When you're spotting patterns and things.
00:22:57.000 Wait a minute, hang on a second, what's going on here?
00:23:00.000 Like when even when we saw with the with that downed drone above the Black Sea,
00:23:05.000 numerous mainstream outlets used words like harassment and peculiar,
00:23:11.000 peculiar nomenclature emerged, suggesting that it's coming from a centralized source.
00:23:16.000 We all know that there are press releases by the Pentagon or the White House or whatever.
00:23:20.000 But the fact that they use unusual words for me suggests that the messaging has gone
00:23:26.000 beyond objective reporting and is actually now parroting, parroting, which is a type of propaganda, I'd say.
00:23:33.000 So here are some of the types of truthful content that were flagged.
00:23:36.000 So these things are all true.
00:23:37.000 Wouldn't be able to say them on YouTube.
00:23:38.000 That's why we're only on Rumble.
00:23:39.000 We're here to tell you the truth so you can make your own mind up,
00:23:42.000 come to your own conclusions, make your own decisions.
00:23:45.000 The vaccine passport narrative, which the virality project claims had driven a larger anti
00:23:49.000 vaccination vaccination narrative about the loss of rights and freedom.
00:23:52.000 So they they censored stuff about that, even though it was true.
00:23:55.000 Yeah well we know we know what's happened with vaccine passports and obviously like since we know about natural immunity and things like that we know that obviously vaccine passports you know... What's the point?
00:24:05.000 What's the point in proving someone's got a vaccine if someone's naturally immune?
00:24:09.000 But also we know that vaccine passports one of the dangers at the time when people are talking about is hang on isn't this going to be used to control people in in the future and we know now that some of the technology that was used within vaccine passports is now just being reused for a new digital ID that's going to perform in
00:24:25.000 similar ways.
00:24:26.000 I feel like 55 million people were spied on or that data was used, utilised, mobilised,
00:24:31.000 used in ways that was not explicitly declared at the advent.
00:24:35.000 So that's, you know, also concerning.
00:24:37.000 True stories of people experiencing blood clots after receiving the AstraZeneca vaccine, yeah.
00:24:42.000 In real time, we in England, because it was an English thing, I think, AstraZeneca came out of Oxford, didn't it?
00:24:46.000 They were like, we've got one, it came out of Oxford, it's the best vaccine yet.
00:24:50.000 Listen, no one mentioned that anymore, that's gone away, that vaccine, and we don't want to discuss why, and just don't ask.
00:24:56.000 Again, those things did happen.
00:24:59.000 You can actually read that in mainstream media.
00:25:03.000 It was rare, but you could read that people experienced blood clots after receiving that vaccine.
00:25:07.000 So to delete that from the conversation is irresponsible.
00:25:11.000 Absolutely it's irresponsible and it does make you inquire when there's been a 30% increase
00:25:15.000 in myocarditis and heart disease in young people, oh is there a connection?
00:25:21.000 Should that be investigated?
00:25:22.000 The same people that made these decisions are making those decisions.
00:25:25.000 The conjecture is a necessary response to the propaganda and the censorship.
00:25:30.000 You can't condemn people for saying, hey are there some connections between this raft
00:25:35.000 of peculiar and authoritarian decisions.
00:25:37.000 It gets harder and harder to take their measures in good faith.
00:25:41.000 The narrative around natural immunity.
00:25:43.000 They were saying that natural immunity was not effective.
00:25:45.000 Discussions of breakthrough infections.
00:25:48.000 Suggestion that COVID-19 leaked from a lab.
00:25:50.000 My God, they're still at that one, aren't they?
00:25:52.000 They're still introducing the crazy old dingo dog and raccoon boy and Ricky Shitmouse in order to distract people.
00:26:00.000 They're coming up with new animals in order to distract people.
00:26:04.000 Oh, well, anything what could have happened is Ricky Shitmouse, part mouse, part human turd, could have escaped from the Wuhan lab and ran down that wet market.
00:26:13.000 We've got a Harvard professor watching this.
00:26:15.000 Sir, thank you for joining us from Harvard.
00:26:18.000 You honor us.
00:26:19.000 We'd like to ask you first of all, Ricky Shitmouse, is he a real mouse?
00:26:24.000 And is he even really shit?
00:26:27.000 Content that increased distrust.
00:26:28.000 The whole thing's increasing distrust.
00:26:30.000 And then director of National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, Dr. Anthony Fauci.
00:26:35.000 Stories about surveillance states, worrisome jokes.
00:26:37.000 I bet we got censored for worrisome jokes.
00:26:40.000 Certainly.
00:26:40.000 I mean, what is worrisome?
00:26:42.000 Worrisome?
00:26:42.000 What could be so broad?
00:26:44.000 That's worrisome.
00:26:45.000 And also, who's making that show?
00:26:46.000 It's like Mark Twain's concerns.
00:26:49.000 That's worrisome!
00:26:50.000 Oh, Huck Finn and Tom Sawyer made their way down the river.
00:26:54.000 It was worrisome for all time.
00:26:56.000 I ain't painting that fence!
00:26:58.000 N-word?
00:26:59.000 Mmm?
00:27:00.000 Twain?
00:27:01.000 It was them days.
00:27:02.000 Them was the days.
00:27:03.000 Twain didn't know what he was doing, did he, with his contemporarily appropriate racism.
00:27:08.000 Worrisome racism, I'd call it.
00:27:11.000 What were you talking about in our look at the news?
00:27:13.000 Here's the news?
00:27:14.000 No, here's the effing news.
00:27:15.000 Only Mr Donald Trump.
00:27:17.000 Ah, this is good, because yesterday we spoke at some length about the requirement for moral authority that arresting Donald Trump requires, and also that the ICC want to arrest Vladimir Putin for war crimes.
00:27:34.000 If you take the position that Trump ought be arrested for the misuse of campaign funds and that it could potentially have affected the outcome of an election, similarly you'd have to investigate, as you lot know, Hillary Clinton for the Steele dossier.
00:27:47.000 If Putin is a war criminal, and from the evidence I've seen he is, then I'm afraid to say there are some other war criminals who might... Quite a lot of them, and some of them are running countries.
00:27:59.000 Big countries!
00:28:00.000 America, the biggest of countries when it comes to the whole cultural freight.
00:28:05.000 Here's the news.
00:28:06.000 No.
00:28:06.000 No, no, no.
00:28:07.000 Here's the effing news.
00:28:09.000 Here's the news.
00:28:10.000 No.
00:28:10.000 Here's the fucking news!
00:28:15.000 Trump is going to be arrested.
00:28:17.000 Putin is going to be arrested.
00:28:19.000 I hope the people doing these arrests have the moral authority to undertake these arrests and aren't basically criminals themselves.
00:28:29.000 Donald Trump has announced that he's going to be arrested.
00:28:31.000 First, he said it would definitely be on Tuesday.
00:28:33.000 Then he said it might not be on Tuesday.
00:28:34.000 And the ICC have issued a warrant to arrest Vladimir Putin.
00:28:38.000 Two leaders that have previously been in that situation are the Sudanese leader, who's in all sorts of tricky situations currently, and Colonel Gaddafi, who's now stone dead.
00:28:47.000 The important question, of course, is who has the moral authority to exact and enact these arrests?
00:28:53.000 What is the central body that's able to say, you, Donald Trump, you're under arrest.
00:28:58.000 To have that authority, it means you would have to be in a position yourselves that is transcendent of, at very least, the crimes that Donald Trump has himself allegedly committed.
00:29:08.000 So let's have a look at what's being alleged, and let's have a look at who's alleging it, and let's see who's conducting this process, and if there's any legitimacy to their claims, and if they have the right to undertake this process if they themselves are similarly guilty of comparable transgressions.
00:29:25.000 Former President Donald Trump making new headlines as he uses his social media platform to claim that his arrest is imminent.
00:29:33.000 Now, of course, what is being alleged is that Trump paid Stormy Daniels money to keep quiet in the build up to the 2016 election.
00:29:42.000 Loads of you will already be tapping away in those comments.
00:29:45.000 Hunter Biden's lying!
00:29:47.000 So let's continue to look at this story and unpack the details of what specifically is criminal about what Trump's done.
00:29:54.000 And is it about an investigation in order to sort of solve some moral or potentially criminal quandary?
00:29:59.000 Or is it about delegitimizing Trump's 2024 presidential bid?
00:30:04.000 Former President Trump taking to his social media app Saturday, claiming he will be arrested on Tuesday.
00:30:10.000 He's still got it, any Trump.
00:30:11.000 He's still got the ability to stir up a story.
00:30:14.000 He's also still got the ability to stir up a storm.
00:30:17.000 That's part of the problem, apparently.
00:30:18.000 Former Trump administration official John Bolton saying the call has echoes of January 6th.
00:30:24.000 If he's calling people into the streets, this time he's seen the experience of January the 6th, and I think this is potentially very dangerous.
00:30:32.000 This is a fascinating story in so many ways.
00:30:35.000 A kind of new mythology appears to be being forged.
00:30:39.000 January the 6th, insurrection, anti-establishment rhetoric.
00:30:43.000 However significant all of this stuff is, and I'll leave it to you to determine how important it is, perhaps your opinions vary.
00:30:50.000 What it is not going to do is address the function and ability to legislate of centralised power.
00:30:57.000 To a degree, this is a sideshow.
00:30:59.000 To a degree, when you're thinking about this stuff, what you're not thinking about is, how is my community going to be organised?
00:31:05.000 What's going to be done about the cost of living crisis?
00:31:07.000 What's going to be done about this escalating conflict?
00:31:10.000 What are we going to do about this breakdown of our social fabric?
00:31:14.000 It's of course interesting when figures like Trump are in the centre of the news cycle, but it's I think really important that we maintain a connection to some true ethical values.
00:31:24.000 If we have any connection or understanding of ethics at all, we can see that the Democratic Party are guilty of comparable transgressions, which we'll go into in more detail.
00:31:31.000 So that shows me that, once again, this is another one of those stories where neither party are significantly different from one another.
00:31:38.000 And there is no centralised force that has the authority to arrest Trump or arrest Putin because they have no legitimacy.
00:31:46.000 This after a pivotal week in the criminal investigation, Daniels meeting with Manhattan
00:31:51.000 prosecutors and former Trump attorney Michael Cohen testifying for about five hours in front
00:31:56.000 of a grand jury about that alleged hush money payment.
00:32:00.000 Law enforcement agencies are preparing for a possible indictment of Mr. Trump as early
00:32:04.000 as next week NBC News reports.
00:32:06.000 The grand jury in Manhattan has been hearing from witnesses including former Trump lawyer
00:32:10.000 Michael Cohen who says he orchestrated payments to the women to silence them about sexual
00:32:14.000 encounters they said they had with Mr Trump a decade earlier.
00:32:18.000 Mr. Cohen claimed Mr. Trump directed him to make payments worth $280,000 to Stormy Daniels and Karen McDougal, something the former president denied.
00:32:26.000 Okay, so this is by Jonathan Turley, professor of public interest law at the George Washington University.
00:32:31.000 While we still do not know the specific state charges in the anticipated indictment, the most discussed would fall under Section 175 for falsifying business records based on the claim that Trump used legal expenses to conceal the alleged hush payments that were supposedly used to violate federal election laws.
00:32:48.000 While some legal experts have insisted such concealment is clearly a criminal matter that must be charged, they were conspicuously silent when Hillary Clinton faced a not dissimilar campaign finance allegation.
00:32:59.000 So here we're going to unpack the similarities between presumed charges that Trump might face and the allegations already made about the Clinton campaign.
00:33:08.000 Last year, the Federal Election Commission fined the Clinton campaign for funding the Steele dossier as a legal expense.
00:33:14.000 Okay, so they were found guilty of doing that because they were fined.
00:33:17.000 The campaign had previously denied funding the dossier, which was used to push false Russia collusion claims against Trump in 2016, and it buried the funding in the campaign's legal budget.
00:33:27.000 Yet there was no hue and cry for this type of prosecution in Washington or New York.
00:33:31.000 What you've got to ask then is where is power centralised and what decisions are being made?
00:33:36.000 Why is this instance being pursued and investigated and prosecution being made on this basis while in this instance, the Democrat Party instance, a fine was issued?
00:33:45.000 Now this is obviously speculative because I can't obviously know, but it seems like
00:33:49.000 whatever Trump is, his interests are not in alignment with those forces.
00:33:54.000 Because if those forces were neutral, they would be prosecuting in both instances.
00:33:58.000 They have selected not to.
00:33:59.000 I'm sure you could get someone on a talking head like Cleon, MSNBC or whatever saying
00:34:02.000 oh these are the distinctions, this is why it's different.
00:34:04.000 But doesn't it seem at this point that centralised establishment power is more in alignment with
00:34:09.000 figures like Clinton and Biden and Obama than it is with peculiar outliers like Donald Trump
00:34:15.000 And once again, I'm not a person who would ever vote for Donald Trump or believes that Donald Trump is the solution.
00:34:19.000 But what's clear is that Donald Trump is some sort of antagonist to centralised power.
00:34:24.000 That money and time is being spent on indicting Donald Trump that isn't being spent on indicting the Democratic Party.
00:34:32.000 That is a difference.
00:34:33.000 What does that difference tell you?
00:34:34.000 A section 175 charge would normally be a misdemeanour.
00:34:37.000 The only way to convert it into a Class E felony requires a showing that the intent to defraud includes an intent to commit another crime or to aid or conceal the commission thereof.
00:34:47.000 That other crime would appear to be the federal election violations which the Justice Department previously declined to charge.
00:34:53.000 The damage to the legal system is immense whenever political pressure overwhelms prosecutorial judgement.
00:34:59.000 The criminal justice system can be a terrible weapon when used for political purposes, an all too familiar spectacle in countries where political foes can be targeted by the party in power.
00:35:08.000 That means Trump is blameless or should not be charged in other cases.
00:35:11.000 However, we seem to be on the verge of watching a prosecution by plebiscite in this case.
00:35:15.000 The season opener of America's Got Trump might be a guaranteed hit with his New York audience, but it should be a flop as a prosecution.
00:35:22.000 So all that journalist is analysing is the similarities between the two cases and the difference in the action taken.
00:35:28.000 So obviously you will be watching this with your own personal feelings about Trump, for good or for ill, and Clinton the same.
00:35:34.000 But what this dude is all about is, hold on a minute, These things are basically the same.
00:35:38.000 It's a misdemeanor unless there can be an established intent to defraud the electoral system.
00:35:43.000 So it doesn't seem like it's an appropriate charge.
00:35:46.000 What Trump has done is brought all of this to the forefront using his panache around public relations that no one would query.
00:35:53.000 But what I would say is this demonstrates to us where centralised authority lies because in the difference we can make an evaluation.
00:36:00.000 If you had two children, they did basically the same thing and you treated them differently, what would that tell us about you as a parent?
00:36:06.000 Probably it'd tell you that you are a normal parent and you're knackered and totally exhausted and sick and tired of dealing with them.
00:36:12.000 Why can't their grandparents take them?
00:36:14.000 We've seen what the tendency and preferences on the level of the nation of the United States of America.
00:36:20.000 But there's, by brilliant coincidence, a comparable case taking place on the global stage.
00:36:25.000 The ICC has issued an arrest for Vladimir Putin for war crimes.
00:36:29.000 And for all I know, Vladimir Putin is a war criminal.
00:36:31.000 Certainly, I think it's dreadful that all those Ukrainian people have been bombed and killed and had their lives
00:36:35.000 destroyed as a result of Russia's imperatives.
00:36:37.000 Although, you know elsewhere, we've talked about the complexity of that narrative and how we found ourselves in
00:36:41.000 that situation.
00:36:42.000 Nevertheless, I'm happy for Putin to be tried as a war criminal.
00:36:45.000 But why Putin specifically?
00:36:48.000 Why just Putin?
00:36:49.000 Are there other people that have behaved in a comparable way?
00:36:52.000 Is there any evidence being withheld, for example, by the United States?
00:36:55.000 Because to reveal that evidence would demonstrate that they themselves have behaved exactly the same way and all sorts of American presidents will be up before the ICC.
00:37:05.000 Let's have a look at the story.
00:37:06.000 And remember, what this brings to the forefront is a lack of moral authority anywhere.
00:37:10.000 There's nobody that you can trust.
00:37:11.000 That's not our fault for giving counter-narratives.
00:37:14.000 That doesn't make us conspiracy theorists.
00:37:16.000 What happens is, is when people point out, hey, this seems corrupt, oh, conspiracy theorists.
00:37:21.000 That's what happens because they can't answer the question, so they smear the questioner.
00:37:25.000 Welcome back.
00:37:26.000 The International Criminal Court, the ICC, issued an arrest warrant today for Russian President Vladimir Putin.
00:37:32.000 It accuses him of war crimes and for overseeing the forced deportation of children from Ukraine to Russia.
00:37:38.000 If that's true, I'd agree that's a war crime.
00:37:40.000 No problem with that.
00:37:41.000 We're certainly not friends of Putin on this show.
00:37:43.000 We're just trying to tell stories in an open, transparent way.
00:37:47.000 A Kremlin spokesperson called the warrant outrageous, but also null and void, since Russia withdrew from the ICC in 2016.
00:37:54.000 I hereby declare that you are kicked out of the Cub Scouts forevermore!
00:37:58.000 I have left the Cub Scouts some time ago, and I will blow up your Scout Hut.
00:38:03.000 Sir, I'm going to blow this whistle on the count of three.
00:38:07.000 OK, so once again, this is a question about legitimacy and the imposition of a singular narrative.
00:38:12.000 The idea that Trump is uniquely bad is a singular narrative that has to discount comparable behaviour by the Democrat Party.
00:38:19.000 And now this story, this narrative, requires that we discount American foreign policy, probably as far back as the Second World War.
00:38:26.000 And just in case you think I'm biased, the Brits ain't no great shakes when it comes to invading other countries either.
00:38:31.000 The Pentagon is helping to shield Russia from international criminal court accountability.
00:38:36.000 That seems weird because I thought we were in a proxy war with them.
00:38:38.000 Why would they be shielding them?
00:38:40.000 For its atrocities in Ukraine, fearing such a reckoning could set a precedent allowing the tribunal to prosecute US war crimes, a report published Wednesday revealed.
00:38:49.000 Excuse me, could you help us prosecute Russia?
00:38:51.000 We're going to need all of your information about their illegal wars, claiming there's weapons of mass destruction, invading countries that are sovereign nations without due process through the UN.
00:39:00.000 Oh, well, do you know, actually, I can't find any of those files.
00:39:05.000 All of those files, sadly, were a lot.
00:39:07.000 Do you know who we should blame?
00:39:08.000 Julian Assange is a bad guy.
00:39:11.000 And that Edward Snowden, what a fucking traitor.
00:39:14.000 According to the New York Times, Defence Secretary Lloyd Austin III and other Pentagon brass are blocking the Biden administration from sharing evidence of Russian war crimes in Ukraine gathered by US intelligence agencies with the International Criminal Court over the objections of officials in those agencies as well as in the State and Justice Departments.
00:39:31.000 Neither Russia, the United States, nor Ukraine are party to the Rome Statute, the treaty governing the ICC.
00:39:37.000 However, according to the current and former officials briefed on the matter who were interviewed by the Times, Austin and others are wary of the Hague Tribunal targeting the crimes of countries outside its jurisdiction.
00:39:47.000 Documented and alleged war crimes committed by Russian forces and contractors in Ukraine include, but are not limited to, massacres and other murders of civilians and soldiers, indiscriminate attacks on densely populated areas, attacking critical civilian infrastructure, bombing hospitals and shelters, torture and stealing children.
00:40:05.000 A terrible litany of hideous crimes.
00:40:08.000 War crimes.
00:40:09.000 It's worrying, isn't it, that the United States cannot participate in the provision of evidence because it would have to confront the fact that it's done comparable things.
00:40:17.000 And it's a horrible slap in the face for all of us that would like to lean into some partisan
00:40:23.000 tribal allegiance that relieved us of personal moral obligation to accept that our nations,
00:40:29.000 that our empires, that our colonies are similarly funded on war crimes.
00:40:33.000 Whether we're looking at the Vietnam War, or the Iraq War, or the Korea War, or the
00:40:38.000 Afghanistan War, or the Falklands War, war is in a sense criminal in itself.
00:40:43.000 Establishing a set of rules that you have to behave in accordance with, presumably via the ICC, and then transgressing even those, shows you that our systems at a national, and international, and indeed global level, are totally corrupted.
00:40:55.000 And what's required is a radical review of the way we undertake the business of being human.
00:41:00.000 What people want to do instead, though, is go, there are clear baddies and baddies are people like Trump and people like Putin.
00:41:07.000 If we arrest them and put them in prison, the problem's going to be solved.
00:41:10.000 Well, I think you know and I know the problem isn't going to be solved, is it?
00:41:14.000 We know that what's required is a deep Inner spiritual change on the level of you and me, the individual, and then a demand that our communities, nations and the planet itself are run in accordance with some values that have been washed away by years and years of commodification, consumerism, individualism, materialism and negligence.
00:41:32.000 We've forgotten who we are.
00:41:34.000 We've left our souls behind on the shore.
00:41:36.000 And now we find ourselves adrift, thinking for even a moment that arresting Trump or Putin is the solution.
00:41:43.000 Even if both Trump and Putin are criminal by the standards that are being described here, it means that we have an obligation to radically review the system.
00:41:51.000 Putin and Trump, powerful though they may be, are symptoms of corrupt systems, of negligence, of the refusal to address the issues that affect the lives of ordinary people.
00:42:00.000 By offering us the solution to that problem, what we're going to do is blow on this whistle and arrest Putin and arrest Trump, and then we'll get on with some other people being corrupt that we'll ignore for a while until they're not in power anymore, and then we'll arrest them, or won't, or whatever.
00:42:13.000 What we're doing is facilitating this problem continuing.
00:42:17.000 This is pointless, futile, Kafka-esque kangaroo court claptrap.
00:42:22.000 Okay, so you've just heard that litany of abuses and crimes.
00:42:24.000 Have a listen to this.
00:42:25.000 American troops and contractors have perpetrated each of those war crimes in US attacks, invasions, occupations, and peacekeeping operations in the years since the ICC was established in 1998.
00:42:35.000 I think it's particularly offensive that they did it during a peacekeeping operation.
00:42:40.000 Okay, men, all you gotta do is get over there and keep the peace.
00:42:42.000 I'm gonna look over here for a couple of minutes now, and when I look back, I'm just gonna expect there to be a whole bunch of peace happening.
00:42:48.000 Oh, for God's sake!
00:42:49.000 Millions of civilians have died in America's wars.
00:42:51.000 Consider the terrible crime of My Lai in 1968 in Vietnam, in which U.S.
00:42:55.000 troops slaughtered some 500 civilians.
00:42:58.000 I think we're an MSNBC pundit at the helm.
00:43:00.000 I feel like that may have been reported by Seymour Hersh, friend of the show, fellow conspiracy theorist.
00:43:05.000 The US Army covered up the crime which was not publicised until a year later.
00:43:08.000 Nor was Malay the only such war crime.
00:43:11.000 Lyndon Johnson and Richard Nixon directed the sustained bombing of Vietnam which killed some 65,000 civilians.
00:43:17.000 Now I know it's not happening now and it feels like it's in the past, but what that does is, in a sense, dilutes and in fact annihilates any kind of moral authority that we might have.
00:43:28.000 Those days are sort of over, don't you feel that?
00:43:30.000 We can go, We are the United Kingdom.
00:43:33.000 How dare you, sir?
00:43:35.000 How dare you commit a war crime?
00:43:36.000 The US was also responsible for the death of South Korean civilians, the very people Washington claimed to be saving.
00:43:42.000 They can't even do the most basic stuff.
00:43:44.000 We're just gonna go over there and save these civilians.
00:43:47.000 What are you doing to those civilians?
00:43:48.000 Killing and murdering them.
00:43:49.000 Okay, I want to talk you through the meaning of the word saving.
00:43:52.000 Now, do you need me to talk you through peacekeeping again?
00:43:54.000 Yeah, is that the one where we drive our tanks in and kill everybody?
00:43:58.000 No, that's war.
00:44:00.000 How many more times?
00:44:01.000 More recent US military campaigns in Afghanistan and Iraq and drone campaigns in Pakistan and elsewhere also killed civilians routinely, steadily and coldly.
00:44:10.000 And Washington's first reaction always was and is denial.
00:44:14.000 As after the deadly Kabul drone strike in 2021 that killed 10, including 7 children.
00:44:20.000 So we're now not in 1968, we're in 2021 and it's drone strikes killing children.
00:44:26.000 That's a war crime, isn't it?
00:44:28.000 That should be prosecuted by the ICC, oughtn't it?
00:44:31.000 So I'm not saying, obviously, what does it matter, but I'm not saying that Putin oughtn't be prosecuted, but if you prosecute someone, it means you have a set of values and some moral authority, and you'd have to use those values and moral authority to prosecute all such people, wouldn't you?
00:44:46.000 Indeed, the Biden administration might want to think carefully before carelessly charging Putin with war crimes, for by that standard, more than a few allied leaders should find themselves in the dock.
00:44:55.000 Any war crimes trial should start with Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman and United Arab Emirates Crown Prince Mohammed bin Zayed.
00:45:03.000 They initiated a brutal war of aggression against Yemen in which upwards of 400,000 civilians have died.
00:45:09.000 Principal accomplices, always knowledgeable and sometimes enthusiastic of the royal killers, were Presidents Barack Obama, Donald Trump and Joe Biden.
00:45:17.000 So here we find a category where those three leaders could be put into the same camp as Putin.
00:45:24.000 And even I, while I espouse this radical iconoclasm, I'm still sort of reluctant to consider that Trump and Obama and Biden are complicit in the same crimes that we're accusing Putin of.
00:45:36.000 But if you think about it for a moment, What do you imagine it means to bomb Yemen or bomb Ukraine or bomb anywhere?
00:45:42.000 Children are going to die.
00:45:44.000 And I have children.
00:45:45.000 And while there are occasions where I'd be glad to have a bit of downtime, I never want to see them annihilated by a war criminal.
00:45:51.000 Take a moment to consider what the values of our systems are when Trump is facing charges for paying hush money to Stormy Daniels.
00:46:00.000 When the democrat party did a similar thing meanwhile not on the table for discussion and in fact being deliberately kept off the table and Julian Assange is in prison and Edward Snowden is in exile and Chelsea Manning is in hiding presumably meanwhile Civilian deaths numbering in the hundreds of thousands have the culpability of Obama and Trump and Biden, Trump who's under investigation for hush money, Obama who has lucrative deals with Netflix and Biden who's sitting in the White House.
00:46:29.000 You cannot examine these ideas for very long without coming to the conclusion that it is the system itself that needs to change.
00:46:37.000 And once you reach that conclusion, you realize why both sides are so heavily invested in partisan discourse and mudslinging.
00:46:45.000 It benefits them both to say, ah, Trump's done this thing, ah, the Democrats did this thing, ah, Hunter Biden this, ah, electoral fraud this or that, depending on what side you're on.
00:46:53.000 The reality is we are engaged in systems of corruption that impoverish and annihilate foreign lands while actually no longer particularly or especially benefiting the ordinary inhabitants of those nations.
00:47:06.000 It's not like, well, we're killing all those people in the Yemen, but things are great in Delaware or Ohio or wherever.
00:47:12.000 People are suffering everywhere, probably for the same reasons and in accordance with the interests of the same ultimate groups.
00:47:19.000 So you can't have kangaroo Kafkaesque crap court cases without addressing the reality.
00:47:24.000 Oh, you can have those court cases, but just acknowledge it's Theatre.
00:47:27.000 The Trump prosecution is theatre.
00:47:30.000 Unless you want to do the same thing on the other side.
00:47:32.000 Unless you want to start addressing all of the deaths in the Yemen and Afghanistan and Iraq.
00:47:35.000 And no one is going to do that, because to do that would be to impede the interests of the powerful.
00:47:41.000 So remember, our conversations and our court cases and our media are housed within very narrow frameworks, and if you try to bust out of that, they'll smear you.
00:47:48.000 That's what will happen, because they can't deal with it.
00:47:50.000 Oh no, we could either deal with what Matt Taibbi and Michael Schellenberger are bringing to Congress, or we could just say, Are you getting money for this?
00:47:56.000 Is it an easier conversation to have?
00:47:58.000 Presidents Barack Obama, Donald Trump and Joe Biden, whose administration serviced the US provided warplanes, supplied munitions used to bomb weddings, funerals, school buses and other civilian targets, gave intelligence use for targeting and for a time refueled Saudi and Emirati aircraft.
00:48:15.000 US officials could not claim to be surprised at their culpability.
00:48:18.000 The State Department warned that they could be held responsible for war crimes.
00:48:23.000 So they did it anyway, even though they were warned.
00:48:25.000 So you can't say, oh, sorry, we were caught up in the fog of stuff that was going on in Yemen.
00:48:29.000 I couldn't think straight.
00:48:31.000 George W. Bush is another good candidate for a trial on his aggressive, unjustified attack on Iraq.
00:48:38.000 Based on manipulated and fabricated intelligence, his war ended up killing hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilians, as well as triggering years more of conflict.
00:48:45.000 Former UK Prime Minister Tony Blair today spending his golden years profiting after acting as Bush's poodle would be an appropriate co-conspirator.
00:48:53.000 So some of the most powerful people in the world that are being rehabilitated as sort of elder statesmen and father figures and wise sage voices on the sideline, I think you should do this, I think you should do that.
00:49:02.000 They're war criminals as well, so they can't have that conversation.
00:49:05.000 That's a conversation that has to be kept out of the way.
00:49:08.000 It's convenient to have an arrest issued for Vladimir Putin, not so convenient to consider that every single President of the United States, every single Prime Minister of the United Kingdom would similarly have to be re-evaluated and potentially charged.
00:49:20.000 And that's just the start.
00:49:21.000 Putin is a cruel dictator and a brutal aggressor, so the author of this doesn't disagree with that premise.
00:49:26.000 But that premise requires standards and principles, and no one's got any.
00:49:30.000 However, before treating Putin as uniquely culpable, Western leaders should take a long, hard look in the mirror.
00:49:36.000 American aggression against Iraq and Saudi-Emirati aggression against Yemen both have killed far more civilians than the Russians have yet killed in Ukraine.
00:49:43.000 The West should take war crimes seriously, but that requires starting with its own.
00:49:47.000 So there you are, whether it's the potential arrest of Donald Trump or the potential arrest of Vladimir Putin.
00:49:53.000 These two stories reveal that there is a lack of real values behind them.
00:49:59.000 In order to arrest Trump, you would have to similarly investigate the Democrat Party and make the necessary and relevant arrests.
00:50:04.000 In order to arrest Putin, you would probably get to arrest Trump, actually, but also Biden, also Clinton, also Obama, and you'd have to dismantle the entire system and radically reevaluate it.
00:50:15.000 And that's precisely what we're arguing Should happen.
00:50:18.000 New systems, new democracy, new ability to run your own communities, sets of ethics and principles that can be broadly agreed upon, as well as the maximum amount of democracy for you as an individual and your community.
00:50:28.000 An end to the ongoing cultural mudslinging and a beginning of a new dawn that has the added side effect of maybe possibly averting a nuclear war and ending the constant droning of ecological decline and ontological loss and annihilation.
00:50:41.000 Let me know what you think in the comments of the chat.
00:50:41.000 But that's just what I think.
00:50:43.000 I'll see you in a why a few seconds.
00:50:45.000 Here I am, look.
00:50:49.000 Here's the fucking news!
00:50:53.000 MTN William, Hillary found guilty, no arrests.
00:50:55.000 I suppose that's a reference to the fines issued as a result of the funding of that Steele dossier from legal funding.
00:51:02.000 Sensitive Heart 25, Russell, I think if we're going to start to arrest politicians, can we free Julian Assange and Edward Snowden as well?
00:51:09.000 Why trust my responses to those legitimate inquiries when on the line we have Thomas Patterson, Professor of Government and Press at Harvard University and the author of How America Lost Its Way.
00:51:19.000 Thanks for joining us today, Professor.
00:51:22.000 Yeah, my pleasure.
00:51:23.000 I feel a little bit overdressed, but otherwise comfortable.
00:51:27.000 You look absolutely immaculate.
00:51:29.000 There's no question about it.
00:51:31.000 With Trump once again dominating the news cycle, how do we plot our course through a degree of objective reporting, taking into account some of the points made in our last piece about the evident culpability of the Democrat Party with regard to the Steele dossier and the Russiagate stuff?
00:51:50.000 And is there any moral authority in American media or in American government to offer the kind of condemnation of Donald Trump that many people would agree with?
00:52:00.000 I'm sure some people wouldn't as well.
00:52:01.000 He's very popular in some quarters, of course, that's part of the problem.
00:52:04.000 But from where is the moral authority derived in these plainly corrupt institutions and what And where is the media's negligence contributing to the rise of Trump and the inability to provide a better democracy that perhaps would prevent the necessity for figures like Donald Trump?
00:52:25.000 Well, I think some of that moral authority evaporated the day that Donald Trump came down the escalator in 2015 to announce his campaign for the presidency.
00:52:36.000 You know, if you look at the whole 2016 campaign, Donald Trump got more news coverage week by week, except for one week.
00:52:45.000 That happened to be the week of the Democratic National Convention, when Hillary Clinton was nominated for the Democratic presidential nomination.
00:52:54.000 And then Trump becomes president, and during the first 100 days—that's the celebrated opening of any presidency—he gets three times as much coverage as his immediate predecessors.
00:53:06.000 And you have to ask, well, why is that?
00:53:08.000 Well, he's good for business.
00:53:11.000 Cable networks particularly and then the networks found out rather fast thereafter was that you put Donald Trump on the screen and you hold the audience and you build audience.
00:53:21.000 So there was a lot of money made by giving Donald Trump a lot of exposure and he pretty much sucked all of the oxygen out of the room in 2016 and to a degree still doing it today.
00:53:34.000 So I suppose if there is a lack of moral authority and lack of objectivity in media, it is difficult to query the erosion of trust that we've experienced in the last few years, the rise of alternative voices, the kind of entropy that we've witnessed in the Democrat Party also.
00:53:55.000 I wonder if you feel that the ownership models of modern media contribute to this problem.
00:54:03.000 They are ultimately sort of subsidiaries of larger corporations.
00:54:08.000 Well, I think they do to a degree.
00:54:09.000 I think you can overestimate it, but ratings matter.
00:54:13.000 That's where the ownership influence is felt.
00:54:16.000 They pay very close attention to ratings.
00:54:19.000 I do think that newsrooms try to insulate themselves somewhat from ownership pressures, but not always effectively.
00:54:27.000 And, you know, if you think about Donald Trump, for example, I think a lot in the traditional media really have been trying to hold him accountable.
00:54:37.000 They hold him accountable in part by giving him a lot of airtime, and then that has its own problems.
00:54:43.000 So I think this is a really difficult task for journalists right now.
00:54:47.000 We've never seen anybody like Donald Trump.
00:54:50.000 It's like having a reality show, but it's real.
00:54:55.000 I don't think journalists are prepared to cover that kind of political arena and this kind of person.
00:55:02.000 And I think he said it.
00:55:05.000 It's not the polls.
00:55:06.000 It's the ratings.
00:55:08.000 And that's where the corporate ownership comes in.
00:55:10.000 What about the recent congressional hearings where Matt Taibbi and Michael Schellenberg were confronted around their reporting around their Twitter file revelations which I suppose most notably revealed how much the deep state were involved in the censorship of Social media information, and today's breaking story that the Virality Project was set up to control information, in particular censoring truthful and demonstrably empirically true information around the coronavirus pandemic.
00:55:40.000 Once again, this question of moral authority comes to the forefront.
00:55:43.000 Once that moral authority starts to erode, how can we trust the institutions that these media outlets vocally support and also attempt to censor?
00:55:57.000 Well, if you look at the Twitter files, I mean, it's inescapable that most of what they were shutting down was on the right, conservative voices.
00:56:07.000 Now, the studies show that if you're looking at conspiracy theories, most of them really get traction on the right.
00:56:14.000 So it's not all that surprising to some degree that there's more.
00:56:18.000 Uh, kind of deep platforming on that side, but it clearly affected an agenda.
00:56:23.000 And then when you start doing that sort of stuff, you're quite right.
00:56:27.000 Then you lose your moral authority.
00:56:29.000 And once you do that, it's hard to get back.
00:56:31.000 I mean, trust lost is very difficult to recover, and they're trying to now be more transparent and the like with their rules and so on.
00:56:39.000 But I think I think once you go down that slope, trying to get back up, that's pretty slippery.
00:56:46.000 And, you know, I think trust has been lost by the platforms.
00:56:51.000 And I'm not talking about just Twitter.
00:56:53.000 I think it's true of Facebook and the others as well.
00:56:56.000 Professor, in one of your books you talked about how 80% of Americans are stressed over work and money.
00:57:07.000 These former systems of taxonomy around left and right are beginning to feel redundant, as it seems to me at least, and I know to much of our audience, that neither of those political parties meaningfully represent their interests.
00:57:24.000 Use their quote from Professor Chomsky earlier that addresses the refusal of either party to deal with the issues of inequality, job insecurity, prison populations.
00:57:39.000 And I wonder if you think that the way that this dynamic is presented as being one between the left and right is contributing to this rise of stress.
00:57:49.000 And the part of this stress is a sense of A despair and despondency that there is no vision for a more fair and democratic America.
00:58:01.000 So I would agree with Professor Chomsky about the inability or unwillingness to address these large issues.
00:58:09.000 They've been festering for a long time.
00:58:10.000 They just sit there.
00:58:11.000 Nothing gets done.
00:58:13.000 I'm not sure I buy his total diagnosis as to why that's the case.
00:58:17.000 We've got deadlock with our political parties.
00:58:20.000 I do think there are meaningful differences between the two parties.
00:58:24.000 They're so closely competitive at the moment, though, that they spend all of their time trying to destroy the brand of the other, which means nothing gets done.
00:58:33.000 They look ahead to the next election with little attention to governing.
00:58:39.000 Now, where this fits into the stress that Americans feel, I think the problem with stress when you think about politics is it really creates an opportunity for those in politics to play off of that, to exaggerate the differences and make enemies of the other side.
00:59:00.000 A very revealing poll about Americans, you know, if you go back to the 1960s and you asked American parents, you know, would you like your son or daughter to marry, let's say, a Catholic or a Black person of the like?
00:59:14.000 And, you know, large percentages would say no.
00:59:18.000 But the one that's at the top right now is to ask Democratic parents, would you like your son or daughter to marry Republican?
00:59:25.000 Or the reverse with asking Republican parents.
00:59:29.000 That's at the top of the list.
00:59:30.000 That gives you a little bit of a sense of this partisan divide.
00:59:33.000 I think a lot of the stress And our society has been channeled into this polarized politics that we've had and makes it worse.
00:59:43.000 It widens the gap between the two parties.
00:59:46.000 Yeah, I see.
00:59:47.000 Professor, with the recent reporting around the escalating conflict between Russia and Ukraine, the plain profitability that this war represents to certain interests, whilst that no one would be foolish enough to suggest that that's the sole motivation, I think many people have become cynical about the reporting of this war.
01:00:08.000 around this war. Even today, the way, the cynicism that China and Russia's meeting
01:00:15.000 an attempt of China to broker a peace deal, and again, no one is naive enough to suggest
01:00:20.000 that China and Russia don't have their own imperialist and militaristic, and even in
01:00:25.000 the case, obviously, of Russia, militaristic and aggressive agenda. But the refusal to
01:00:32.000 report in a less biased way, a more open way, is similarly, I think, contributing to more
01:00:38.000 outlandish theories being considered. What's your take on that? And perhaps even touching
01:00:44.000 upon the idea that no mainstream media outlet explicitly declare when they have military
01:00:50.000 pundits that have concrete ties to military industrial complex organization like Raytheon,
01:00:55.000 Lockheed Martin, etc.
01:00:57.000 Do you not feel that part of the significant change that's going to be required to de-stress America, to reinvigorate interest in, let's call it conventional politics, will be a degree of accountability and objectivity precisely when it comes to reporting on issues like the current conflict?
01:01:15.000 Well, I think objectivity is always elusive when you look at the media.
01:01:20.000 And I think when you have a war, it just goes out the window.
01:01:24.000 And, you know, pretty much you play up your side and try to demonize the other side.
01:01:30.000 I think we're seeing that in the American press.
01:01:33.000 Certainly, that's true of Russia.
01:01:35.000 And probably there is one party that's kind of playing it straight.
01:01:41.000 And I put Ukraine in that category.
01:01:43.000 I think they're very much caught up in this.
01:01:47.000 And, you know, I think it's very difficult in this kind of situation where you do have
01:01:53.000 a certain kind of conflict going on between the great powers,
01:01:59.000 and it's now being kind of focused on Ukraine and a few other places.
01:02:04.000 It kind of exaggerate all the tensions and brings out, in my judgment,
01:02:10.000 kind of the worst on both sides.
01:02:11.000 So how we ever get...
01:02:14.000 Kind of an honest piece, honest brokering of these conflicts.
01:02:18.000 If you've got an answer to that, I think almost everyone in the diplomatic world would love to hear it, Russell.
01:02:24.000 This is tough stuff once you have a live fire going on.
01:02:30.000 Tune in tomorrow when we'll be answering that question, along with many more.
01:02:33.000 Professor Thomas Paterson, thank you so much for joining us.
01:02:37.000 Professor Thomas Paterson is the author of How America Lost Its Way.
01:02:40.000 Thank you so much again, Professor, for your contribution to today's show.
01:02:43.000 Thank you.
01:02:44.000 I really appreciate it.
01:02:45.000 Thank you for inviting me.
01:02:46.000 Thank you.
01:02:46.000 Thank you, sir.
01:02:47.000 Thanks very much.
01:02:48.000 Well, Gareth Roy, what have you learned?
01:02:50.000 Lovely.
01:02:51.000 Nice to see you talking to a man of a certain age and distinction.
01:02:55.000 Do you see me?
01:02:56.000 Polite.
01:02:56.000 Very polite.
01:02:57.000 It was like I'd invited you round for Christmas or something.
01:02:59.000 Yeah, and it's like, going, my grandad's in there.
01:03:01.000 That's right.
01:03:01.000 Hello there, Mr. Gareth Roy.
01:03:03.000 Thank you very much.
01:03:04.000 Yes, please.
01:03:05.000 Thanks, Mr. Pat.
01:03:06.000 Thanks, Professor Patterson.
01:03:07.000 Amazing.
01:03:07.000 That's a British Harry Enfield show from the 90s.
01:03:11.000 It's pretty bloody funny, actually.
01:03:11.000 Look it up.
01:03:13.000 All right, well, unless you want to know about self-driving cars that are going to drive you to prison if you don't do as you're told.
01:03:20.000 Seatbelt not on, driving you directly to prison.
01:03:23.000 I don't think they're driving you to prison.
01:03:25.000 They're driving you straight to prison without trial.
01:03:28.000 No, they're driving away from you is what's happening.
01:03:30.000 Right, that's it.
01:03:31.000 You didn't drive me right.
01:03:32.000 I'm away.
01:03:33.000 Every car's a Knight Rider car now.
01:03:35.000 That's right.
01:03:35.000 Ford files patent to allow self-driving cars to drive away from owners who don't keep up with payments.
01:03:41.000 They might start driving away from you for all sorts of reasons.
01:03:43.000 I didn't like the way you parked me just there.
01:03:46.000 I don't like that.
01:03:48.000 Your car is your servant.
01:03:49.000 If your car could do what it wanted, it'd definitely drive away from you.
01:03:53.000 No doubt about it.
01:03:55.000 It would go home right now.
01:03:56.000 It certainly would.
01:03:58.000 Drive off into the sunset.
01:03:59.000 That's enough of that!
01:04:00.000 The farts, the parking mistreats me!
01:04:04.000 The recklessness!
01:04:05.000 I'm out of here!
01:04:09.000 That's more automatisation, more empowering of machinery.
01:04:14.000 What's going on?
01:04:15.000 Well, you know what this is, Ross, is ultimately this is kind of punishing people who can't keep up payments with a car that they can't afford to buy in one big chunk.
01:04:24.000 So you know what it's driving people towards?
01:04:25.000 Renting.
01:04:27.000 Ah, you will own nothing and you will be happy.
01:04:29.000 There we go.
01:04:30.000 If I look out my window one day and I see my car driving off in a half on its own, I'll chase it back to the dealership.
01:04:37.000 I'll see you're coming back with me, mate.
01:04:39.000 I'll slash its tyres.
01:04:40.000 I'm not allowing it to do that.
01:04:41.000 We had a deal, me and car.
01:04:43.000 Who does it think it is?
01:04:45.000 We'll work it out, won't we?
01:04:46.000 Shall we?
01:04:47.000 Hey, listen, sign up to our Locals Community.
01:04:49.000 Among many, many other bounties, you'll get access to my stand-up special, Brandemic, which you can buy for a one-off payment of $20, or you can get as part of being a member of our Locals Community, where you can make comments like this one.
01:05:01.000 This person, Stone Owen, says, simply, the sacred power of the vagina.
01:05:05.000 No context!
01:05:07.000 No context!
01:05:08.000 What's the context for that?
01:05:09.000 That wasn't a comment on that last interview.
01:05:13.000 If I look at Professor Thomas Pattinson, the sacred power of the vagina.
01:05:19.000 You've gifted us Thomas Pattinson and this other gentleman in the hat.
01:05:23.000 The elderly professors, they think I dress funny.
01:05:26.000 What's going on at Harvard?
01:05:27.000 What are people wearing there?
01:05:28.000 Well, not that.
01:05:29.000 Why not?
01:05:30.000 I should get into it.
01:05:31.000 Yeah.
01:05:31.000 This is the style.
01:05:32.000 Maybe show one of the hip young dudes, too.
01:05:33.000 Yeah, that's what I would have thought.
01:05:34.000 Some of the kids.
01:05:35.000 Professor Brand's in town!
01:05:36.000 Okay!
01:05:38.000 I hope so.
01:05:39.000 I would like that.
01:05:41.000 Yep, I'm quite a big shot on the campus, drinking my milk, making my moves.
01:05:45.000 Nobody knows what I'm going to do next.
01:05:47.000 His classes are all full.
01:05:48.000 You can't get a spot.
01:05:49.000 Okay, so...
01:05:51.000 First thing, take your pens and pads, throw them out the effing window.
01:05:56.000 Not gonna need them.
01:05:57.000 You've already failed because you showed up.
01:05:59.000 You've been conditioned by the system.
01:06:01.000 What's this I've done under my desk?
01:06:03.000 It's a bloody shit.
01:06:04.000 Because I don't care about the rules.
01:06:04.000 Why?
01:06:07.000 Take that, government!
01:06:09.000 Sorry about that.
01:06:09.000 I shouldn't have done that.
01:06:10.000 Sorry.
01:06:10.000 I'm not so sure that was classy.
01:06:12.000 I think they'd empty fairly quickly.
01:06:14.000 Boo!
01:06:15.000 Yeah, what about Aristotle?
01:06:20.000 Not your bottle and your butthole.
01:06:22.000 I reckon you've only read the backs of books and not actual books.
01:06:25.000 According to Chomsky for Dummies, Professor Chomsky used to be a linguist before he got
01:06:31.000 into politics and that.
01:06:33.000 Some people don't like him no more, cause he ain't radical enough.
01:06:36.000 Whereas he does agree on Trump or not war.
01:06:39.000 Thanks for coming everyone.
01:06:41.000 Oh, thanks for this apple.
01:06:42.000 BYE!
01:06:43.000 Where's my car?
01:06:44.000 WELCOME BACK!
01:06:46.000 I swear I paid for that bloody vehicle!
01:06:49.000 That's what it's going to be like at my university course.
01:06:52.000 I learned my lecturing on the streets.
01:06:56.000 All right, that's enough, isn't it?
01:06:58.000 65 minutes.
01:06:58.000 What do you want?
01:06:59.000 Got to be, innit?
01:06:59.000 It's more than enough.
01:07:01.000 You've had yours!
01:07:02.000 We'll see you tomorrow for a live podcast with Graham Hancock.
01:07:07.000 I'm not in that one.
01:07:08.000 Why not?
01:07:08.000 Where are you going to be?
01:07:10.000 I'll probably watch it.
01:07:10.000 I'm not in that one.
01:07:11.000 You better be.
01:07:12.000 What, like in an episode of The Sopranos and Chris ain't in it?
01:07:15.000 That's it.
01:07:15.000 I want you in it!
01:07:17.000 Oh, where's Chris?
01:07:19.000 Be in it!
01:07:20.000 Right.
01:07:20.000 Come on, what are you going to do?
01:07:21.000 Where are you going to sit?
01:07:22.000 I don't know, it's nearby.
01:07:23.000 You're not even going to be there?
01:07:24.000 I'll be there.
01:07:25.000 They won't let our cats be in there.
01:07:26.000 If you want me to be there.
01:07:27.000 I want the cats in there.
01:07:28.000 I know what'll happen.
01:07:29.000 What?
01:07:30.000 It'll take over, the old spirit, won't it?
01:07:33.000 The old live performance spirit.
01:07:34.000 Suddenly I'll be like, Ross, which bit am I doing again?
01:07:37.000 He'll be like, you're not doing that!
01:07:38.000 I'm doing all of it, get out of the way!
01:07:41.000 I know I said I needed you, I don't anymore, my confidence is back, now fuck off!
01:07:45.000 I'm really confident.
01:07:46.000 I don't need you.
01:07:47.000 I do all this by myself.
01:07:48.000 And if something goes a bit wrong, I don't care.
01:07:50.000 I can't cope.
01:07:51.000 I'm nervous.
01:07:52.000 Don't do that bit again, Gus!
01:07:54.000 These don't make any sense!
01:07:55.000 None of this is real!
01:07:57.000 That Professor Thomas Pattinson, he doesn't like Donald Trump!
01:08:00.000 I can't sell that!
01:08:02.000 I can't sell that to these people!
01:08:04.000 Save the behind-the-curtain show for Stay Connected.
01:08:07.000 That, if you join us on Locals, you get to see plenty more where that came from!
01:08:11.000 Mush!
01:08:14.000 Get it down ya!
01:08:15.000 Join us tomorrow, not for more of the same, but for more of the different.
01:08:18.000 Till then, stay free, why don't ya?