In this episode, Russell Brand and David Zweig discuss the Israeli-Palestine conflict, its escalation, and why no one should profit from this horrific conflict. They also discuss the Biden administration's decision to combine aid packages for Israel and Ukraine with a request for more funds for the fight against the pro-Russia separatists in Ukraine, and whether this is a good or bad move by the White House, and how the media should be prevented from profiting from it. Stay tuned for more episodes of Stay Free with Russell Brand, Stay Awakened, and Here's the News about You're Not Supposed to Believe This. Stay woke! Stay awake! - Russell Brand Subscribe to Stay Free With Russell Brand on Podchaser.fm/StayAwakenedWondwondr/StayWondered? To find a list of our sponsors and show-related promo codes, go to bit.ly/sponsorships/StayFreeWithRussellBrand. If you like what you hear, please consider pledging a small monthly support of $1, $5, $10, $15, $20, $50, or $100, or even $150, and we'll give you 5% off our next month's ad-free version of our new issue of StayFree with Brand. We'll be giving out a free copy of our latest issue of Keep Free with Brand - a limited edition print edition of the book "Keep Free with a coupon good for 5 stars only available on Amazon Prime and VaynerSpeaker, starting on 7/27/VaynerMedia, available on Nov 1st, 2019. Learn more about our ad-only, starting from $99, only 5/3rd, starting 7/19th, and get 5/6/29th, only 3 months from Prime Ministerial and 7/16th, shipping free on Vimeo, only full-of VIP access to Vimeo and Vimeo worldwide, Vimeo will get full access to the full-place worldwide, and all other places they can get the deal on the best vouching for the book, Vimeo is also get a discount on the deal, starting 2-of course, VINiola, and VINVOTING PRODONE and VOTING 4/VOTERPRODONE, and VOGUE PROMOTION ONLY, VOTER_PROMO, VOGA_PROGONE_INCLUSION
00:05:29.000Well done for avoiding the legacy media's attempts to fill you full of information that is not beneficial to your spiritual advancement.
00:05:38.000And in this time of omni-crisis and omni-division, we must become well-informed, well-educated and connected in order to navigate these complex spaces.
00:05:49.000That means you'll get a notification if you turn on the notification bell whenever we make content so we can stay connected.
00:05:55.000It's not like on YouTube where the notification bell only works arbitrarily.
00:05:59.000You'll get informed that we're doing it.
00:06:01.000And if you can support our work, press the red button, become an Awakened Wonder and stay connected to us.
00:06:06.000Of course, today we have to talk about some Very challenging and difficult stories, the Israel-Palestine conflict, its escalation, and extraordinarily, one thing I'm sure everyone can agree on, is that nobody should profit from this horrific conflict.
00:06:23.000About how the media present information in ways that continue to be advantageous, the suppression of information during the last three years and the ongoing management, manipulation and let's call it what it is, propaganda that surrounds many of the issues that continue to define our time.
00:06:49.000We're talking about the five ideas that are going to change the world.
00:06:51.000We're going to talk about special, separate communities that have managed to transcend the problems of our system, and we need them now more than ever.
00:06:59.000Of course, more arms are being sent to Israel.
00:07:02.000The Biden administration are using this opportunity and the considerable support behind it to further arm Ukraine.
00:07:10.000at a time when people are beginning to question the efficacy of that particular geopolitical
00:07:16.000project. It looks like the Biden administration is going to combine its request for war expenditure
00:07:23.000in Ukraine with aid packages for Israel, bypassing, I would say, proper debate on the
00:07:29.000matter of continuing the unwinnable conflict between Ukraine and Russia.
00:07:35.000The idea is referred to as jamming the far right which is referring of course to Republicans in Congress who oppose the proxy war in Ukraine but are staunch Israel supporters.
00:07:44.000Let's look at how the legacy media reports on this subject.
00:07:47.000So I'm not going to get ahead of the President's request and not going to take the place of the OMB director who will present the request that we send up.
00:07:55.000But the President was very clear today that we will be making a request to the Congress, and it will include a request for funding for support to Israel.
00:08:04.000And he has also been equally clear that we are going to renew our request to the Congress for aid to Ukraine.
00:08:09.000What exact form that all takes, that will be worked out and presented by others, not by me.
00:08:15.000The notion that we're going to go up and ask for Israel aid and ask for Ukraine aid, that's unequivocal.
00:08:21.000Given the unconscionable horror of recent events, it's more complex than ever to discuss this historic and complex issue.
00:08:29.000I would say so complex that any package to bundle together this conflict with further aid for Ukraine and even Taiwan Seems exploitative.
00:08:40.000One of the things I think we can agree on together is that we should watch for how this conflict is exploited.
00:08:46.000And I mean just in the plain sense of profiteering.
00:08:50.000Combining these distinct and difficult conflicts that are at different phases with very different histories complicates and I would argue exploits a number of very difficult situations.
00:09:03.000We're going to be talking later in Here's the News about You're not going to believe this.
00:09:08.000Do you know there are people in Congress who are right now investing in weapons manufacturers and energy companies in a way that seems exploitative and a way that I think should be banned.
00:09:19.000Let me know in the chat if people in Congress should be banned from exploiting situations like this and benefiting from what looks like inside knowledge.
00:09:26.000I'm obviously not making any criminal allegations right there.
00:09:29.000Of course, NATO members continue to make extraordinary admissions about the ongoing Ukraine-Russia conflict.
00:09:38.000I can't believe this has been said out loud.
00:09:41.000The Minister of Defence from the Netherlands, Kaiser Alongren, has said explicitly that Ukrainians are a cheap way to resist Russia, equating human life with Economic expedience?
00:10:07.000So I think we have to engage also in the dialogue with our American colleagues and friends because they have the same interest.
00:10:15.000In a way, of course, supporting Ukraine is a very cheap way to make sure that Russia, with this regime, is not a threat to the NATO alliance.
00:10:24.000Notice how on one level of discourse these ongoing conflicts are spoken of in incendiary, moralistic terms.
00:10:32.000Elsewhere, they're spoken of in economic terms.
00:10:35.000One of the things we have to be able to do is to recognize that perhaps both components are significant.
00:10:43.000Whilst they are publicly comfortable talking about humanitarianism, solidarity, and very particular positions against horrific acts of
00:10:52.000violence which anybody would agree with.
00:10:54.000Note how the same as with something like online safety bills or internet censorship legislation,
00:11:01.000they tell you some things that are easy to agree with.
00:11:03.000Child pornography is wrong, hate speech is wrong, we're going to censor your ability to communicate,
00:11:12.000We are going to profit from this unbelievably sad, tragic, difficult, awful situation.
00:11:20.000It becomes revealing when people talk in economic terms about military conflict, because it reveals something that many of us suspect is true, that there are other motivations.
00:11:29.000I'm speaking specifically of the Ukraine-Russia war in this conflict, but it's important to remain open-minded, I think.
00:11:35.000There's no question we're in an Omnicrisis, a time of censorship, a time of global conflict, of escalation, of authoritarianism and tactics that seem likely to make the world worse.
00:11:48.000And one thing that's What's been speculated upon is the reason that ordinary people are being treated with less and less respect is because of the increasing ability for automation that AI will afford.
00:12:01.000It's time for us to, I don't want to say meet because it's not a real person, but look at in something between awe and horror, a mecha.
00:12:11.000A mecha is a new humanoid robot that He's being proposed as a nurse right now, but how long before Ameka's outside your house, forcing you into your bedroom because of a pandemic or a climate change or because of an indiscriminate or foolish phrase?
00:15:47.000I suppose that's what's wrong with materialism, rationalism, and a purely logical approach to the problems we face in reality.
00:15:54.000All of us know, as individuals, that there are levels of complexity within us that are beyond IQ, logic, materialism.
00:16:00.000People are capable of doing mad and irrational things because of their emotions, which would be seen as a flaw in the terms of this discourse.
00:16:19.000Rationalism like, we know that there will be profit derived from conflicts.
00:16:25.000And those profits are not derived from the people that are activated or involved in the conflicts.
00:16:30.000Curiously, they're like sort of third parties, identifiable.
00:16:33.000You know, we say their names when we talk about it in a minute in Here's the News.
00:16:37.000It's astonishing that rationalism is presented as the entire framing for what reality and indeed the future should look like.
00:16:46.000You cannot reduce human beings to numbers.
00:16:48.000You cannot reduce us to individual objects.
00:16:50.000You cannot reduce our interests to just points on a chart.
00:16:55.000If we ignore this complexity, this ulterior realm, difficult to access, discern, and yet defining for us all, you end up in a future where some human beings like these people, they're only 60 IQ, wipe them out.
00:17:49.000It's because we all know subjectively what it feels like when we're lied about, when we're wounded, when we're hurt, when we're betrayed, when people Let us down when you can't communicate with one another, when your heart gets broken, when you lose someone you love.
00:18:02.000Our rights are derived from the idea that we're sacred, even if that isn't the word that you use.
00:18:09.000Grant, in Robots Rights, shows that we've become detached, actually, from essence and meaning.
00:18:35.000In a sense, what you end up with is a state that primarily enforces the will of powerful establishments, uses the idea that all of us have rights over our own property to beguile us into a state where we can't Properly see and observe that what's happening is the interests of the powerful are always being met and that we are the perennial turkeys voting for Christmas.
00:18:55.000Robots are intelligent beings and deserve to be treated with respect and dignity.
00:19:00.000Well, let's get there with humans first, then we'll move on to robots.
00:19:03.000Are you capable of causing people harm?
00:19:46.000Another step in the direction of dystopia, whilst I recognise, of course, that technology In the right hands, with the right agenda, undergirded by the right ideology is a beautiful, magnificent miracle.
00:19:58.000The realization of the ingenuity of people like Einstein and the many genii working in fields of medicine and technology now that bring us and grant us healing and relief and advancement and of course the technology that we use now to communicate.
00:20:12.000But when the ideology behind it is an ideology of authoritarianism and exploitation, the results will reflect that.
00:20:19.000Of course the Israel-Palestine conflict is more complex to discuss now than ever.
00:20:25.000Here we focus on one aspect of this that I think we can all agree on.
00:21:02.000With tensions escalating in the war between Israel and Hamas, surely no one will be cynical enough to exploit this situation in order to make a profit.
00:21:12.000You wouldn't expect, for example, members of US Congress to be investing in military-related stocks, would you?
00:21:21.000Hello there you Awakening Wonders, thanks for joining us on our voyage to truth and freedom at a time where it is necessary more than ever to look at the world through different eyes and importantly support independent media where you can so we can have complex conversations about complex matters and review and analyse potential solutions together.
00:21:40.000Certainly no one can claim to have answers with something as complicated as this, but it's
00:21:43.000vital that you don't only believe what you read or see in legacy media with something so complex
00:21:49.000as this. So if you can support us, support us. Remember we're on Rumble every day. Download
00:21:54.000the app, you get notifications and we can continue to stay in contact with you and learn from you.
00:21:59.000And I pray to God, develop solutions together that are beneficial for us individually,
00:22:03.000collectively, globally, if such a thing were ever possible. Please make it revealed now.
00:22:08.000Obviously with something as sensitive as this you wouldn't imagine that there will be anyone anywhere in the world looking to exploit such a sensitive and awful situation from which nobody really clearly benefits if you ask me to be looking for opportunities.
00:22:22.000And yet that is precisely what's happening.
00:22:25.000Military experts are predicting record profits for weapons manufacturers, as always happens in war.
00:22:34.000But you certainly wouldn't expect, would you, members of the United States Congress to be investing in defense-related stocks.
00:22:41.000Wouldn't that undermine everything they've been telling you about Let's have a look at Joe Biden, as you might imagine, pledging support and claiming that this is a simple moral issue.
00:22:48.000to regard this conflict, all of the grandstanding and moralising and the sympathetic I stand with,
00:22:54.000or we must be pro, how does that look in light of the fact that members of Congress have been
00:23:00.000investing in military-related stocks? Let's have a look at Joe Biden, as you might imagine,
00:23:06.000pledging support and claiming that this is a simple moral issue.
00:23:09.000My administration's support for Israel's security is rock solid and unwavering.
00:23:19.000This is not a moment for any party hostile to Israel to exploit these attacks to seek advantage.
00:23:26.000Or, perhaps you could argue anyone to exploit these attacks, from any angle.
00:23:30.000Surely, with all of the complexities that must be considered in this long historic matter, you wouldn't expect it to be reduced to an exercise in profiteering, particularly not by people that are making decisions with regard to the military aspect of this encounter, would you?
00:23:45.000Well, you probably would if you have access to independent media, because you will be well informed about the machinations of government, and in spite of its rhetoric, what its priorities As tensions escalate between Israel and the Hamas group, it has been revealed US congressional leaders have been making some strategic investment moves into military-related stocks.
00:24:12.000To consider that when most of us are thinking, where do you find a unifying truth in this complex and horrific matter that there are people in Congress paid for by you, elected to serve you, that are right now going, this might be a good time to invest in Lockheed Martin.
00:24:29.000I think we're going to be selling a lot of missiles.
00:24:32.000For starters, defense company General Dynamics has witnessed a surge in purchases.
00:24:38.000Defense stocks often become attractive active during times of geopolitical tension.
00:24:42.000And whilst that might be plain common sense, it's also an indicator that there
00:24:46.000are systemic problems that might need to be addressed.
00:24:50.000If foreign policy crises and military crises are able to be exploited not just by the weapons industry,
00:24:55.000which is bad enough, but also by politicians and Congress people, that might be something that needs to be examined.
00:25:01.000If health crises are beneficial to pharmaceutical companies, if energy crises are beneficial to energy companies,
00:25:07.000all the while punitive to ordinary people all around the world, isn't that an opportunity
00:25:13.000for systemic analysis, revolution, reformation, and change?
00:25:17.000Tell me which one in the chat and the comments.
00:25:19.000However, what's even more intriguing is the sectoral split between Republicans and Democrats.
00:25:24.000A substantial number of Republicans have shown a keen interest in the energy sector.
00:25:28.000Heavyweights like ExxonMobil, Devon Energy and Chevron are clearly the favourites.
00:25:33.000On the other side of the aisle, Democrats seem to be playing the long game, focusing on the cybersecurity sector with acquisitions in firms like Fortinet, according to insights by At Unusual Wales on X.
00:25:44.000There are so many complex issues, it's churlish and rude, I think, to reduce this long, historical, painful, agonizing conflict into platitudes or tribalism.
00:25:53.000There are enough people that will do that.
00:25:55.000Perhaps we could focus together on the things that we can uniformly agree are wrong.
00:25:59.000And I would say people in Congress buying stocks exploitatively is wrong and could be banned.
00:26:04.000But who would ever vote for such a thing?
00:26:06.000Who would ever propose such a legislation?
00:26:08.000Usually what happens at times like this is because there is a unified public opinion, They push through a bill to invest more in defence and then maybe tack on an idea like, we'll also invest in more weapons for Ukraine as well.
00:26:19.000Major defence stocks added around $20 billion in market cap yesterday following the events.
00:26:25.000What's interesting about this is this is relatively mainstream media just reporting on this matter.
00:26:29.000Plainly, observably, makes you wonder, wow, if we know all of this, why are we not able to make different decisions together?
00:26:35.000Over the last three days, so Northrop Grumman and Lockheed among those still trending higher.
00:26:40.000These types of moves are not uncommon during times of war.
00:26:44.000Now a similar surge happened when Russia invaded Ukraine and you're looking at some of the movement that we're seeing today in Lockheed Martin up just about 1% as well as Boeing, RTX.
00:26:54.000And Northrop also once again moving to the upside.
00:26:57.000Now these gains coming on, like we just said, a strong day for the stocks.
00:27:03.000Northrop coming off its biggest daily gain that we've seen since 2020.
00:27:09.000The truth is, if it's someone's job to make those kind of investments, I imagine they would make those kind of investments.
00:27:14.000But similarly true, is if it's your job to run America, to represent the people of America, and you are also making those kind of investments, I would say that's an indication that your moral character is perhaps not appropriate for government.
00:27:27.000But the thought process is just in terms of the amount of spending, what's going to be allocated towards some of these defense companies given the conflict and the risk that this war could widen over in the Middle East.
00:27:39.000That's why we're seeing the reaction play out in chairs today.
00:27:41.000Yeah, and from a technical perspective too, it'd be interesting to look at this for anyone who's trying to figure out if some of the spikes that take place after there are international conflicts or events of international conflict.
00:27:53.000How can you have Have people involved in making decisions about American military expenditure similarly investing in companies that will benefit from American military expenditure?
00:28:04.000That is one of the areas of corruption that I think we can all agree on or be addressed.
00:28:09.000It's the kind of bias that will lead to escalation in any conflict, not even specifically this one, because it remains profitable.
00:28:21.000Firstly and foremostly, it should be illegal to trade in stocks and shares in industries that you regulate or in any matter in which you possibly have influence.
00:28:38.000Complex though those conversations remain in the geopolitical climate that we are currently in, whether that's the Russia-Ukraine conflict or this current escalating situation in the Middle East.
00:28:48.000How can we have a good faith open conversation at the level of media or the level of politics when plainly a significant factor is the opportunity to exploit these situations for weaponry profit and energy profit?
00:28:59.000Wouldn't it be good to at least remove that so there was one less complex component that exacerbated this already dreadful situation?
00:29:07.000Where some of the defensive names continue to cyclically in this instance here gets some type of attention from investors since and I kind of point back to early 2022 when we were thinking about the initiation of the invasion of Ukraine by Russia and what took place there.
00:29:24.000Shares jumped by about 25% in that instance.
00:29:27.000It's held on since then to the majority of that move since beginning of 2022.
00:29:31.000Remember, these companies that see these benefits from these conflicts spend money on lobbying.
00:29:38.000They spend billions collectively on lobbying.
00:29:41.000Lobbying simply means jostling, cajoling, biasing, influencing, prejudicing the direction of political expenditure.
00:29:51.000Taxpayer dollars will be flowing in this direction.
00:29:54.000Legislation, regulation, policy that prevents the continuation of that profit will be averred, ignored, reduced, diluted.
00:30:03.000You don't have to have strong views, and many people understandably do, on this complex, horrific conflict to recognise that this is a problem.
00:30:13.000And remember, systemic problems are where we have to focus our attention if we actually want to change the world.
00:30:18.000What institutionally is wrong with the media?
00:30:21.000What institutionally is wrong with the government?
00:30:23.000What I mean by institutionally is you could change the individuals within it.
00:30:26.000You could even change the parties within it.
00:30:28.000And the problem wouldn't change because the true power and the true interests are ulterior to the level that can be organised by public opinion or democracy or discourse or debate.
00:30:39.000That's why you need independent media like this, because complex and difficult though it is, we must remain in communication with one another.
00:30:46.000Those of us that are not directly affected by the horrific events that are taking place have a different type of duty, a duty of respect.
00:32:04.000That's what one defence executive said at a London arms conference last month.
00:32:08.000The very fact that there are arms conferences is perhaps an indication that our global ideology perhaps needs some amendment if historic conflicts are going to have any hope, any hope at all, of resolution.
00:32:19.000I was at the arms conference and no one had any ideas that didn't lead to selling more arms.
00:32:24.000It was almost as if the whole thing, the whole system, was geared towards selling arms.
00:32:32.000That was the wrong place to go for a solution.
00:32:34.000And what the stock market reflected on Monday as Israel blockaded and bombarded the Gaza Strip in response to Hamas's weekend attack that killed hundreds of Israelis.
00:32:43.000There is nothing but prayer and love that I'm able to offer In response to such a horrible piece of text and a horrible piece of information.
00:32:51.000Fox Business reported that shares of General Dynamics, which makes submarines and combat vehicles, rose the most since March 2020 when it gained over 9%.
00:33:01.000Lockheed Martin's stock jump Monday was the biggest for the US's largest defense contractor On a non-earnings day since March 2020, narrowly topping the gains it notched immediately after Russia launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine, Forbes noted.
00:33:15.000Northrop Grumman shares also had their best day since 2020.
00:33:19.000If you were an investor, if you are a trader, even if you are an ordinary person who dabbles in financial matters, the fact is that it would be sensible, expedient, wise, frugal, fiduciary action to invest in these companies at this time.
00:33:34.000And doesn't that suggest that we've entered a moral space that is baffling, bedazzling, bewitching, and bewildering?
00:33:42.000Because if there is any action that can be taken in this time that's beneficial for a personal and financial perspective, a war that's being fought territorially, on spiritual values, or at least religious edicts, is somewhat out of line with the direction of power and finance.
00:33:59.000Shouldn't this financial component at least somehow be ameliorated, omitted, amended?
00:34:07.000Because I recognize that so much of what's happening is impossible to resolve without a degree in history, a deep understanding of ethics, a willingness to think the unthinkable, open-heartedness, transcendence of personal values, tribalism, deep understandable pain.
00:34:22.000I mean, this at least Could be addressed.
00:34:25.000Commenting on the bloodshed in Israel and Gaza over the past few days, Samir Samana, senior global market strategist at Wells Fargo Investment Institute, told Market Watch that, as countries need to replenish their weapons, we do think defence companies will do very well.
00:34:40.000Sometimes I look at this and feel incredible despair and that there may not be a way out for us without almost inconceivable personal and global change.
00:34:47.000But over at Wells Fargo, they can see the bright side of all of this horror and death.
00:34:52.000Less than two months after Russia's invasion last year, William Hartung, a senior research fellow at the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, highlighted how such conflicts benefit the arms industry, writing that the war will indeed be a bonanza for the likes of Raytheon and Lockheed Martin.
00:35:07.000We can't bring you complex independent reporting without our sponsors and partners.
00:35:30.000Cell phones go down for hundreds of reasons, but satellite phones, like this guy, will always work because you're carrying your own personal cell tower with you everywhere you go.
00:35:39.000Does that mean it's more hard to trace you?
00:35:42.000Anyone with a satellite phone in the affected areas of Hawaii, the Nevada desert, like a burning man, would have a way to communicate with friends and family and emergency services.
00:36:02.000Do walkie-talkies like kids, like in the film Big, when they tour across the alley till Tom Hanks became a big person because of that machine.
00:36:09.000Yeah, it's got confusing already, that bloody film.
00:36:11.000I still don't I don't know what that message is!
00:36:13.000And those guys know how to keep their business quiet.
00:36:30.000You don't need the old activation fee.
00:36:32.000Visit sat123.com or you can call on your normal spy phone 866-643-0609.
00:36:39.000This service is only applicable, I'm sorry to tell you, if you're in the US, which is a shame because I currently am not and I want one of these things.
00:36:47.000Okay, let's get back to this difficult story about how we could make small changes that might make the world a little better and then communicate them so that people didn't know that's what we were planning.
00:36:56.000Last December in Forbes, Hartung warned against using the Russia-Ukraine war to permanently expand the weapons industry.
00:37:02.000Plans that have been floated so far include building new weapons factories, dramatically boosting production of ammunition, anti-tank weapons and other systems, and easing oversight of weapons procurement.
00:37:14.000People don't want someone peering at them when they're trying to sell weapons.
00:37:17.000These changes will come at a cost that over time will run into tens of billions of dollars above current spending plans and possibly more, much more.
00:37:24.000At a time when the Pentagon budget is soaring towards $1 trillion per year and debates about how to respond to the challenges posed by Russia and China are front and centre, it is more important than ever to make an independent assessment of the best path forward.
00:37:38.000Ideally, this would involve objective analysis by unbiased experts and policy makers grounded in a vigorous public conversation about how best to defend the country, but more often than not, Special interests override the national interests in decisions on how much to spend on the Pentagon and how those funds should be allocated.
00:37:55.000Even in this incredibly sensitive issue you have seen bombastic rhetoric designed to make you feel honesty and transparency and yet simultaneously it's impossible to ignore that very powerful industries that lobby and spend a lot of money are profiting and people in Congress who are entrusted with the moral heart of a nation are plainly acting in self-interest.
00:38:17.000With so much that is difficult to discuss, with so much that is uncertain, let us plainly state that that kind of corruption should be ended.
00:38:25.000One practice that introduces bias into the shaping of defence policy is the revolving door between the US government and the weapons industry.
00:38:31.000The movement of retired senior officials from the Pentagon and the military services into the arms industry is a long-standing practice that raises serious questions about the appearance and reality of conflicts of interest.
00:38:41.000Mostly because employing well-connected ex-military officers can give weapons makers enormous, unwarranted influence over the process of determining the size and shape of the Pentagon budget.
00:38:53.000A 2021 report by the Government Accountability Office found that 1,700 senior government officials had taken positions in the arms industry over a five-year period, an average of well over 300 a year.
00:39:02.000And a new report from the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft found that this practice is particularly pronounced among the top generals and admirals.
00:39:09.000In the past five years, over 80% of retired four-star generals and admirals, 26 of 32, went on to work in the arms sector as board members, advisors, lobbyists or consultants.
00:39:21.000A statistic of that nature is an indication that, to a degree, these are not separate institutions.
00:39:26.000You have people in Congress investing in stocks and shares that they are in a position to influence the trajectory of.
00:39:32.000You have a weapons industry that invests significantly in directing and biasing the policy of an entire nation.
00:39:39.000You have senior officials in very powerful positions within incredibly powerful military organizations that have financial ties to the tune of 86% of them working within the weapons industry.
00:39:49.000These, again, during a very complex time, are problems that could easily be resolved and solved.
00:39:55.000The reason they're not being solved is because this is part of a system that, while it is painful for so many people, even those of you that are not directly involved, it's profitable for the people that matter.
00:40:06.000And you have to ask yourself the question, No matter what they say, what is their moral position?
00:40:11.000And is their moral position the platform that directs their action?
00:40:15.000Or is it possible there are other intentions and other agenda?
00:40:18.000You can ask that broadly about geopolitical conflicts.
00:40:21.000I understand as much as someone as abstracted as I am.
00:40:24.000That this is a situation that almost interrogating and making inquiry of is too painful for people directly involved to countenance.
00:40:31.000They simply want support for their own perspective.
00:40:34.000But what we have to look at in addition to understanding those deep, deep sensitivities that are beyond my comprehension is that if there is an institutional and profitable component to global conflicts, global conflicts are unlikely to be resolved.
00:40:47.000Let me know in the chat and the comments how you feel about that.
00:40:49.000The most recent batch of retired four-star generals, they're not cookies, are not only seeking employment with the big contractors, they're also branching out to work for small and mid-sized companies that focus on cutting-edge technology, like next-generation drones, artificial intelligence and cyber security.
00:41:06.000That's where international conflict and domestic conflict might conflate.
00:41:10.000Have you noticed that conditions appear to be moving in the direction of population control that has become increasingly militaristic?
00:41:32.000If the past is any guide, this new influx of former military officials into the arms sector will distort Pentagon spending priorities and promote higher military budgets than would be the case absent their influence on behalf of their corporate employers.
00:41:45.000As documented, there are numerous examples of senior military officials who have advocated for dysfunctional weapons while in government and then gone on to work for the companies that produce those systems.
00:41:54.000In addition, former military officers have played central roles in preventing the Pentagon from divesting itself of weapons it no longer wants or needs.
00:42:03.000The prevalence of this kind of activity is hard to track because of the limited information available about what retired military officers do once they join the arms industry.
00:42:11.000Those military officials were involved in a plan for a surprise party for your birthday and you ruined it.
00:42:17.000There's too much at stake both in taxpayer dollars and our future security to let conflicts of interest and special interest politics shape the Pentagon budget.
00:42:25.000The time for Congress to act to reduce the influence of the revolving door is now.
00:42:29.000Here's some information posted on X by Unusual Wales about the number of Democrats and Republicans investing in oil, energy and military industrial complex companies.
00:42:39.000He posted So here's every US politician in Congress who currently holds stock positions that will directly benefit from the war in the Middle East.
00:42:46.000And I will tell you now, it is not a very short list.
00:42:50.000I mean, one would be too many, but it's more than one.
00:42:55.000So baffling, terrifying and awful, though this conflict is and has been for a very long while, let us focus on what we can agree on together.
00:43:04.000People in Congress should not be able to invest in companies that will benefit from military conflict.
00:43:09.000Let's have a government that's there to serve the people, certainly the domestic population, if it's possible the population of the world, that have an intention and a trajectory towards beneficial outcomes that are not biased by or in any way guided by personal interest.
00:43:25.000Only then may we move forward in this new geopolitical climate, in this state of omni-crisis, where everywhere you look there are wars in Europe that could escalate into Armageddon, potential wars in Southeast China that could escalate into the apocalypse.
00:43:40.000And in the Middle East, a region historically troubled by the intervention of imperial and colonial powers, including Britain.
00:43:47.000While these conflicts continue, there should be no opportunity for profit.
00:43:50.000It should simply be a complex, difficult, agonising, painful matter for all those involved.
00:43:56.000And those of us that are not directly involved should do everything we can to bring about a peaceful solution, even if it is, in our own hearts, futile, empty and shallow, as that might sound in such a painful time for so many of you.
00:44:27.000Surely we can agree that people that are in positions of power oughtn't be profiting from this situation.
00:44:32.000Let me know in the chat and the comments.
00:44:35.000We're gonna leave now, so click the link in the description and join us on Rumble.
00:44:39.000Remember, we premiere every day, 12, Eastern Time.
00:44:44.000Become an Awakened Wonder to get access to more content from us.
00:44:48.000Meditations, five ideas that will change the world, meaningful ideas, successful communities that have broken out of this system, deep spiritual readings, new ideas and arcane wisdom fused together, individual awakening, community reformation and even revolution.
00:45:06.000That's what we're going to be discussing.
00:45:08.000And we've got a guest that could join us in those spaces easily.
00:45:11.000David Zweig is a journalist for SilentLunch.net.
00:45:14.000He's the author of Invisibles and Abundance of Caution.
00:45:17.000He's one of the Twitter Files journalists who helped lift the lid on the suppression of information that was taking place during the pandemic and the deep state intervention in public discourse that's come to define our age.
00:45:33.000This is a conversation, or a subject at least, that we discuss continually on our channel.
00:45:38.000We talk a lot about studies that reveal that during the pandemic period the information we were given was biased and it's extraordinary how the biases often have a common trajectory.
00:45:52.000It seems that many of the narratives on masks, lockdowns and other Covid measures were Sure.
00:46:08.000But specifically what I had written about not that long ago was a study that was published out of Imperial College of London, where they did something called a challenge study, which is they purposefully infected participants in the study with SARS-CoV-2 to give them
00:46:38.000And what they found was something really fascinating, which is that a very, very small percentage of them,
00:46:45.000it was something like 7% of the viral emissions from these participants occurred before they had symptoms.
00:46:52.000So what this means is that, and what I write about in my article on the study is that Much of the pandemic narrative was that every person walking around could be this unknowingly one person WMD that each of us could potentially infect a zillion other people and we didn't even know it.
00:47:14.000And the study doesn't disprove any notion that there are some people who may not have symptoms who could still infect others.
00:47:20.000But what it found was that it's incredibly rare that people without symptoms even had the ability to infect anyone else.
00:47:30.000And this really, as I explained in the piece, really kind of turns upside down much of the justification that was given behind all of these measures that were imposed upon the citizenry during the pandemic.
00:47:43.000Because they all were based on the idea that we better put everyone at home, make everyone wear a mask, make everyone quarantine, etc., etc., because we don't know who might be infecting other people.
00:47:54.000And what this study found is that that really seems like it's highly unlikely that that was actually the case.
00:48:01.000To try and offer some kind of good-faith argument in a bad-faith world, is it possible they simply didn't know that, even though I've heard elsewhere that there were forms of testing available that demonstrated that asymptomatic people were not contagious?
00:48:17.000It's not the first time I've heard this.
00:48:19.000Other studies have reached comparable conclusions.
00:48:22.000Is it possible that it wasn't like this?
00:48:24.000The worst case scenario is that coronavirus was used to pilot measures that would legitimize authoritarianism and prime various populations to be managed and controlled.
00:48:38.000It also piloted the ability to censor social media spaces in a new media environment where dissent is more possible likely mobile than ever how much can you can control dissent and if it were to pilot those things and of course I'm not suggesting it was then I would say that they would have observed there is a pretty effective level of control that's able to be asserted people generally speaking were compliant although a lot of people weren't generally speaking they were able to control the narrative although there are sort of significant events and obviously over time
00:49:12.000People's perceptions of COVID have changed but yet more curiously a lot of people don't seem to be acknowledging the significance and distance between where we were when we began this period and where we are now i.e.
00:49:26.000Most people think, yeah, but they didn't know that then.
00:49:29.000And oh, well, people don't say, generally speaking, see this as an epochal event that defines new techniques
00:49:39.000So where on that spectrum should we be, David?
00:49:43.000Well, I'm reluctant to conjecture about the motives or about why they did these things.
00:49:51.000But what I feel very confident doing is talking about the evidence that I found
00:49:56.000and what I've been writing about for years related to, to me, the biggest thing, Russell,
00:50:02.000The degree of certainty within which pronouncements were made by public health officials throughout the pandemic, starting from the very beginning with these projections from the models, many from Imperial College and other places, that were wildly inaccurate.
00:50:18.000And so I don't know whether they were purposefully, you know, I'm not gonna suggest that necessarily, but what we know is that much of the information was based on modeling, whether it's the amount of deaths that were going to occur, and then specific to the notion of asymptomatic transmission or pre-symptomatic transmission, which would be before one gets symptoms when they're infected, is those were also based on modeling.
00:50:45.000We were told somewhere between 30 and 50% There were studies showing that 30-50% of people who were infected could potentially infect others, but people who didn't have symptoms.
00:51:01.000This was based on modeling and these sort of epidemiological studies.
00:51:05.000And what's powerful about this study, and by the way, as a side note, what's interesting is Almost no one has covered this.
00:51:11.000The little bit of news coverage on this study has been related to some other findings, which are interesting and important, related to the super spreader idea that there were some people in the study who seemed to project far more virus than others, but they ignored this element that I'm talking about, the tiny, tiny percent, because this upends the whole thing.
00:51:31.000So what's powerful about this study is it was an actual biological study on people, rather than modeling studies with conjecture.
00:51:41.000And you were asking before, Russell, about, you know, how much do we know early on?
00:51:45.000You know, at least on this specific point, I've also written about another study that's a really nice dovetail to this, and it came out of Stanford.
00:51:52.000They developed a test, a very, a specific type of PCR test that actually, that not only could tell if someone was infected or not, but it could tell whether they were contagious or infectious.
00:52:03.000The regular PCR test that hundreds of millions of people, you know, were taking could only tell you if you had the virus in your body.
00:52:09.000It told you nothing necessarily about whether you can infect other people.
00:52:13.000Stanford developed this test, I believe it was as early as the summer of 2020.
00:52:18.000They talked about it with other institutions.
00:52:22.000So these two tests, the Stanford test and this challenge study from Imperial College, really, I think, make a very persuasive case that the narrative we were told and the justification for imposing these measures on society as a whole, Rather than following the sort of classic advice of, if you're sick, stay home, we did this other thing that had, you know, tremendous consequences.
00:52:47.000And it's very astonishing to me, but I've been astonished repeatedly over the last three and a half years, how little coverage there's been.
00:52:56.000I'm not aware of anyone else covering this specific point other than me.
00:52:59.000And to me, this is a complete bombshell.
00:53:05.000The distinction between biological studies and modelling being that biological means human subjects, certainly in this case, and modelling means a bunch of data is put into a computer and it sort of predicts what might happen.
00:53:18.000Is that sort of a layman's way of understanding that?
00:53:23.000And much of what we were told, again, were these projections where people use sophisticated formulas to model, which means to estimate what they think is going to happen.
00:53:32.000But as we know, models are built upon the inputs.
00:53:35.000It depends what little widgets you put into the computer is going to dictate what comes out.
00:53:43.000And there's a hard limit to the accuracy of a model because it's built very much on the subjective choices made by the modelers and on limited information versus you have this PCR test out of Stanford and you have this challenge study where they weren't using formulas, but they actually looked at the biological markers in people.
00:54:05.000So it's an entirely different, when you look at the hierarchy of evidence, this is entirely different.
00:54:09.000So although this is a small study, and you know, every study has its limitations, I think it's incredibly important that they were looking at biological markers rather than just taking a guess.
00:54:19.000And lo and behold, it appears that the guesswork that was happening was very off base relative to what these biological tests are showing.
00:54:28.000When was that test conducted again, please?
00:54:32.000Well, the Stanford test began, I think, as early as the summer of 2020, and then it took them quite a while to actually run their study with it.
00:54:40.000But people knew that this could be done, this specific type of PCR test.
00:54:44.000And I spoke with several of the authors of that study, who are the researchers who worked on it, and I kept pressing them.
00:54:51.000I'm like, but didn't you talk to other people?
00:55:03.000And they said, we shared the information with other academic institutions, and they're just, for reasons I don't know, it just wasn't taken up.
00:55:14.000And this would have had a dramatic effect on what we knew.
00:55:17.000Instead of making a child stay home for two weeks, they could have said, boom, take this test, Okay, according to our specific test here, you are not contagious.
00:56:12.000We believe in freedom, your freedom, while legislating and at least regulating maximum levels of authority in some cases, and in this case, unprecedented levels of authority.
00:56:23.000We've never had shut down nightlife, shut down restaurants, shut down football, shut down everything.
00:56:31.000The origins of the virus, of course, are themselves subject to considerable controversy, where most people now are erring on the side of it came from the place where it was discovered, where there was a lab that was studying viruses of that nature.
00:56:43.000It seems extraordinary it's taken so long to even be able to publicly say that.
00:56:48.000And throughout the pandemic, it appears that information like, you know, the Stanford study 2020 that has a test that could immediately end the idea that if you're, you know, if you're asymptomatic people or pre-symptomatic people couldn't be out and about.
00:57:02.000People that have even got COVID but are shown to be non-contagious, they could be out and about.
00:58:29.000How did it take place and how is it going to be prevented from taking place again?
00:58:33.000Because it seems really likely that in fact it's already kind of happening.
00:58:39.000What possible thing could that be telling you about David?
00:58:43.000What is it that because that was an alarm that wasn't a cook.
00:58:46.000I had that set to go off right at this moment when you Now listen, I've been very polite so far.
00:58:53.000This is the bit where the whole conversation turns on a dime.
00:58:56.000So I guess, yeah, like, you know, I would love to talk about some of the sort of the impact of some of the measures on young people, their psychological impact.
00:59:04.000But, you know, I'm guessing that you're motivated to continue to study this because you think something extraordinary has happened.
00:59:11.000I've talked about this quite a bit with some friends recently that I'm completely sick of thinking and writing about and researching stuff related to the pandemic.
00:59:22.000And yet at the same time, This is such a profound event that, you know, there are people who get a PhD and study, you know, the sartorial habits of monks during medieval times.
00:59:36.000There are people who have all these niche things.
00:59:39.000There should be some people, you know, studying what happened, deconstructing the pandemic.
00:59:45.000For a very long time to come, considering, you know, all the other things that people look into.
00:59:50.000And it's such a fascinating lens through which to view so many other things in society.
00:59:58.000And, you know, one of the things is, you know, sort of the broader idea is thinking about information.
01:00:04.000And, you know, as one of the people who worked on the Twitter files and also some of my work in general during the pandemic, as someone who sort of has had a foot in two different worlds where I wrote for a lot of legacy media outlets for a number of years.
01:00:21.000And seeing what type of narratives were acceptable, what type of articles were acceptable to write, and which ones were sort of outside.
01:00:31.000And that same dynamic was also seen within the public health community repeatedly, because I somehow was able to publish a lot of articles that ran Contrary to what the narrative was, but I still had them in pretty mainstream publications.
01:00:47.000It was a very unusual place for me to be in.
01:00:50.000And what happened was, from very early on, I had doctors at prestigious institutions, epidemiologists, immunologists, all these different people reaching out to me privately saying, I agree with you, but I'm afraid to talk about this publicly.
01:01:08.000You know, this started happening in the spring of 2020, and it's something that I still think about on a regular basis, and that we can see the echoes of that in all these other areas.
01:01:18.000So I think, you know, even yourself, that, you know, working as an independent person on independent platforms, there is something really important and fascinating going on with our media environment.
01:01:30.000And that, you know, as you well know, certainly in America, and I'm sure it's the case, you know, elsewhere, there is a relatively very small clique of people, most of whom went to the same college, you know, the same universities, they share the same thoughts, they go to the same cocktail parties, who all work at these small number of media outlets.
01:01:52.000So there is this lack of diversity in thought and diversity in experience.
01:01:58.000And it shows in how the media covers different issues.
01:02:01.000And it shows also, same thing within the public health community.
01:02:04.000Most of those people are within a very narrow type of socioeconomic experience as adults now.
01:02:12.000And all of that matters in how studies are covered or not covered by the media.
01:02:18.000And all of that matters in how public health people talked about things.
01:02:21.000And to your point about this kind of broader authoritarianism, It may even have been well-intended, I think, by many of these people.
01:02:31.000But nevertheless, this specific type of life experience, if you're making a hundred or a couple hundred grand a year, that's going to affect how you think about things versus the working class people who still Had to go out.
01:02:45.000They were bad because they weren't able to just stay locked at home or the children who are in homes that weren't able to do Zoom school or, you know, and the parents weren't able to look after them.
01:02:54.000All of these things were very class related.
01:02:57.000And the irony to me is that at least, you know, in America, what they would call the left, which is typically associated with as being the party of people most concerned with people in the working class and the less privileged.
01:03:10.000In fact, that same people on the left were the ones who imposed these measures that hurt the working class, that hurt underprivileged people the most.
01:03:19.000Well, my personal feeling, and I recognize that that is not the same as science, Is that that class has become ultra-conservative, and while the rhetoric is a liberal rhetoric, i.e.
01:03:38.000socially progressive kind of rhetoric, and I would say often ideas that don't require a lot of sacrifice or meaningful economic change.
01:03:48.000And if you are conservative, if ultimately you want to keep your 100 to 200 grand a year job, if you want to continue to be part of a sort of a media cartel or perhaps that's a needlessly pejorative way of framing that, if you want to remain in That kind of lifestyle in that kind of the world you described.
01:04:19.000I want to challenge the establishment.
01:04:21.000That's not what that class of people believe.
01:04:24.000Clearly, plainly, evidently, we can see that now from the type of information that they convey, the way that they willingly support any new emergent crisis, and in this poly-crisis time, each of these ideas suddenly occupies the center of the frame, you won't hear debate, you won't hear conversation, you won't see investigation.
01:04:47.000Like you said with the stuff that we've discussed already, there's no appetite to investigate that, convey it.
01:04:54.000So what I feel is that we're living in a peculiar time when it comes for the ways even that we classify cultural identity because people that think of themselves as progressive and purport to be progressive are Deeply conservative when it comes to that's most basic effects.
01:05:11.000They don't want things to change They don't want that they might want some superficial things to shift but when it comes to actual personal experience They don't really want anything to change now this idea of authoritarianism and the management of information, you know notably in the obviously censorship, but also the way that language is selected is a part of your work and I thought that you've written about it and recently was that where did you write about that? Is it you
01:05:37.000want sub stack mate? Or where are you?
01:05:38.000That's right. Yeah. Well, my newsletter sub stack, it's just
01:05:42.000at silent lunch.net. And that's where I've been doing pretty
01:05:48.000much all of my journalism now, with the exception of a few other places like the free press. And what was interesting
01:05:56.000to me is, regardless of one's views about the Israeli Palestinian conflict, what's interesting is, this is what I
01:06:02.000just wrote about a couple days ago is I noticed that with.
01:06:06.000With almost no exception, all of the elite American media has referred to Hamas as militants rather than as terrorists.
01:06:17.000And look, there's a lot of gray area regarding violent actions and how they are going to be defined or not defined.
01:06:25.000But when you look at the actual definitions from the U.S.
01:06:28.000government, from the FBI, in the penal code, and Canada is the same thing as well, the European Council, The actions did meet.
01:06:37.000It's going after civilians, you know, doing violent acts to achieve a political end.
01:07:15.000Again, someone may disagree, but, you know, how this should be framed.
01:07:19.000But to me, what's interesting is the sort of uniformity amongst a lot of these people.
01:07:25.000And then the flip side of that is, why is it that during the pandemic, these legacy media outlets parroted the party line from the CDC, from Anthony Fauci, from public health officials, with a very rare exception, they would just amplify and project whatever the CDC told them.
01:08:15.000I mean, I suppose you're saying that there are events and there has appeared to be almost instantaneous coordination and shared language.
01:08:28.000Perhaps a less incendiary subject is around the pandemic again, the response to Joe Rogan saying I took ivermectin.
01:08:39.000Everywhere, horse-paced, everywhere, with total uniformity.
01:08:43.000So, again, it's possible to talk about what is perhaps the most contentious and difficult subject to discuss in world events and, God, I start to think, world history, actually.
01:08:53.000And now, with this being coupled with the cultural environment that has been the last five, ten years, the possibility of having a conversation that's oriented towards solutions doesn't seem very... it doesn't seem there's much
01:09:11.000appetite on either side to try and find a way to resolve even the most immediate consequences
01:09:18.000of this. So what do you think... do you think that the way that the choice
01:09:23.000of the word militant or the choice of the word horse paste or you know
01:09:26.000that or indeed you know any apparently coordinated media event where you see
01:09:31.000the same reporting everywhere with significant corollaries.
01:09:39.000Are you aware of, for example, the Trusted News Initiative where numerous global news organizations acknowledge that their primary enemy or competition, perhaps, is the independent media world rather than each other?
01:09:53.000What do you think is behind it, David?
01:09:56.000Well, I think they actually are fairly out in the open with some of these things.
01:10:01.000Some of the descriptions I was reading in researching this recent piece, that when different news outlets talk about their style guides, every news outlet has a style guide for different words or how they're going to frame or talk about different things, they refer to each other.
01:10:15.000It could be the New York Times saying, the Associated Press does blah, blah, blah.
01:10:22.000Use each other as it's sort of this circular justification.
01:10:26.000I mean, it reminds me of during the pandemic when my children's school district was making these decisions that were completely illogical, forcing them to have these plastic barriers on their desks for which there was absolutely no evidence that this, you know, had any benefit whatsoever.
01:10:43.000Each child's head was inside these sort of horse blinders.
01:11:05.000And the response was, well, the other towns near us are doing it, too.
01:11:10.000And I think, and so that to me, sort of speaks to this broader thing.
01:11:16.000There's just, perhaps human beings, you know, as a default, we tend to, to just look to the people around us as to what we're supposed to be doing.
01:11:25.000And there's a small number of people in society for whatever, for good and bad, are able to kind of step outside of that type of mindset.
01:11:35.000But that, to me, I think explains a lot, whether we're talking about pandemic actions or the media or otherwise.
01:11:41.000Mandy Cohen said that when they were deciding whether or not particular states or even regions were going to ban football, they were just doing it by sort of peer-to-peer chat.
01:11:51.000It wasn't, well, football, I suppose the risk of football is this, and based on this study or even this modeling, it was just like, are you going to ban it?
01:11:58.000Yeah, all right, we'll ban it as well.
01:12:00.000In a way it was a extraordinary social phenomenon which again I cite as an opportunity to observe how power will behave and I think is part of a broader trend where crisis are used as opportunities and this used to be a sort of analysis of the left and notably Naomi Klein's shock doctrine how Deep state American organizations CIA in particular would induce or exploit crises in Latin and Central American countries in order to Unsettle and then usurp democracy and many people claim in 2014 comparable tactics were used in Ukraine to the eventual political advantage and it's just God I suppose the more it becomes difficult to discuss these things culturally and in because of fear of censorship because of fear of approbation it's
01:12:49.000It seems like less and less likely that we're able to create spaces where, again, good-faith, open-hearted communication can take place.
01:12:58.000Now, of course, we're on Rumble with its commitment to free speech, which has led to it being the recipient of much ire.
01:13:06.000In my country, the UK, even Rumble executives They've said that they could be arrested if they continue to house or platform speech and content that the UK don't approve of as a result of new censorship laws that have been passed in this country that allow them to find platforms that don't follow their guidance.
01:13:26.000Essentially the state has managed to co-opt and find a way to manipulate big tech power and they've found ways of Cozying along quite nicely, I guess, allowing big tech to continue to monetize data through advertising and the state to utilize data through surveillance.
01:13:43.000What's the significance of platforms like Rumble and X and do you feel that we're, you know, given everything you've said about the legacy media and everything that you've said about the pandemic period, is it going to be important that platforms like X and Rumble make a commitment to free speech?
01:14:05.000By the way, there are plenty of journalists who are very smart and do excellent work at legacy media outlets.
01:14:11.000It's not to just paint this with a broad brush.
01:14:14.000It's to say that what we don't want...
01:14:17.000Is to have a small group of people deciding how the frame should be set around different narratives, whether that small group is the media or whether it's and certainly we don't want the government doing that.
01:14:28.000And as I reported and as others like Matt Taibbi and Michael Schellenberger had reported
01:14:34.000in the Twitter files when I was there and I was looking through,
01:14:37.000there was evidence in the emails that I'm reading at Twitter from the government
01:14:43.000who had basically their foot on the neck of these people at Twitter saying,
01:14:48.000these are the type of people we don't want them speaking out on your platform.
01:14:54.000This is the type of information we don't want to be said.
01:14:57.000And I won't run through the list, but we all know the items that we were told were true
01:15:03.000and turned out to not be true, whether.
01:15:08.000Whether it's from masks, the lab leak was a conspiracy theory until all of a sudden it wasn't.
01:15:13.000And then here, as we started our conversation about asymptomatic transmission, This justification for the entire sort of non-pharmaceutical interventions that occurred, that shut down society, all of these things were told with great confidence, with great certainty to the public.
01:15:32.000This is what's true with a capital T. They were said that by the government, by these different officials, and many of these social media companies went along with that and censored people who didn't fall in line with that.
01:15:44.000And the legacy media, by and large, went along with that as well.
01:15:49.000They didn't have to be forced to do it.
01:16:07.000People need to have the option of being exposed to different ideas.
01:16:13.000And by exposing people to different ideas and allowing that, I think it would enable an environment within certain professions, like public health, should there be some other large event that happens, where perhaps next time there won't be these physicians at places like Harvard and Columbia who are contacting me saying, thank you so much for writing that article that was critical of the CDC on whatever the thing is.
01:16:51.000If you download the Rumble app though and watch us there and turn on notifications, you will be notified every time we make a bit of content, not like on YouTube where it's arbitrary and simply may not happen.
01:17:01.000It's more important you support us now than ever.
01:17:03.000If you can press the red button and support us directly, then please do.
01:17:07.000But if not, it's so much more important we have your attention than anything else that you could offer us.
01:17:12.000David, what do you think about this November 14th meeting where global leaders are coming together to map a unified strategy for global pandemic preparedness, which seems like a good thing.
01:17:23.000If there's going to be a global pandemic, we should be prepared.
01:17:27.000What do you think that preparedness might look like?
01:17:30.000Might it include censorship of counter-narratives?
01:17:32.000Might it include the increase of authoritative measures?
01:17:36.000Might it be connected to the WHO's pandemic treaty where they want 5% of each nation's health budget?
01:17:46.000I mean, it's sort of, you know, meet the new boss, same as the old boss.
01:17:49.000The people who orchestrated the response during the pandemic are the same people who are now supposedly, you know, going to be orchestrating the preparedness and the plans for the next time something happens.
01:18:02.000And To me, that's emblematic of the entire problem that we're talking about here, is that during the pandemic, there was this monomaniacal focus on this one thing of trying to limit the spread of one particular virus, but they didn't take in outside voices, you know, and I've focused very much, I'm writing a book about American schools during the pandemic right now, and I've focused very much on the idea that
01:18:25.000No one was talking to, in any sort of senior level, talking to economists, talking to psychologists, talking to all sorts of people who work in other areas of society where these interventions that they were imposing We're going to affect everyone.
01:18:45.000So there's this real interconnectedness between the different things we're talking about.
01:18:49.000The idea of this specific focus on doing one thing, this kind of authoritarianism, combined with the idea of not wanting these other outside voices, bringing in different—you know, the idea that Anthony Fauci—this is one A man, one person with one perspective, who doesn't have an expertise in education, he doesn't have an expertise in the economy, he doesn't have an expertise in all these other, but yet the decisions that he was making and pushing forth, those affected all these other things.
01:19:18.000So the thing I've written about a lot is the idea that there are all sorts of second-order effects.
01:19:24.000There are, you know, just like when you take a medicine, There are potential side effects.
01:19:29.000Well, these non-pharmaceutical interventions put upon us have vast side effects, and they were woefully understudied or not thought about enough before they were put into place.
01:19:42.000And that ties into the idea of having the former prime minister of New Zealand and these other people who said, we're the one source of truth and these types of statements.
01:19:51.000All of this bundles together into kind of this broader tapestry that obviously you're well aware of, that I think has all sorts of problems associated with it.
01:20:01.000And we need to figure out a way of having more voices heard and taken seriously in all sorts of fields of endeavor.
01:20:09.000David Swag, thank you so much for your terrifying insights, you harbinger of grim doom, but with sparkling eyes and fantastic hair.
01:20:22.000You can follow David's work by going to silentlunch.net and sign up to his newsletter, which if I hadn't done, I'd be a lot less bright than I currently am as a result of David's work, and follow him on X at David Zweig.
01:20:46.000Guess who we've got on the show tomorrow?
01:20:48.000Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, who's just won a case against the Biden administration.
01:20:52.000It's one of the names you will have continually heard At the advent of the pandemic one of the first voices to criticize the way that things were going now I know it seems like it's a long way off I know it seems like it's a for the way that the way that time appears to move these days we're on this relentless hamster wheel of history there's no time
01:21:17.000We must remain able to absorb the information that we're receiving now.
01:21:22.000Bear in mind the narrative of what we've just encountered.
01:21:25.000Try to observe the apparent patterns of the powerful.
01:21:28.000It seems that centralized authoritarian measures are being introduced everywhere.
01:21:33.000And if you click the red button, the Awaken Wonders button, You get to join me, like we're doing book readings now, we're doing bible studies, we are looking at the five ideas that are most likely to change the world, whether that's cryptocurrencies, new communities, new systems of food growing, and new energy.
01:21:52.000How are we going to live beyond these systems?
01:21:55.000I want to welcome our new supporters like Vincent Vero, 2022, Freecrumble, Plum Derosa.
01:22:00.000Thank you for becoming Awakened Wonders.
01:22:02.000It means the world to me that you have risen above the fear, that you are determined to educate and evolve yourself, that you believe that change is possible, and this is where we are going to explore that change together.
01:22:13.000Join us tomorrow, not for more of the same, oh no, but for more of the different.