Stay Free - Russel Brand - Pfizer Vs. Project Veritas - The Truth! - #080 - Stay Free With Russell Brand

00:00:00.000 I'm going to be doing a lot of work with this, but I'm going to be doing a lot of work with this.

00:00:05.000 I'm going to be doing a lot of work with this.

00:01:01.000 In this video, you're going to see the future.

00:01:15.000 Hello there, you awakening wonders.

00:01:16.000 Thanks for joining us on Stay Free with Russell Brand.

00:01:19.000 We are going to go on a voyage together.

00:01:21.000 Wherever you are watching this right now, the whole show is exclusively available only on Rumble.

00:01:26.000 Why?

00:01:27.000 Because we care about freedom of speech.

00:01:28.000 Why?

00:01:29.000 Because we want to bring people together.

00:01:30.000 Because we respect diversity.

00:01:32.000 Because we respect your individual rights.

00:01:33.000 Because we respect democracy and community.

00:01:36.000 We even respect the great Melodies of the sky, the UFO phenomena is all around us.

00:01:43.000 Have you seen Edward Snowden tweeting about it?

00:01:46.000 Edward Snowden, he's a man who's experienced the deep state.

00:01:50.000 Edward Snowden, do you remember like when that Citizen Four film came out about Snowden, the thing I loved most was he was clearly a person that had seen too much.

00:01:59.000 Like this film, this This could be bugging us!

00:02:00.000 Right now, they're filming us!

00:02:02.000 Like, you could see someone who'd, like, just flipped out of the Matrix.

00:02:04.000 You wanna talk about red pills?

00:02:06.000 Edward Snowden, he downed the whole bottle.

00:02:08.000 He went through an Alice in Wonderland, Lewis Carroll-style medicinal OD.

00:02:13.000 He has to say about this whole balloon UFO phenomena.

00:02:16.000 And by the way, one of my personal regrets at the moment is, they've ruined UFOs for us now!

00:02:20.000 I love UFOs!

00:02:20.000 Well, exactly!

00:02:21.000 You want it to be UFOs, don't you?

00:02:22.000 I love aliens!

00:02:23.000 I was going on about aliens, like, Ironically, like when I was a kid I used to listen to sort of David Icke stuff and it was all like extraterrestrials are real.

00:02:29.000 Careful, you can't say that word anymore.

00:02:32.000 No, I was a boy then, I was a youngster.

00:02:33.000 Right.

00:02:34.000 Like, what I was interested in is the idea that top secret information included cosmic data.

00:02:41.000 That we are not alone in the universe.

00:02:43.000 I used to enjoy all of that stuff so much.

00:02:45.000 That could still be true.

00:02:46.000 And the Eric Von Daniken stuff.

00:02:48.000 You know, like, sort of, the Bible is accounts of interventions by mystical, transcendent, cosmological, heavenly beings.

00:02:56.000 And, like, you know, there were depictions of, like, aircraft on the Pyramid Scariff!

00:03:00.000 Oh no!

00:03:01.000 Get him off topic!

00:03:03.000 Abort! 0.99

00:03:04.000 Don't panic!

00:03:05.000 No, what I'm saying is that the subject of UFOs used to be fun.

00:03:07.000 Now the government are saying that there are UFOs.

00:03:09.000 I got off UFOs there.

00:03:10.000 Well, that's because they're lying.

00:03:12.000 I hate using those UFOs.

00:03:12.000 That's why.

00:03:14.000 And as Snowden said, it's not aliens.

00:03:16.000 I wish it were aliens, but it's not aliens. 0.97

00:03:18.000 It's just the old engineered panic and attractive nuisance ensuring that national security reporters get assigned to investigative balloon bullshit. 0.98

00:03:26.000 Excuse the language, Edward. 0.80

00:03:27.000 Rather than budgets or bombings a la Nord Stream.

00:03:30.000 Until next time.

00:03:31.000 We had such a great conversation yesterday, didn't we, with Pulitzer Prize winning journalist Seymour Hersh, who told us that actually our reporting is spot on.

00:03:41.000 The Nord Stream pipeline bombing, if indeed it was the United States of America, serves so many purposes.

00:03:48.000 Militarily, economically, depriving Europe of that gas means that Europe are looking for different relationships.

00:03:54.000 Such a fantastic story.

00:03:56.000 You also did say that one of those UFOs or unidentified objects is like a meteorological thing, didn't he?

00:04:02.000 He said there's a meteorological centre up there in Alaska that they can't get anybody to work at because it's too cold and they've got balloons up there being operated remotely and everyone knows that they're there and no one thinks for a second that it's UFOs.

00:04:13.000 They're simply under a lot of pressure to reduce their defence budgets.

00:04:15.000 They're trying to get through the biggest defence budget in history so they need to escalate hysteria.

00:04:21.000 Listen, we wouldn't normally ask for a huge budget but I've got to tell you There are aliens, okay?

00:04:25.000 Now, give me your money! 0.99

00:04:27.000 We're just giving you $100 billion to give to Ukraine.

00:04:29.000 We're gonna need more.

00:04:30.000 Plus, it seems that you've been agitating Russia into that war through NATO impeachment on previously agreed, excluded territories.

00:04:38.000 Listen, just give us your money.

00:04:40.000 What's next?

00:04:40.000 China?

00:04:41.000 As a matter of fact... Where did you find out about that?

00:04:44.000 But the one thing they could do that's worse than antagonising Russia is antagonise China, but they're doing that as well.

00:04:50.000 And across the course of the show, we're going to be talking about the ongoing demonisation of Russia.

00:04:53.000 We're going to be talking about the way that the media has been amplifying the significance of James O'Keefe from Project Veritas' wrongdoing.

00:05:01.000 I'm certainly not suggesting that he hasn't done anything wrong.

00:05:04.000 I understand he took a pregnant lady's sandwich, didn't he? 1.00

00:05:06.000 Apparently.

00:05:07.000 And a bit of bullying we hear.

00:05:08.000 That's got to stop.

00:05:10.000 How much bullying can there be when you're taking a whole staff with you to see Oklahoma?

00:05:15.000 I've never heard of bullying included.

00:05:18.000 The reason Project Veritas are in the news, if you're aware, because it's not allowed to be on certain platforms, it's certainly not covered on the mainstream media, is because he did a sting operation on a former Pfizer employee who made revelations about Pfizer that are unfavourable to Pfizer and their shareholders.

00:05:33.000 And now, mysteriously, this guy, James O'Keefe, has been sent on paid leave.

00:05:37.000 So we wondered, how have the establishment reached Project Varites?

00:05:41.000 Because they're sort of like an outsider organisation.

00:05:44.000 They're somewhat radical, I believe.

00:05:46.000 They're kind of a right wing.

00:05:47.000 And over here, we don't care what Wing you're on. 0.70

00:05:49.000 We just care about right and wrong, not right and left.

00:05:52.000 So how did they get to him?

00:05:53.000 And now we have a little bit of an understanding how Project Veritas have been pressured by the mainstream, by Big Pharma.

00:06:02.000 Well, we don't, we don't know, but we don't know.

00:06:05.000 But also it seems like a massive coincidence.

00:06:08.000 If they haven't, it feels like it's a massive coincidence that this is happening at this time.

00:06:12.000 I've been investigative journaling all day, like it's 1999.

00:06:15.000 Well, Seymour Hersh has vouched for you.

00:06:17.000 Seymour Hersh, he's a Pulitzer Prize winner.

00:06:19.000 He says I'm one of the best out there.

00:06:20.000 Now, look, if you're watching this right now on YouTube, you've got to click over and watch us on Rumble, because in a minute, we'll be exclusively on Rumble.

00:06:27.000 And that's when we're going to be telling you about Fauci's secret meetings on natural immunity that took place during the pandemic.

00:06:33.000 I came out of it, of course, and said natural immunity, that's not a real thing that's existed throughout human evolution.

00:06:38.000 In fact, without which there could be no such thing as human We'll be talking about that and revealing some interesting information, but only on Rumble, so click over and join us there when you can.

00:06:48.000 It's imperative that you do.

00:06:50.000 But if that weren't tantalising enough, let's form, before your very eyes, a causal... Is this how you do it?

00:06:56.000 Yeah, this is the investigative journalism.

00:06:57.000 Yeah, I'll do it.

00:06:58.000 You can watch me like investigative journalism right now.

00:07:01.000 Let's form the link between Pfizer and Project Veritas.

00:07:05.000 You might wonder, how did the mainstream, how did Big Pharma exert influence onto an outsider organisation like Project Veritas?

00:07:14.000 Well, let's show you how that could work.

00:07:16.000 They're a radical independent journalist, a news reporting agency, aren't they, Project Veritas?

00:07:21.000 Or are they, Gareth?

00:07:22.000 Who funds Project Veritas?

00:07:24.000 Hmm, riddle me this.

00:07:25.000 The Donors Trust gave Project Veritas a million dollars in 2020.

00:07:29.000 The Koch Brothers, you've heard of them, are co-donors to the trust.

00:07:31.000 They own Koch Industries.

00:07:33.000 Koch Disruptive Technology.

00:07:33.000 Hmm, hmm.

00:07:35.000 Let's call it Disruptive Technologies, you nerds!

00:07:38.000 And they invest funds in big pharma companies, including an organisation called Resilience.

00:07:42.000 Resilience is a biopharmaceutical company that uses living organisms to create drugs.

00:07:46.000 Why not?

00:07:47.000 What harm could that do?

00:07:48.000 I say, get yourself down a bat cave. 1.00

00:07:50.000 That's where... I mean, I'm not suggesting anyone has ever done this.

00:07:52.000 Allegedly.

00:07:53.000 People like EcoHealth Alliance... I know, don't need that guy.

00:07:56.000 Like the EcoHealth Alliance are hanging around in... They're in more bat caves than Bruce Wayne, then, Lord! 0.99

00:07:56.000 Allegedly. 0.99

00:08:02.000 Luckily we're not giving them money anymore.

00:08:04.000 Oh no!

00:08:04.000 Oh no we are!

00:08:05.000 We're still giving EcoHealth Alliance.

00:08:07.000 But them bat caves ain't gonna fund themselves.

00:08:09.000 So Resilience is a biopharmaceutical company that uses living organisms to create drugs.

00:08:13.000 In 2020 Pfizer also financed Resilience.

00:08:17.000 So that's the connection between Pfizer and James O'Keefe.

00:08:21.000 Now you'll all know that James Keefe is a man that should be forced on gardening leave.

00:08:25.000 Paid leave.

00:08:26.000 That's what that means, isn't it?

00:08:27.000 Because, firstly, look, he took a sandwich from a pregnant woman because he was hungry and angry simultaneously.

00:08:35.000 That's hangry.

00:08:36.000 He received $20,000 to pay for staff to accompany him to Virginia when he starred in a 2021 production of Oklahoma.

00:08:44.000 Now that, to me, seems like the sweetest little bit of corruption I've ever heard of.

00:08:48.000 But is it any good?

00:08:50.000 Well, let's see, because we have acquired footage Wow.

00:08:54.000 Of James O'Keefe.

00:08:55.000 I investigate journalists and here he is.

00:08:58.000 Now let's have a look at James O'Keefe in Oklahoma and I'll be the first to admit it's transgressive and wrong. 0.94

00:09:07.000 Maybe we'll see some clues.

00:09:09.000 What further clues to investigate?

00:09:10.000 Maybe.

00:09:11.000 But I want you to bear in mind Pfizer's actions during the last couple of years, I want you to remember Albert Baller saying it would be unconscionable for Pfizer to profit from this two-year process, from this healthcare crisis.

00:09:25.000 Minimal profit, he said, didn't he?

00:09:27.000 Minimal profit.

00:09:28.000 Now, I want you to carry all of this in your mind while looking at, uh, there's a few questions I want you to ask yourself.

00:09:33.000 I want you to ask, I wonder how much profit they made.

00:09:36.000 I want you to ask yourself how much money Pfizer spent on lobbying.

00:09:39.000 I want you to consider the conditions of Pfizer's ongoing COVID vaccine trials, none of which I'm willing to talk about, not until we're exclusively in our safe place Of Rumble.

00:09:50.000 I want you to ask yourself all those things, and if they did kind of receive public funding in so much as they partnered with BioNTech who received hundreds of millions of dollars from the German government.

00:10:01.000 But while you're mulling over all those questions, because I know you can do numerous things simultaneously, because I believe in your intelligence.

00:10:08.000 I believe in you.

00:10:09.000 They may not, but we do. 0.97

00:10:11.000 Let's have a little look at James O'Keefe performing in Oklahoma, the swine. 0.91

00:10:18.000 Inuit, innit? 0.97

00:10:33.000 Yeah.

00:10:34.000 He's certainly committed to it.

00:10:35.000 That lady, though, in the pink hat, she is not into it at all.

00:10:38.000 She's actually on the phone, which is one of the most hurtful things you can do when someone's playing. 0.98

00:10:42.000 He's playing that part from both his balls and his solar plexus. 0.96

00:10:42.000 Isn't it? 0.96

00:10:46.000 He's really Oklahoma-ing with everything he's got.

00:10:49.000 She's on the phone.

00:10:50.000 How would you react in that scenario?

00:10:52.000 Stop the song.

00:10:53.000 Right.

00:10:53.000 I'd start saying, excuse me, excuse me, and even that's a track isn't he?

00:10:56.000 He's not got musicians there with him.

00:10:58.000 So like the music would be playing and stuff and it'd be weird and they'd have to sort of turn it down while James O'Keefe... I'd snatch that out of her hand like it was a sandwich and she was a pregnant lady. 1.00

00:11:06.000 You give me that! 0.72

00:11:09.000 Now, of course, this is an appalling performance of Oklahoma.

00:11:11.000 Anyone can see that.

00:11:13.000 But is it as bad as Pfizer's litany of let's call them successes over the course of the pandemic period?

00:11:21.000 That's what that's, I guess, what we're querying.

00:11:24.000 Because like James O'Keefe, he might only be in your mind because of that moment where he was chatting to that lad.

00:11:28.000 Jordan who they'd honey-trapped into making some, if indeed these things are legitimate,

00:11:35.000 some extraordinary revelations about Pfizer's ongoing practices and practices in the preceding

00:11:40.000 couple of years. Are we able to show that while we're still on YouTube or is that a

00:11:44.000 rumble only?

00:11:45.000 No, we're not allowed.

00:11:46.000 We're not allowed to show that. So if you stay with us, if you're watching this somewhere

00:11:48.000 else, click over onto Rumble now because we want to show you, remind you of the last time

00:11:54.000 you saw James O'Keefe. And sort of bear in mind that when he's investigative reporting,

00:11:58.000 a very somber, serious dude.

00:12:00.000 Yeah, I just think that it's amazing that this is the best that I could get on him.

00:12:03.000 Like, can you imagine the effort that would have gone into, how can we bring down James O'Keefe? 1.00

00:12:08.000 That son of a bitch! 1.00

00:12:09.000 He's humiliated Pfizer with his sting. 1.00

00:12:12.000 I want you to get out there and show us the filth that you've got on James O'Keefe.

00:12:17.000 I know that guy's got skeletons in his closet.

00:12:19.000 What has he been doing?

00:12:20.000 Well, he once took a pregnant lady's sandwich.

00:12:23.000 That is bad.

00:12:23.000 Anything else?

00:12:24.000 Yeah, look at this.

00:12:28.000 Hey, has he got the right to use that?

00:12:31.000 Did he license that piece of music?

00:12:33.000 That's very expensive.

00:12:35.000 He spent $20,000 on... The corruption level is what they're talking about.

00:12:38.000 They're not talking about Oklahoma itself being a problem.

00:12:40.000 They're saying he spent $20,000 on shipping out the stuff.

00:12:44.000 Well, let's have a look at that in what I call Pfizer language.

00:12:47.000 Pfizer earned $102 billion, I think, in 2022.

00:12:48.000 That's $279 million a day.

00:12:49.000 That's $11 million an hour.

00:12:49.000 That's $194,000 per minute.

00:12:51.000 That's $20,000 in six seconds.

00:12:51.000 That's six seconds of Pfizer graft.

00:12:52.000 That's $11 million an hour. That's $194,000 per minute.

00:12:55.000 That's $20,000 in six seconds.

00:12:58.000 That's six seconds of Pfizer graft.

00:13:00.000 Think of all the musicals you could have done with that.

00:13:02.000 Then we could be doing, putting on a different musical every day here

00:13:05.000 in conjunction and cooperation with Project Veritas.

00:13:09.000 Stay free and Veritas Presents.

00:13:11.000 You saw it here first!

00:13:12.000 Annie gets your gun! 1.00

00:13:13.000 The King and I!

00:13:15.000 Okay, so we don't need to see no more of Oklahoma.

00:13:19.000 I'd love to see Pfizer's litany of earnings and expenditure.

00:13:24.000 So, right, so He spent that 20 grand, he took that pregnant lady sandwich and he may have done some bullying.

00:13:29.000 But what I'm interested in actually, if I can be serious for just a moment, is the way that the media is framing this event, neglecting and not reporting on a story that is significant.

00:13:38.000 Many people had suspicions about Pfizer's activity and more broadly the handling of the pandemic.

00:13:43.000 And during the period of these revelations, that story has been selected against in the news cycle.

00:13:51.000 We've seen the Oklahoma scandal in all of its vivacity.

00:13:55.000 Let's look at what Pfizer have been up to.

00:13:57.000 They said they would not overcharge for that vaccine.

00:13:59.000 Albert Baller said it would be reprehensible.

00:14:01.000 They only make minimal profits.

00:14:02.000 The drugmaker made $65 billion from the vaccine in 2022 and $102 billion in profit overall.

00:14:06.000 In 2022, they Allegedly.

00:14:10.000 Allegedly.

00:14:11.000 $15 million on lobbying. They tried to conceal full vaccine safety data for 75 years. There

00:14:11.000 Still on YouTube.

00:14:18.000 have been concerns raised about the vaccine trials, including, but not only, lack of monitoring,

00:14:24.000 poor safety protocol, mislabeled laboratory specimens, a lack of follow-up of patients

00:14:29.000 who experienced ad...

00:14:30.000 Allegedly.

00:14:31.000 Allegedly.

00:14:32.000 Still on YouTube.

00:14:33.000 Allegedly.

00:14:34.000 Allegedly.

00:14:35.000 The vaccine was originally developed using $375 million, or euros, from the German government

00:14:40.000 and 100 million euros from the EU.

00:14:43.000 So I don't know, what do you think is a more significant story?

00:14:46.000 Would you like to see Oklahoma again?

00:14:49.000 I mean it was, I thought he was quite good.

00:14:51.000 I thought he was pretty good.

00:14:52.000 Yeah, I didn't think he was going to be as good as he was.

00:14:55.000 Okay, listen guys, if you're watching this now on YouTube, click the link, get over and watch us on Rumble where we can give you a little more detail on some of this Extraordinary data.

00:15:04.000 And I'd like to be reminded, before we get into Fauci's secret meetings on natural immunity, of how James O'Keefe entered into most people's consciousness via a certain meeting with this former Pfizer employee.

00:15:18.000 Let's have a look at it.

00:15:19.000 Goodbye, YouTube!

00:15:19.000 Join us on Rumble.

00:15:21.000 Hey there.

00:15:22.000 Is this seat taken?

00:15:23.000 You work for Pfizer.

00:15:24.000 My question for you is...

00:15:26.000 Is this real life?

00:15:34.000 Is it real life?

00:15:35.000 Can any of us make a claim to have access to the objective experience of reality when the realm of the senses is so clearly limited?

00:15:43.000 Can any of us ever know what truth is?

00:15:46.000 Are we living in a convergent and highly curated reality?

00:15:51.000 A reality that is beneficial only to the most powerful interests in the world?

00:15:54.000 Do we have a duty to awaken individually and collectively and demand democracy?

00:15:58.000 Some say democracy is the only game in town.

00:16:02.000 Hey, it's just us lot on Rumble now.

00:16:04.000 We've got a great video coming up for you later, a great presentation.

00:16:08.000 Here's the news.

00:16:09.000 We're talking about balloons, UFOs, military expenditure.

00:16:09.000 No, here's the effing news.

00:16:15.000 We're talking somewhat about the tendency to demonise and escalate the threat of external forces when you need to generate funding from your domestic population.

00:16:27.000 A little while ago, last year, UK congressman, US congressman, excuse me, Tom Malinowski

00:16:34.000 said that Russia ought be made a terrorist state.

00:16:38.000 Once you start using that kind of language, maligning a nation like Russia using such

00:16:43.000 pejorative and incendiary language, ultimately what you're calling for is an end to diplomacy.

00:16:50.000 And many of us have been struck by the lack of calls for peace around this process.

00:16:54.000 Let me know in the chat, let me know in the comments whether you've been kind of shocked by their removal of peace from the discourse around this conflict.

00:17:02.000 Russia ain't a country you can just write off as a terrorist state.

00:17:07.000 It's appalling enough when you can pass those kind of ideas using, I suppose, unconscious occidentalism around states like Iran, or whatever, or Vietnam, or... In the long history of proxy and colonial wars, it's been necessary to demonize enemies in order to continue to fund these often proven to be subsequently illegal wars.

00:17:30.000 Iraq, for example.

00:17:31.000 But Russia, it shouldn't happen at all, but with Russia it's implausible and impossible. 0.76

00:17:37.000 Some kind of peace will have to be made with Russia. 0.93

00:17:39.000 It's a superpower.

00:17:41.000 We have a shared history, fought in numerous wars, huge population, a history of being actually quite good in wars as well.

00:17:50.000 Pretty tenacious is how I describe Russia.

00:17:53.000 So to start thinking that Russia can be written off as a terrorist state is Beyond naive, and it makes me question the ideology of the unipolar globalists that appear to be seizing control of the news agenda.

00:18:09.000 Yeah, but we know what can be then achieved once you're labelled a terrorist, don't we?

00:18:13.000 I mean, we know what happened in Iraq.

00:18:14.000 As soon as that happened, they were able to essentially go to war with Iraq.

00:18:18.000 But the way in which terrorism is used now as a word and the kind of shifting uses for it, I mean just the other day we actually did a presentation about the WHO and how they've stated that online anti-vaccine activism is now deadlier than global terrorism.

00:18:33.000 So I think what they're saying about this now is that anti-vaccine activism is worse than Russia.

00:18:38.000 So if you thought that Putin was the worst thing out there, actually now it's anti-vaccine activism.

00:18:43.000 All dissent is being delegitimized.

00:18:46.000 Geopolitical dissent through a conflict that has a complicated origin of mutual escalation at best and at worst the ongoing NATO agitation of Russia through encroachment on former territories that when we spoke to Seymour Hersh he told us there were not treaties but agreements to not encroach upon.

00:19:07.000 And When it comes to using a word like terror, as Gareth just said, and as we've pointed out, what you're doing is delegitimising dissent, whether it's at the level of the nation state or the level of the individual.

00:19:21.000 Increasingly, I think what we're seeing is the desire to surveil and control and monitor, that your freedom is inconvenient.

00:19:31.000 Your sentience, your volition, have become enemies of this globalist project.

00:19:37.000 And whether it's as nefarious as it sometimes feels and sounds or not, I'm unable to say.

00:19:42.000 But I do know that what the overt and increasingly explicit desire of these globalist entities that are, broadly speaking, unelected, the WEF, the WHO, Is to maintain control, is to bypass democracy, is to be able to assert control at the level of the nation and beyond the nation.

00:20:01.000 And in order to do that, they have to, I don't want to say create crises, but they benefit from crises and use them to implement this legislation that is favorable.

00:20:11.000 Should we start telling you about it?

00:20:13.000 Would you like to hear about the secret meaning of unnatural immunity before we get into the news?

00:20:20.000 Four of the highest ranking US health officials, including Andy Fauci, met in secret to discuss whether or not naturally immune people should be exempt from getting COVID-19 vaccines.

00:20:20.000 Here it is.

00:20:29.000 So all of the time when people were getting, I think, kicked off of platforms like Instagram for even mentioning natural immunity.

00:20:35.000 That hashtag was banned, wasn't it, on Instagram?

00:20:37.000 It's really censorious and extraordinary that that kind of, that level of conversation becomes the subject of measures.

00:20:45.000 So Draconian, let me know what you think.

00:20:47.000 Let me know what you think in the chat.

00:20:50.000 The officials brought in four outside experts to discuss whether the protection gained after recovering from COVID-19, known as natural immunity, should count as one or more vaccine doses.

00:20:58.000 There was an interest in several people in the administration in hearing basically the opinions of four immunologists in terms of what we thought about natural infection as contributing to protection against moderate to severe disease and to what extent that should influence dosing, said Dr. Paul Ofit.

00:21:13.000 So, Seems like, I suppose, a little like a conversation we had recently regarding the origins.

00:21:22.000 While publicly there was a lot of certainty, Privately, there was a lot of doubt and discussion.

00:21:29.000 And I suppose what that shows is a concerted effort to manage the narrative and the conversation by excluding certain ideas, banning, censoring certain ideas.

00:21:39.000 Also, you know, Fauci came down very hard against natural immunity.

00:21:39.000 Yeah.

00:21:46.000 And so I guess the other thing that this is showing is that there were experts, there were scientific experts involved in this conversation.

00:21:53.000 that we're stating their opinions within this you know within these emails and these meetings we're saying no we really feel that natural immunity even when it was alongside of vaccines a hybrid immunity was you know extremely effective and what Fauci and Walensky of the CDC chose to do was disregard those opinions and again a little bit like we were saying earlier on about about Wuhan is that they were considering other options they were considering that it could be a lab leak but then they came out and basically flatly refused that A lot of people in our chat are saying this is peace, love, light, our immune systems are incredibly powerful and then someone's done this fan art of Gareth saying that you should take your top off and I think that's actually off topic.

00:22:37.000 It is.

00:22:37.000 I don't mind some of Gareth's quite Hard work!

00:22:40.000 Sure, sure.

00:22:41.000 Gareth's trying to explain how even hybrid immunity ought to have been a topic for discussion.

00:22:47.000 And in fact, Gareth's not even saying anything divisive or polarising like, you know, the vaccines are dangerous or that people oughtn't take them.

00:22:56.000 Trying to bring people together.

00:22:57.000 And how do you treat him? 1.00

00:22:59.000 Like a sex object! 1.00

00:23:01.000 Is that how you repay him? 0.99

00:23:02.000 Well it's Dr Poloffi, I thought you'd enjoy this.

00:23:04.000 Get your top off.

00:23:06.000 I shan't do that.

00:23:08.000 He's the scientist that also came out and said I'm uncomfortable that we would move forward with giving millions or tens of millions of doses to people based on mouse data.

00:23:17.000 Do you remember that person who said that?

00:23:18.000 Well they worked on up to eight mouses.

00:23:20.000 We did tests on eight mouses and we are very confident that this booster shot is spot on.

00:23:26.000 How are them mouses doing? 1.00

00:23:27.000 They're fine.

00:23:28.000 They're having a lovely time now.

00:23:30.000 Get your top off, only to receive a vaccine in this instance, but get your top off nevertheless.

00:23:36.000 So yeah, I suppose the reason we're using this, so far where we are, hysteria around UFOs and balloons in order to facilitate future funding.

00:23:46.000 Demonisation of a sovereign nation in the case of Russia.

00:23:51.000 The ludicrous exaggeration, it seems to me, of the wrongdoings of James O'Keefe and neglecting to mention the at least advantageous position, there's that joke by the way, the advantageous position that Pfizer gleaned and gained from the horrors of the pandemic.

00:24:11.000 This is why people are so annoyed though, Russ, because it's, you know, with Pfizer and Fauci, you know, there's a link, there's obviously plenty of links there.

00:24:17.000 You know, with Moderna recently, there was that story, wasn't there, and I think Paul Offit was involved in commenting on that also, where Moderna basically hid the fact that the new booster doesn't work any better than the last one.

00:24:29.000 It's appalling!

00:24:30.000 And so when you've got, and you know we're obviously talking about Pfizer's profits and things, when you've got now evidence coming out that was saying that there were meetings between Fauci, Walensky, various other scientists, where literally they were having discussions about these things.

00:24:43.000 They dismissed other scientific opinion.

00:24:46.000 I guess fine if you need to go with one opinion at the end of it, but then don't go on CNN, don't go on other news shows.

00:24:52.000 Don't censor people!

00:24:53.000 Don't ban it!

00:24:54.000 Exactly!

00:24:55.000 Don't infiltrate Twitter.

00:24:56.000 You should be saying, oh we've had this conversation already and actually these are some of the findings and actually this is some of the research that we've favoured.

00:25:02.000 It's good that you're saying that because we were just talking about that in this top secret meeting that we've not given you the information from, leading you to perhaps presume that one of the outcomes was beneficial to pharmaceutical interests that, by the way, award incredible royalties to Fauci's organisation NIADH.

00:25:22.000 So, in the end, you start to sense corruption because of the management of the information.

00:25:28.000 Hey, you there, LaneViews, will you make us some mugs, please?

00:25:33.000 Or at least designs for mugs.

00:25:34.000 I don't expect you to do the actual ceramics and pottery.

00:25:37.000 This is a person that's in our chat.

00:25:38.000 You can join us on Locals, by the way, and become part of our community.

00:25:41.000 Then we'll bother you for merch.

00:25:43.000 Like, using our logo and maybe images of me and Gareth, could you just send some designs in the chat, please?

00:25:47.000 We're very busy, we ain't got time.

00:25:48.000 We're trying to bring down bloody systems of globalism, unelected bodies, usually funded by Bill Gates.

00:25:55.000 We're going to be telling you more about that later in the week, but now in our item here's the news.

00:25:58.000 We're going to be talking about People are now asking for funding to the Ukraine, the ongoing conflict between Ukraine and Russia, to end.

00:26:08.000 So, we believe that the reason that we're seeing more hysteria, more weather balloons, more UFOs, amping up of agitation between the US and China, is to ensure that conditions to reduce expenditure on weapons more broadly do not become a common, dominant, or even popular mainstream narrative.

00:26:30.000 We're going to be looking at that in depth and in a minute we're going to be talking to Michael Tracy about the

00:26:34.000 Ukraine and perhaps the five most significant stories that you may

00:26:37.000 have missed and pieced together a glorious narrative, investigative journalism at its best.

00:26:41.000 But first it's time for Here's the News.

00:26:43.000 No, here's the effing news.

00:26:45.000 Thank you for choosing Fox News.

00:26:47.000 Here's the news. 1.00

00:26:48.000 No, here's the fucking news. 0.99

00:26:51.000 With more voices calling for an end to the Ukraine war and the profits that come with it, 0.99

00:26:57.000 we're going to need some new enemies.

00:26:59.000 How about China?

00:27:00.000 And UFOs!

00:27:01.000 Woohoo! 1.00

00:27:04.000 We've been talking for a long while about the Ukrainian war and how the humanitarian disaster, which is doubtlessly real as all wars generate human suffering, is being used to mask different, less favourable truths, i.e.

00:27:15.000 it's extremely profitable, black rock are gonna profit, the military-industrial complex are gonna profit.

00:27:19.000 Those stories are actually gaining traction now, and I'm certainly not suggesting that we're responsible for that, but that means that new stories are required.

00:27:26.000 Oh no!

00:27:27.000 Look up there!

00:27:27.000 What's that?

00:27:28.000 Up, up, up in the air!

00:27:29.000 Is it a bird?

00:27:30.000 Is it a plane?

00:27:30.000 Is it a reason to spend more money on the military?

00:27:33.000 Yeah, it's a reason to spend more money on the military.

00:27:35.000 Let's get into this story about how UFOs and increasing the threat and presence of the Chinese is being used essentially to facilitate expenditure and hysteria. 0.94

00:27:45.000 The US military shot down another unidentified flying object over Lake Huron in Michigan on Sunday, the third in three days and the fourth overall.

00:27:54.000 Let's have a look.

00:27:55.000 And I don't want you thinking this newscaster looks like a sexy lady Michael Jackson. 1.00

00:27:59.000 That's childish and it's just happening in your mind.

00:28:02.000 Now to a developing story this morning, an unidentified flying object shot down by the US over Alaska.

00:28:10.000 This of course follows the downing of that Chinese spy balloon last weekend.

00:28:14.000 You'll notice that the mainstream media narrative in this instance appears to be about the generation of mystery and inquiry rather than conclusion.

00:28:23.000 In fact, do you remember that film, Don't Look Up?

00:28:25.000 This is the opposite of that film, Don't Look Up.

00:28:27.000 It's called Do Look Up.

00:28:28.000 Look up here and don't look what's going on around here.

00:28:31.000 In the relationship between Congress and the military-industrial complex, which people in Congress own shares in companies like Raytheon and Lockheed Martin, essentially part of this story is about a distraction.

00:28:40.000 Andrew, before it was shot down, pilots were able to get close enough to that unknown object to see that it was unmanned and drifting in the wind.

00:28:48.000 Drifting in the wind?

00:28:49.000 When did the news start talking like that?

00:28:51.000 Are you a newscaster?

00:28:52.000 Or are you Bob Dylan?

00:28:53.000 The answer, my friend, is drifting in the wind.

00:28:56.000 The answer is drifting in the wind.

00:28:58.000 And also it's passing through Congress now in new measures to escalate tensions between us and China and generate profits for Northrop Grumman, Lockheed Martin and Raytheon, my friend.

00:29:07.000 President Biden ordered the takedown that was executed by an F-22 fighter jet Friday afternoon.

00:29:13.000 The unknown object was spotted off the coast of Alaska Thursday night at 40,000 feet in the air and floating

00:29:19.000 northeast.

00:29:20.000 These are the kind of things that are continually happening.

00:29:22.000 The use of UFOs...

00:29:23.000 UFOs though on the news, I'm not familiar with that.

00:29:25.000 You don't remember when I grew up UFOs, there are no such thing as you could only hear about UFOs

00:29:30.000 if you went to the more, let's face it, the darker corners of the internet,

00:29:34.000 which from which we are now banned.

00:29:36.000 So it's interesting to see this stuff entering into the mainstream.

00:29:39.000 Let me know in the chat and the comments what you think they're trying to achieve.

00:29:41.000 Is this a distraction?

00:29:42.000 Is this an opportunity to escalate tensions and expenditure in a presumed forthcoming war between the US and China?

00:29:49.000 How do you think this is functioning?

00:29:50.000 One thing we know for sure is if you see it on the mainstream media, it will not be at odds.

00:29:54.000 with the interests of the powerful.

00:29:56.000 That's not how things work.

00:29:57.000 We know that by now, right?

00:29:58.000 Do you have anything further on this point?

00:30:11.000 The Nord Stream Pipeline, people are questioning that, the amount of profits, BlackRock's role, subsequently Zelensky being used potentially as a kind of puppet figure, that what's required is a sort of a distraction and some sort of potentially successful, unequivocal success story, like shooting hot air out of the sky just so he can perch outside of a government building and literally say the word success at nothing.

00:30:33.000 The White House says the object was about the size of a small car.

00:30:36.000 Unmanned.

00:30:37.000 Not an unmanned car.

00:30:38.000 It was like a car.

00:30:39.000 It's not actually a car.

00:30:40.000 In other news, flying cars have been invented now.

00:30:43.000 I'm panicking!

00:30:43.000 Ah!

00:30:44.000 ...posed a reasonable threat to the safety of civilian flight out of an abundance of caution and at the recommendation of the Pentagon.

00:30:52.000 President Biden ordered the military to down the object.

00:30:55.000 I think that's about making Joe Biden look efficient and proficient.

00:30:58.000 He ordered them to down the object.

00:31:00.000 Ooh, no, don't down my object! 0.95

00:31:02.000 The strike happened over frozen Arctic waters within U.S.

00:31:06.000 territory, and military aircraft were deployed to recover the remnants.

00:31:10.000 Officials say it's still unclear who was responsible.

00:31:13.000 These are all visual cliches now, the Chinook, the man standing next to the flag. 0.85

00:31:18.000 It's the imagery of war.

00:31:19.000 Do you ever get the sense that you're being continually primed with easily observable objects into a new narrative?

00:31:24.000 For example, you can say that we're imposing sanctions against China for the manufacture of semiconductors.

00:31:29.000 Whoa, what does that all mean?

00:31:30.000 That's boring.

00:31:31.000 But a floating visual thing getting shot out of the sky, we can all, whoa, man!

00:31:36.000 Also, it's like news for children.

00:31:36.000 Stuff's happening.

00:31:38.000 People don't understand that there are economic sanctions and that we're really hitting them hard in the semiconductors.

00:31:43.000 Is there something, like, that we could do that's an easy visual representation of our authority and power?

00:31:47.000 I don't know, could we shoot something out of the sky?

00:31:49.000 Well, not a plane, that's like an act of war.

00:31:51.000 How about, I don't know, a balloon? 1.00

00:31:52.000 Is that too stupid? 1.00

00:31:53.000 It is too stupid, but we'll do it. 1.00

00:31:55.000 As domestic dissatisfaction with the government increases, cost of living crisis, energy crisis, people suffering, inequality, social tensions, you have to increase the external threat because otherwise the internal menace grows. 0.99

00:32:09.000 Who do you think's your real enemy?

00:32:10.000 Your government or China?

00:32:12.000 Where do you think the threat's going to come from?

00:32:13.000 Who's going to have a bigger impact on your life?

00:32:15.000 Who's going to have a bigger impact on your economic life, your personal life, your social life?

00:32:19.000 Is it going to be China or is it going to be your current actual government that you're paying for?

00:32:23.000 So by escalating the idea that the Pentagon is a force for good, that military expenditure is necessary, you dampen down and quieten dissenting voices.

00:32:34.000 Voices that are saying, hey, with this economic crisis, $100 billion going to Ukraine, shouldn't we slow down that train of expenditure flowing out of our pockets into the pockets of elites?

00:32:44.000 No, no, because, you know, balloons.

00:32:46.000 And if balloons ain't scary enough, what about ALF and E.T.

00:32:50.000 and all those guys?

00:32:51.000 They could be coming to you in a hot air balloon.

00:32:53.000 I don't care.

00:32:53.000 I like E.T.

00:32:54.000 But what about bad ALF?

00:32:54.000 and ALF.

00:32:56.000 Like a bad elf coming to you in the night in bad E.T.

00:32:59.000 with that glowing finger?

00:33:00.000 Man, if that guy starts thinking cuckoo and in league with the Chinese, he'll red-finger you when the sun don't shine! 1.00

00:33:06.000 The White House says this latest object was smaller and less mobile than the Chinese spy balloon, which could maneuver in the air.

00:33:12.000 Oh my god!

00:33:13.000 What is it doing?

00:33:14.000 Maneuvering in the air!

00:33:15.000 Ahhhh! 0.99

00:33:17.000 Well, for God's sake, don't then start spending money on internal infrastructure!

00:33:21.000 Jobs and houses for ordinary people! 1.00

00:33:23.000 Spend that money up there on that maneuvering son of a bitch! 1.00

00:33:26.000 You maneuvering son of a bitch! 1.00

00:33:28.000 USA! 1.00

00:33:29.000 USA! 0.99

00:33:30.000 You've maneuvered your last maneuver, you hot-ass son of a gun! 0.98

00:33:33.000 Pieces of that balloon were recovered off the South Carolina coast and are still being investigated. 0.96

00:33:38.000 Look at it there behind a crime scene, like, it's not gonna do anything now.

00:33:41.000 It's come back to life!

00:33:41.000 Oh no!

00:33:43.000 Like the Stay Puft man in Ghostbusters!

00:33:49.000 Can you see the invitation to enter into an extraordinary carousel of interlocking weird narrative?

00:33:57.000 China are spying on us.

00:33:59.000 That's not been proven.

00:33:59.000 There also might be UFOs.

00:34:01.000 That's still not been proven.

00:34:02.000 We're doing sanctions against six Chinese companies.

00:34:06.000 You're just deciding that all this stuff is connected.

00:34:08.000 These are events that have been continually happening.

00:34:10.000 It isn't unlike the current conflict.

00:34:12.000 Some people say that war began in 2014 when you did that coup.

00:34:15.000 Other people say that war began when you reneged on the agreement between the former Soviet Union and America not to impinge on former Soviet Union territories.

00:34:22.000 Saying it begins when Russia amassed troops on the border of Ukraine is convenient. 0.99

00:34:27.000 Saying that this is potentially China, potentially UFOs, we don't know what it is, give us more money, we're doing sanctions against China. 0.93

00:34:34.000 The objective comes first, then the narrative.

00:34:36.000 Former Defense Secretary Mark Esper tells CBS News, if it is in fact Chinese, it would be a very troubling escalation, Andrea.

00:34:44.000 Oh, that will be a troubling escalation.

00:34:46.000 Once again, the news is doing the job of the government, of the military-industrial complex.

00:34:51.000 Do you ever stop to think that's not what they're meant to be doing?

00:34:54.000 We just assume.

00:34:54.000 Well, of course, the government, the media, and the Pentagon are all in league with one another.

00:34:59.000 We've just accepted that.

00:35:00.000 The US military, it should be noticed, has been using the threat of UFOs to ask for more funding for years.

00:35:06.000 Oh, so there you are.

00:35:07.000 It's a common trope to escalate the threat of UFOs in order to get more funding.

00:35:11.000 So if you put get more funding at the front instead of at the end, it makes more sense.

00:35:15.000 We need to get more funding.

00:35:16.000 Uh, China UFOs?

00:35:18.000 Capital Alpha Partners analyst Byron Callen said on Friday the incident could limit the risk of a reduction in the defence budget for 2023-2024.

00:35:18.000 Yeah, that'll do.

00:35:26.000 Oh that's interesting because a lot of us were getting a bit sick and tired of this war and the way that public money was finding its way into private hands.

00:35:34.000 I mean I know it's aid for Ukrainian people but of course that aid should go first through Raytheon, Lockheed Martin, that's the best way to get it.

00:35:40.000 Don't just start buying them food and trying to end the war and providing shelters and No, first give the money to people that make missiles and weapons and hopefully the rest of it will all sort itself out somehow.

00:35:51.000 Yeah, an element of fear, which is the element that's required.

00:35:53.000 add another element to the debate over defense, he wrote.

00:35:56.000 Yeah, an element of fear, which is the element that's required.

00:35:59.000 Certain defense contractors may gain from the balloon incident, Callen wrote.

00:36:03.000 One angle would be the potential for defense measures, although these may be niche programs.

00:36:07.000 The other is if the US decides there is a balloon gap and fields its own fleet, Callen

00:36:12.000 wrote.

00:36:13.000 Oh no, there's a balloon gap!

00:36:15.000 Put a balloon in it?

00:36:15.000 What are we gonna do?

00:36:16.000 Oh, oh, okay.

00:36:21.000 I've done it!

00:36:22.000 Lockheed Martin is one company that could benefit from this situation, as there may be potential to build or add surveillance to new balloon systems.

00:36:30.000 Lockheed Martin shares were up 0.4% Friday.

00:36:32.000 What a coincidence.

00:36:33.000 Secretary of State Antony Blinken postponed a trip to China.

00:36:37.000 He should probably get himself to Taiwan. 0.67

00:36:38.000 It's been a while since we've wound him up with that little holiday.

00:36:41.000 President Biden made a thinly veiled reference to the balloon as a national security breach in his February the 7th State of the Union address declaring, if China threatens our sovereignty, We will act to protect our country.

00:36:52.000 We're going to give more money to defence companies.

00:36:57.000 Hey, we need to do a select committee on China because defence spending might dip otherwise and the domestic population might start questioning the ineptitude of the incumbent government.

00:37:10.000 So let's do this China committee to start amplifying the threat of China. 0.89

00:37:14.000 People don't care about semiconductors.

00:37:15.000 I still don't know what one is.

00:37:17.000 Rather than questioning this sabre-rattling, US media have dispensed panicked spin-offs of the original story, ensuring that the balloon saga, no matter how much of the diplomatic decay ensues, lasts as long as possible.

00:37:29.000 The media like it.

00:37:30.000 They like a new sort of distracting story of balloons.

00:37:32.000 Everything's balloons now, people like it, they're sending people out, they're all excited about it.

00:37:36.000 It's all serving an existing agenda.

00:37:38.000 NBC News, The Washington Post and CNN, among countless others, breathlessly cautioned readers that a high-altitude device hovering over the U.S.

00:37:45.000 may have been launched by China in order to collect sensitive information.

00:37:48.000 Local news stations marveled at its supposed dimensions.

00:37:52.000 The size of three school buses, Reuters waxed fantastical, telling readers that a witness in Montana fought the balloon might have been a star or a UFO.

00:38:00.000 I think a boy child.

00:38:02.000 will be born somewhere in Michigan that will ultimately prove to be the son of God.

00:38:07.000 Either that or it could just be a balloon.

00:38:09.000 A Pentagon official without evidence, good start, stated in a press briefing that clearly the intent of this balloon is for surveillance.

00:38:15.000 No evidence though.

00:38:16.000 Clearly!

00:38:17.000 But hedge the claim with the following.

00:38:19.000 We assess that this balloon has limited additive value from an intelligence collection perspective, but we are taking steps, nevertheless, to protect against foreign intelligence collection of sensitive information.

00:38:29.000 So it seems that really the balloon is the perfect metaphor for what's happening.

00:38:32.000 It might be visual, and it might be somewhat novel, and in some ways fascinating, but it is filled with nothing.

00:38:38.000 Nothing but hot air.

00:38:39.000 Despite this uncertainty, US media overwhelmingly interpreted the Pentagon's conjecture as fact.

00:38:44.000 You can see the compliance of the media in the manner of this reporting.

00:38:47.000 That's what's interesting about it for us.

00:38:50.000 Let me know what you think is interesting.

00:38:51.000 Is that they don't sort of inquire about it or ridicule it or joke about it.

00:38:55.000 They sort of do the job of carrying the momentum of the emergent message.

00:38:59.000 And that is because they know already that their interests converge with government interests, converge with military-industrial complex interests.

00:39:06.000 Even more than that, you will have people that own bits of all of them.

00:39:09.000 This more than convergent, it is literally intertwined.

00:39:12.000 Anyway, it's not like spying is just part of international espionage.

00:39:16.000 That's what the CIA, FBI, MI5, that's what all those agencies are for.

00:39:20.000 Yeah, but that's different.

00:39:20.000 been going on for as long as you've had the nation-state.

00:39:23.000 The US sent a naval destroyer past Chinese-controlled islands last year, and the Chinese military

00:39:28.000 confronted a similar US vessel in the same location a year before.

00:39:32.000 Yeah, but that's different.

00:39:33.000 A boat is not so scary as a balloon.

00:39:35.000 I'll take your point.

00:39:36.000 When it's balloon for balloon, balloon on balloon violence, then we'll start taking

00:39:41.000 The US military has also invested in its own spy balloon technology.

00:39:44.000 Oh.

00:39:45.000 In 2019, the Pentagon was testing mass surveillance balloons across the US.

00:39:49.000 Three years later, Politico reported that the Pentagon plans to spend $27.1 million in the fiscal year 2023, adding that the balloons may help track and deter hypersonic weapons being developed by China and Russia.

00:40:01.000 So, there you go.

00:40:02.000 They do it as well.

00:40:03.000 Under the U.S. 0.92

00:40:04.000 drone program, the U.S.

00:40:05.000 military routinely violates other countries' airspace and sovereignty.

00:40:09.000 It's part of a routine.

00:40:11.000 Right, up we get!

00:40:12.000 Fly some balloons and drones across foreign territories.

00:40:14.000 Oh, sorry, I always do that, sorry.

00:40:14.000 Why are you doing it?

00:40:16.000 Not by spending spy balloons.

00:40:17.000 See?

00:40:18.000 It's not the same.

00:40:19.000 It's not spy balloons.

00:40:20.000 But flying robots armed with missiles.

00:40:22.000 Hmm.

00:40:22.000 What would you rather have, a balloon or a flying robot armed with a missile?

00:40:25.000 Let me just give you this mental image.

00:40:27.000 Ding dong! 0.99

00:40:27.000 Hi, I got a present for your child's fifth birthday. 0.99

00:40:29.000 Oh, what is it?

00:40:30.000 It's a flying robot armed with missiles.

00:40:33.000 Sometimes it does this with the express permission of the country's government, and other times it does so regardless of how either a country's population or its government feels, as with Afghanistan, which Washington continues to drone bomb despite having withdrawn ground troops in 2021, or with Yemen, which has been on the receiving end of nearly 400 US airstrikes this century.

00:40:51.000 Yeah, but it's not a balloon though, is it?

00:40:54.000 Air strikes, where drones come down and like blow up your weddings and families and stuff like that.

00:40:58.000 Yeah, it's not ideal, but a balloon?

00:41:00.000 Like from the film Up?

00:41:02.000 Or Richard Branson in the 80s?

00:41:03.000 No, thank you!

00:41:04.000 The US considers it its sovereign right to spy on any nation it chooses, and the average American tends more or less to see it the same way.

00:41:12.000 This is highlighted in controversies around domestic versus foreign surveillance.

00:41:16.000 For example, Americans were outraged over the Edward Snowden revelations, not because spy agencies were conducting surveillance, but because they were conducting surveillance on American citizens.

00:41:25.000 It's just taken as a given that spying on foreigners is fine. 1.00

00:41:28.000 And maybe you do feel that as a patriot.

00:41:30.000 Maybe you think it's part of the purpose of the military and the government to protect the nation.

00:41:33.000 And in fact, I suppose that is according to the current model.

00:41:36.000 But knowing how you're regarded by these same forces, I think is significant.

00:41:41.000 Joe Biden marches outside that government building, White House, wherever it is, and says, success, as if the shooting down of this surveillance tool is somehow protecting you.

00:41:50.000 But you know who is spying on you continually?

00:41:53.000 Joe Biden's government, in cooperation with big tech.

00:41:56.000 You know you're being surveilled.

00:41:57.000 You know they're looking for opportunities to justify that surveillance.

00:42:00.000 In the same way this balloon story is ultimately being used to legitimise more expenditure on the military, they will similarly say, we have to surveil you more for your own safety, you need digital ID, social credit.

00:42:12.000 It's the way we can protect you from a balloon or a germ or a terrorist or whatever it is that week.

00:42:17.000 The idea that they are your friend, that they're there to protect you, has to be smashed.

00:42:22.000 They are not your friend.

00:42:23.000 Neither is the culture that they use to beguile you.

00:42:26.000 These are a set of tools that are used to keep you passive, compliant and malleable.

00:42:30.000 And when you look at the left-right debate and their media arms, you don't see enough willingness to vigorously attack all of the institutions, corporate, financial, military, government.

00:42:39.000 All of these centralised systems are about controlling you.

00:42:42.000 They'll surveil you when it's convenient to surveil you.

00:42:44.000 They'll distract you when it's necessary to distract you.

00:42:47.000 They'll extract your resources, whether that's your time, your attention, or your money, whenever they want, and they'll manage the condition so that it's not noticed, and sometimes so you'll bloody well vote for it.

00:42:55.000 Now let's contrast all this with another news story that's getting a lot less attention.

00:42:59.000 has secured access to four additional military bases in the Philippines, a key bit of real estate which would offer a front seat to monitor the Chinese in the South China Sea and around Taiwan, writes the BBC's Rupert Wingfield Hayes.

00:42:59.000 The U.S.

00:43:12.000 With the deal, Washington has stitched the gap in the arc of U.S.

00:43:16.000 alliances stretching from South Korea and Japan in the north to Australia in the south.

00:43:20.000 The missing link had been the Philippines, which borders two of the biggest potential flashpoints, Taiwan and the South China Sea.

00:43:27.000 The U.S.

00:43:27.000 empire has been surrounding China with military bases and war machinery for many years, in ways Washington would never tolerate China doing in the nations and waters surrounding the United States.

00:43:38.000 There's no question that the U.S.

00:43:39.000 is the aggressor in this increasingly hostile standoff between major powers.

00:43:42.000 So what you could say is this is like Ukraine-Russia five years ago.

00:43:47.000 So at least with our ability to access this information, we're able to assess and diagnose the problem more quickly.

00:43:53.000 While we're thinking about balloons in the sky and UFOs and stuff, the US military are encroaching on Chinese space in a comparable way that NATO encroached on former Soviet territory 10 years ago back in 2014 and since then.

00:44:05.000 What you have to question now is, if you are watching this from America, is are the American government acting on your behalf?

00:44:12.000 Or on behalf of secondary interests like the military industrial complex and other financial interests, let's say just for sake of easy understanding, black rock, to give us a convenient image like a balloon that we can understand, have the image of a black rock and have the image of a missile with the word Lockheed Martin written on the side of it.

00:44:27.000 Who do you think they're provoking China for?

00:44:30.000 For you, do you think this means we're going, oh my God, I'm really worried about people in Delaware and Tennessee.

00:44:34.000 What are we going to do?

00:44:35.000 Let's get over there and build a noose right around China. 1.00

00:44:37.000 Or are they thinking about ongoing expenditure, distracting the domestic population, pursuing geopolitical aims, which might actually bring about the demise of our entire species?

00:44:47.000 I think that it's time for us to look at these narratives in real time.

00:44:51.000 And so I say, what are they doing?

00:44:52.000 What are they angling for?

00:44:53.000 Why don't the media question it?

00:44:55.000 Why don't the government discuss it openly?

00:44:57.000 Why are we invited to look at the news like children?

00:44:59.000 Balloons!

00:45:00.000 No.

00:45:00.000 pipes under the sea. Me, I believe change is possible and I know you believe it's

00:45:04.000 somewhere inside you too. But that's just what I think let me know what you think

00:45:07.000 in the chat in the comments I'll be reading those comments right now.

00:45:11.000 Thanks for refusing Fox News videos. 0.99

00:45:13.000 Here's the fucking news. 0.99

00:45:15.000 At Pride folks says seriously if I were China I would be rolling on the floor at the absurdity of this war on 1.00

00:45:22.000 weather blade.

00:45:23.000 If I were China?

00:45:24.000 Can't be China, PrideFault! 1.00

00:45:26.000 Can't imagine yourself as a whole nation.

00:45:28.000 GraffitiForensic, I see no evidence whatsoever, at all, that these objects originated from China.

00:45:35.000 And then Jim... Well, there's a reason for that.

00:45:35.000 None!

00:45:38.000 There isn't any yet.

00:45:40.000 Ah, there's no evidence at all. 0.98

00:45:42.000 As soon as there's some evidence... And then KY Jelly says, and that's by the way a saucy name, they used my voice for the Here's the Fucking News Baby. 1.00

00:45:50.000 We did, and that's my little daughter. 0.98

00:45:51.000 She's one of my children that I'm getting swearing for a living. 1.00

00:45:55.000 We've got a fantastic guest for you now.

00:45:57.000 It's an investigative journalist, that's like me, who's written extensively about the war in Ukraine on his substack.

00:46:03.000 He's talking to us about Russia being recast as terrorist.

00:46:06.000 In fact, that's something he's been investigated and subject to an infamous slur as a result of those lines of inquiry.

00:46:11.000 We're very excited to introduce on to rumble a man we know as Michael Racey Tracey.

00:46:17.000 It's Michael Racey Tracey.

00:46:19.000 All right, Michael.

00:46:21.000 Well, I'm going to keep it rated PG for this particular Rumble colloquy, so I'm going to avoid getting too racy such that, I don't know, maybe there might be some new censorship stricture imposed on Rumble solely to do with preventing me from getting too racy for the daytime audience.

00:46:39.000 Don't push this to such a limit that Rumble, that has organised itself around the principle of free speech, has to renege on that pledge because you are so disgusting in the things that you say.

00:46:51.000 That would be funny if I'm just so repulsive that they have to totally abandon their stated sort of core principles for... Speech is wrong!

00:46:59.000 You can't just shout fire in a crowded theater!

00:47:01.000 Free speech is dangerous!

00:47:03.000 It's too much free speech!

00:47:04.000 Hey Michael, Tracy, we want to ask you first of all about the Is there a plan or movement to recast Russia as a kind of terrorist state?

00:47:14.000 Is this something that's been ongoing?

00:47:15.000 How's that changed since the Cold War?

00:47:17.000 How's it changed recently?

00:47:18.000 And was it just one lone congressperson advocating for that or was it a broader movement?

00:47:23.000 Well, yeah, earlier you mentioned that there was this particular Democratic congressman named Tom Malinowski who was booted out of the House of Representatives actually at the midterm elections and replaced by a Republican who pledged to be even more aggressive and antagonistic toward Russia.

00:47:39.000 So that kind of well encapsulates the bipartisan consensus on this topic.

00:47:44.000 But I interviewed Tom Malinowski because he happened to be a sponsor of a resolution in the House calling on the State Department to formally designate Russia a state sponsor of terrorism, so putting Russia into the same category as Syria, Cuba, North Korea, etc., Iran, and thereby kind of formally abrogating any semblance of Official diplomatic ties that could be forged between the United States and Russia, and you'd think that would have a pretty decisive deleterious impact on brokering some sort of settlement to the war.

00:48:25.000 And far be it for anyone to assume that this was just some sort of rogue plan on the part of one particular Democratic congressman, Last July, the U.S.

00:48:37.000 Senate unanimously assented to a resolution that was championed by Lindsey Graham, so UberHawk of all UberHawks, former, you know, chief sort of buddy of John McCain.

00:48:49.000 And by the way, John McCain, for all he was castigated during his lifetime as being this kind of insane hawk and outside the mainstream, believe it or not, in death, John McCain's foreign policy disposition has become strikingly kind of subsumed into just mainstream bipartisan consensus, which I think is an undercover development of this past year or so vis-a-vis Ukraine.

00:49:16.000 But Lindsey Graham championed this resolution with a Democratic colleague, Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut, and all 100 U.S.

00:49:24.000 senators Ascended to it was enacted by unanimous ascent so everybody from Rand Paul to Josh Hawley to Bernie Sanders to Elizabeth Warren anyone who you might think be might be somewhat on the margins or somewhat more of a dissenting sort of standpoint on this particular topic they all whether through overt intentionality or just omission

00:49:49.000 assented to the enactment of this particular resolution, which would, I think it's fair

00:49:53.000 to say, basically obliterate any hope that the United States could engage diplomatically

00:49:59.000 with Russia in pursuit of some sort of negotiated resolution to the war.

00:50:04.000 Now, that move actually has not been formally taken yet, despite the arded lobbying of the

00:50:10.000 Ukraine government and Zelensky as well.

00:50:12.000 When Zelensky was in the United States in late December for his vaunted first trip abroad

00:50:17.000 since the war began, or at least the first trip that's been publicly reported that he's

00:50:21.000 taken abroad since the war began, that was one of his lobbying agenda items for that

00:50:26.000 step to be taken to basically nuke, to use a...

00:50:29.000 Somewhat ominous pun, the diplomatic ties between the United States and Russia.

00:50:34.000 And the United States has not, for whatever reason, formally gone there yet.

00:50:40.000 But the Biden administration tends to be a somewhat lagging indicator in what kind of aggressive steps it's willing to accede to, whereas Congress and the media kind of are at the forefront of kind of banging on for whatever the latest threshold crossing step is.

00:50:58.000 Thanks, Michael.

00:50:59.000 You talked in our conversations offline about the seamless congealing of folklore and myth into conventional wisdom.

00:51:12.000 How, I suppose, abstract ideas that are not underwritten by facts are starting to be used as platforms, foundations and arguments, I guess, for escalated activity within this conflict.

00:51:26.000 Can you give us some examples, or did you just give us one, i.e.

00:51:29.000 the sort of the attempt to label Russia a terrorist state?

00:51:32.000 Are there further examples that have accrued around this conflict?

00:51:36.000 Yeah, and there are multiple dimensions to this phenomenon, and this being the first year anniversary of the invasion starting, or we're approaching that anyway, it's a good time to reflect on how this dynamic has worked discursively.

00:51:53.000 So when Russia first launched the invasion February 24th of last year.

00:51:59.000 There was this instantaneous congealing of myth and folklore, as I would put it, around a sort of triumphalist narrative That showed the resilience and the resourcefulness and the heroism of Ukraine.

00:52:16.000 And certainly in particular instances, there might have been cases that were legitimate of, you know, individual Ukrainians displaying valor of some sort.

00:52:26.000 That's not even what I'm commenting on here, because, you know, the immediate counterargument will be, oh, you're trying to Denigrate the sacrifices of Ukrainians and cheapen their suffering?

00:52:38.000 No, I mean, I personally went to... Why don't you care about them?

00:52:42.000 Get a sticker up in your window.

00:52:45.000 Well, no, I mean, actually, the reason why that rebuttal or that theoretical rebuttal is so cheap is because, you know, an actually serious sort of moral Assessment would have to take into account the genuine suffering of those Ukrainians who, through no fault of their own, actually have had their lives disrupted.

00:53:03.000 When the war first started, I went to Poland on the border area with Ukraine and I personally, you know, without trying to get myself set up for interviews through NGOs or through some sort of fixer or through some sort of, you know, orchestrated PR initiative, I actually personally interviewed lots of, you know, mostly women with young children Who did have their lives genuinely disrupted through, uh, as a result of an aggressive military action.

00:53:31.000 And I think there is sympathy that is justly afforded to them.

00:53:35.000 So, you know, I think somebody who is a careful moral reasoner would have to take that into account.

00:53:42.000 And so I'm taking that into account, but I'm also simultaneously noting that there was this onslaught of just propaganda and fabrication In service of advancing one particular triumphalist Ukraine narrative that was then arrogated for the purpose of intensifying a primarily U.S.

00:54:00.000 military intervention.

00:54:01.000 So I don't know if you recall, but within days of the invasion happening last February, there was this anecdote that got circulated and then just beamed across the entire information kind of landscape where Zelensky supposedly offered an evacuation route out of Ukraine by the United States, and he responded Triumphantly and boldly and audaciously by saying, I don't need ammo, I need a ride.

00:54:27.000 And that became this rallying cry showing not just the valorous spirit of Zelensky, but of Ukraine as a whole.

00:54:37.000 And t-shirts were immediately produced with this slogan, and it became one of the core tenets of this war mythos.

00:54:46.000 And if you actually go and look at what that originated from, there was an AP story In late February, that was sourced to an anonymous intelligence official, so nobody was willing to put their name to the conveyance of this, you know, titanically inspiring quote.

00:55:04.000 And that U.S.

00:55:07.000 intelligence official is the one who relayed it, apparently, to the AP reporter.

00:55:10.000 We still don't know who that intelligence official was, but as you might agree, U.S.

00:55:16.000 intelligence officials have a variety of potential motives for why they would want to place information out for public consumption.

00:55:23.000 And then by October, one of the very few instances of an actually sort of robust journalistic evaluation of the nature of the U.S.

00:55:33.000 intervention in Ukraine was published in the New Yorker.

00:55:37.000 And it quoted another official kind of laughingly acknowledging that that entire anecdote, including the quote itself presumably, was just a sheer fabrication for propagandistic purposes.

00:55:48.000 Which, you know, if you're thinking about it from the standpoint of the self-interest

00:55:51.000 of or the perceived self-interest of whoever those, you know, Ukraine government officials

00:55:56.000 might be, you can see why they would want that information out there to kind of construct

00:56:01.000 this affirming kind of noble narrative on their behalf, because what were they doing?

00:56:06.000 Well, they were lobbying for more and more intense U.S.-Western military escalation.

00:56:12.000 Remember, at that time, Zelensky, despite being crowned as this, you know, incarnation

00:56:18.000 of Churchill and the most beloved leader that has graced the world stage since the Second

00:56:24.000 World War, he was lobbying in March and April of last year for a no-fly zone, which even

00:56:31.000 Joe Biden himself said if that demand were actually acquiesced to, that would instigate

00:56:37.000 World War III, and yet we were all being told that we must be, you know, singing the praises

00:56:43.000 of somebody whose preferred policy interventions would actually bring about the most cataclysmic

00:56:50.000 world conflagration that anybody could ever dream of.

00:56:56.000 So that was one element of the mythos.

00:57:00.000 And I think, you know, on another level, you have just kind of the way that the logic around U.S.

00:57:06.000 interventionism has been inverted to justify support for this particular U.S.

00:57:11.000 intervention.

00:57:11.000 Now, a lot of self-styled leftists and liberals and even leftists kind of Purport to be very well acquainted with the history of interventionist U.S.

00:57:23.000 foreign policy.

00:57:23.000 They'll have learned to some degree about Vietnam.

00:57:28.000 They know about Iraq.

00:57:30.000 Maybe there are some blind spots in their knowledge, but there are certain sort of core kind of features to what they understand to be the reality of U.S.

00:57:38.000 Foreign policy, and it produces a rather cynical view of the utility of U.S.

00:57:42.000 foreign policy, because number one, it tends to be predicated on state duplicity, meaning that the actual nature of the policy is not forthcomingly communicated to the public At first.

00:57:56.000 And it tends to be accompanied by this kind of conjoining what's called mission creep in that the scope or the contours of that U.S.

00:58:06.000 policy tend to expand and lurch out into new areas and to entail a much far greater investment of both financial resources and even human resources if it escalates to the level of an actual Intervention involving boots on the ground, so to say.

00:58:26.000 But all that kind of got shunked into the side with regard to this particular intervention, at least as it began in February of last year, because it was seen as advancing these kind of grandiose objectives of protecting the rules-based international order, protecting international liberalism against the encroachments of, you know, right-wing connotated Global authoritarianism as personified by Putin as the chief exporter of that insidious tendency.

00:59:01.000 It, you know, even in the US, the legacy of World War II itself was specifically invoked time and time again, almost to the point of tedium.

00:59:10.000 No, not almost, definitely to the point of tedium, where, you know, you get, of course, the obligatory Hitler comparisons that, you know, Putin must be stopped or else he's going to do a blitzkrieg throughout all of Europe.

00:59:21.000 But also that the U.S.

00:59:22.000 needs to resume its role that was articulated by Franklin Roosevelt as the arsenal of democracy by furnishing armaments all across the world, including to, you know, Britain, Soviet Union, etc., in that phase before the U.S.

00:59:35.000 formally entered the war in December of 1941.

00:59:38.000 Nancy Pelosi went on the floor of the House of Representatives and demanded the enactment 1.00

00:59:42.000 of the lend-lease policy for the first time since the 1940s on account of these ideological

00:59:50.000 imperatives toward, like, protecting global liberalism from these villainous sort of,

00:59:57.000 you know, depredations of Putin and what have you.

01:00:00.000 I guess also Lukashenko, who we're also supposed to be terrified by.

01:00:05.000 And so all of, you know, given these, like, ideological sort of nostrums that got so,

01:00:10.000 you know, kind of fervently pumped out into the public consciousness.

01:00:15.000 Any kind of analytical, objective, impartial, rationally minded assessment of the nature of this particular U.S.

01:00:22.000 military intervention got subordinated to those wider ideological goals, such that no one really had the sense that there could be mission creep associated with this particular U.S.

01:00:32.000 intervention.

01:00:34.000 No one got the sense that there could be state deceit involved in the selling of the intervention, and yet we found, as could have been I think easily predicted by anybody who was trying to maintain a bit of a mooring and sort of rational Yeah, kind of assessment.

01:00:50.000 Exactly those things have happened.

01:00:52.000 So for one thing, I don't know if you recall, but when Biden and top administration officials were talking about the nature of U.S.

01:01:00.000 intervention post-Russian invasion on February 24th, they were almost invariably framed in terms of sort of a very narrowly confined aid mission, almost like it was just like a strict humanitarian intervention where the aid would be mostly about, you know, blankets and, you know, you know, food and water and basic sort of nourishment for the besieged civilians.

01:01:29.000 And they specifically use the word aid, I think.

01:01:32.000 Because it has a particular propagandistic utility, and this doesn't get much talked about either, but when you think of aid, like if the U.S.

01:01:39.000 is going to be providing aid to a besieged nation, what does that kind of conjure a mental image of?

01:01:44.000 I don't know, like a first aid kit or something, right?

01:01:46.000 Just strict sort of medical aid, whereas by June, of last year, the U.S.

01:01:52.000 was basically agreeing to the demands of the Ukraine military to furnish them with an entirely new military in the midst of a hot war, which we are constantly reminded is the most wide-scale war in Europe since the 1940s.

01:02:08.000 Now, is that aid as commonly understood by just the general member of the public?

01:02:13.000 I don't think so, but that word was sort of very much fixated on, I think, for a particular

01:02:19.000 purpose.

01:02:20.000 And then it kind of escalated from there.

01:02:21.000 I mean, at the beginning, the idea was just to send some aid, along with maybe some small

01:02:25.000 arms, so the courageous Ukrainians could, you know, defend their homes, and also, you

01:02:32.000 know, a Javelin missile here and there so they could take out an invading Russian tank.

01:02:36.000 Then by June it was heavy artillery that the U.S. would also be sending, the HIMAR rocket

01:02:41.000 systems, that later came, of course, the Patriot missile batteries that would then be deployed

01:02:48.000 to Ukraine, as was announced in December by Biden.

01:02:53.000 And it kind of culminated, at least as yet, with the U.S.

01:02:55.000 saying, oh, by the way, we're going to send our most advanced battle tanks into Ukraine.

01:03:01.000 That's the next iteration of this aid.

01:03:03.000 So if that's not mission creep, if that's not in keeping with sort of the quintessential

01:03:11.000 trajectories that you would expect of a U.S. 0.79

01:03:14.000 foreign policy intervention, I don't know what would be.

01:03:17.000 And yet there's just not really much popular consciousness of this very predictable cycle, because the overarching sort of ideological imperatives that have been imbued onto this particular conflict have taken such primacy.

01:03:34.000 Michael, you extraordinary insomniac, you great river of vocabulary, you.

01:03:38.000 What extraordinary analysis you took us there on the journey from blankets to clear escalation via that word lethal aid.

01:03:47.000 I remember when they made that peculiar portmanteau, that new linguistic hybrid.

01:03:52.000 And as language evolves, as censorship increases, you start to recognize how power is newly

01:03:59.000 operating. Michael, I could listen to you all day. Sometimes I felt like I might not have a

01:04:03.000 choice. We'd love to have you back on our show for further conversations. It would be

01:04:08.000 brilliant to get more of your insights and I'm really excited to talk to you more. You can follow

01:04:14.000 Michael on Substack by going to mtracey.substack.com.

01:04:20.000 Thank you very much, Michael.

01:04:22.000 Goodbye, mate.

01:04:22.000 We'll see you again soon.

01:04:23.000 That was amazing.

01:04:24.000 Will we speak again soon?

01:04:26.000 Yes, of course.

01:04:27.000 And sorry if I rambled on.

01:04:27.000 Let's do it.

01:04:29.000 No, it's brilliant.

01:04:30.000 Sometimes I get worked up because sometimes I feel like I'm just, I'm channeling the absolute truth of the universe directly into Rumble.

01:04:38.000 Ah, the old absolute truth of the universe.

01:04:40.000 Oh, someone else liked that.

01:04:41.000 When that absolute truth comes a-knockin'.

01:04:44.000 You've got to answer the door, baby.

01:04:46.000 Michael, that was fantastic.

01:04:47.000 Thank you so much.

01:04:48.000 What a beautiful contribution.

01:04:50.000 He was channeling, wasn't he?

01:04:51.000 Yeah, he certainly was.

01:04:52.000 Some of my favourite words.

01:04:53.000 I like triumphalist quite a lot.

01:04:54.000 I like abrogating.

01:04:56.000 I like that being used.

01:04:57.000 There's a depiction of you with your top off, Gal.

01:04:59.000 Oh, wow.

01:05:00.000 I can assure you it doesn't look anything like that.

01:05:01.000 I like the mood.

01:05:02.000 I've seen you naked many times and you're a fine, fine man.

01:05:05.000 All right, F it.

01:05:05.000 Thank you so much.

01:05:06.000 All right, F it.

01:05:07.000 Off topic, but here you go, ladies. 1.00

01:05:08.000 Also, men, because what about... Sure thing. 0.73

01:05:11.000 Sure thing.

01:05:12.000 Men can objectify you as well. 0.99

01:05:14.000 Of course they can.

01:05:15.000 Anyone's free to.

01:05:17.000 Objectify Gareth.

01:05:18.000 Give him a good objectify. 0.99

01:05:18.000 I invite you to. 0.99

01:05:20.000 Don't try and make some serious point about the war.

01:05:22.000 Look up there.

01:05:23.000 That's what you are.

01:05:24.000 You're sort of a topless... you look like Giroux.

01:05:29.000 I thought it was amazing that thing because when he's talking about the mission creep it's something we've talked about the aid before isn't it the way it started off as aid and then it was lethal aid and now it's military aid and you know Biden coming on the telly you know towards the start of the war saying we're not going to go to war with Russia and then he's got the point I mean Michael's one of the things he's written is that America now controls virtually every rocket fired by Ukrainian forces at Russian targets.

01:05:52.000 We only control virtually every rocket?

01:05:54.000 That's unbelievable!

01:05:56.000 Exactly, virtually every.

01:05:57.000 What if it were every?

01:05:58.000 Do you know what's most terrifying about this?

01:05:58.000 That would be worse.

01:06:00.000 Is we are right.

01:06:01.000 You, on the basis of a lot of diligent research and aggregating a great deal of brilliant reporting and creating your own narratives.

01:06:09.000 Me, because I've always felt, don't trust what you're told.

01:06:12.000 Never ever trust authority under any circumstances.

01:06:15.000 Demand individual and collective freedom.

01:06:17.000 Stuff that I somehow picked up as a child.

01:06:20.000 That's what's worrying.

01:06:21.000 David Icke stuff used to watch. It was mostly him but don't talk about him even on Rumble.

01:06:25.000 No, God bless him. I mean, you know, other than, well now, let's just, let's not get

01:06:29.000 into it. Shall we get into it? Why don't you just take your bloody top off? Got it. Like

01:06:33.000 a good boy. That's what we've got to do to get out of this mess now, is it? I'm afraid

01:06:36.000 to say we're going to have to, sorry, me, there's no demand.

01:06:39.000 You take off your top.

01:06:40.000 Hey, on tomorrow's show, we've got Bob Roth.

01:06:43.000 He's the man that taught me how to transcendentally meditate.

01:06:46.000 He was a student of the Maharishi.

01:06:48.000 He hung with the Beatles.

01:06:49.000 He's a brilliant meditation teacher.

01:06:51.000 Did he teach you to meditate?

01:06:52.000 He did, yeah.

01:06:52.000 But you don't meditate enough, do you?

01:06:54.000 I meditate all the time.

01:06:54.000 I didn't keep that up.

01:06:55.000 I'm a great meditator.

01:06:56.000 We've got to get them not meditating.

01:06:58.000 We've got to get Leon meditating.

01:07:00.000 Why can't we?

01:07:01.000 In a proper cult, you'd have to meditate to be in it, wouldn't you?

01:07:05.000 That's right, that's the only thing that we need to do now.

01:07:07.000 Then we're a proper cult.

01:07:08.000 To confirm our status.

01:07:09.000 Start creating communities.

01:07:10.000 And there's lots of other things that go on in cults.

01:07:12.000 Yeah, but we don't do none of them.

01:07:13.000 A happily married person.

01:07:13.000 No, no.

01:07:15.000 Tim Pool is on the show!

01:07:17.000 Friday!

01:07:18.000 Tim Pool, however, does!

01:07:21.000 Tim Paul is a great guy.

01:07:23.000 He doesn't need any more pressure.

01:07:24.000 He gets swatted every half hour, doesn't he?

01:07:26.000 Tim Paul's on this show on Friday.

01:07:28.000 He's a great friend of the show and we're very excited to have him on.

01:07:31.000 Sign up to Locals to see the show behind the show.

01:07:34.000 How do we conjure up this ingenuity, this chemistry, this majesty that Pulitzer Prize winning journalists like Greenwald, like Seymour Hersh are queuing up to say is the greatest little news show on the planet.

01:07:48.000 I'm pretty sure you just misquoted them.

01:07:49.000 Yeah, they didn't say that.

01:07:51.000 You get the gist.

01:07:53.000 Oh, I see.

01:07:53.000 You get the gist.

01:07:54.000 This is all part of your methodology, isn't it?

01:07:55.000 That's part of my method.

01:07:56.000 I'm different.

01:07:57.000 That's what me and that guy, Racy Tracy, we just channel, really, and then communicate.

01:08:02.000 So you can join us and we'll read your comments, like we will these people.

01:08:06.000 Check out these people that are commenting right now in our Stay Free community.

01:08:10.000 Take your top off, show us your bum, stuff like that. 0.85

01:08:13.000 You could be saying those kind of things.

01:08:14.000 And also you'd get a weekly guided meditation with me.

01:08:17.000 I'll answer your actual problems.

01:08:18.000 Like you might have a heartbreak.

01:08:20.000 Christ, buddy, you don't know the meaning of heartbreak.

01:08:21.000 And I'll meditate you right through it.

01:08:23.000 Also, I've got a stand up special coming out soon.

01:08:26.000 You'll get access to that.

01:08:27.000 Exclusive access.

01:08:28.000 Okay.

01:08:29.000 Well, we're back tomorrow with some fantastic guests and some ludicrous and outrageous fun to some challenges to mainstream narratives.

01:08:35.000 And I would say access to realms as yet Forgone by a world that once you denied the real, real truth.

01:08:43.000 See you tomorrow, not for more of the same, but for more of the different.

01:08:46.000 Until then, stay free.

Stay Free - Russel Brand - February 14, 2023

Pfizer Vs. Project Veritas - The Truth! - #080 - Stay Free With Russell Brand

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript