Stay Free - Russel Brand - July 28, 2023


“WE’RE HEADING FOR WW3?!” | Oliver Stone Goes Nuclear & Reveals Truth About Putin - Stay Free #178


Episode Stats

Length

1 hour and 4 minutes

Words per Minute

164.41861

Word Count

10,605

Sentence Count

695

Misogynist Sentences

9

Hate Speech Sentences

12


Summary

Oliver Stone joins Russell Brand to discuss his new film, Nuclear Now, and why he thinks nuclear energy is the most important technology in the world. He also talks about how he almost made a documentary with Russell Brand, and how he feels about the current state of climate change. Russell Brand is a stand-up comedian, actor, comedian, writer, and podcaster. He is the host of the podcast Stay Free With Russell Brand and is a regular contributor to the New York Times, CNN, and the BBC. He's also the director of Platoon, JFK and Snowden, and has spent over 20 hours in the company of Vladimir Putin, and now we are going to be talking about nuclear energy and its propensity to change the world, or at least the potential for it to do so. And also, although he has forgotten it, he did once make a film with me... and also... he did not remember it. So, you can see that there's a lot of movement in the water. In addition to a forensic look at nuclear energy, we'll be taking a deeper look at the "fucking news" behind one of the stories behind the news in our item, "Here's the effing news" in our piece, Here's The Effing News, No Fucking News. Here's the F effing News. Stay Free, You Awakened Wonders! Stay Free! by Russell Brand . Stay free, You're Woke, You Woke Me Up! by You're Awoke Me! by You Don't Know What? by You Can't Make It? by on Podchaser to find out more about nuclear power and nuclear energy? To find a list of our sponsorships and show-related promo codes and promo codes, go to stayfreewithrussellbrand.co/Stay Free, stay free, stay woke, you'll get a discount on our new ad-free version of Stay Free with Russell's Stay Free? to get 20% off the entire show, and get 10% off your first month of the show, plus free shipping and free shipping throughout the rest of the month, plus a free shipping offer when you sign up for VIP access to our ad-only version of the ad-posting platform, coming in next week, and we'll get an extra $5/month for a maximum of $50/month.


Transcript

00:00:00.000 So, you can see that there's a lot of movement in the water.
00:01:02.000 Hello there, you awakening wonders.
00:01:03.000 Thank you for joining me for Stay Free with Russell Brand.
00:01:06.000 In addition to a fantastic guest, we'll be taking a deeper look, a forensic look, in fact, in one of the stories behind the news in our item, Here's the News.
00:01:16.000 No, here's the effing news, but I've got a very, very exciting guest to present to you today.
00:01:21.000 The Oscar-winning director behind Platoon, JFK and Snowden, a documentary maker who spent 20 hours in the company of Vladimir Putin, and now we are going to be talking about nuclear energy and its propensity to change the world, or at least the potential for it to change the world.
00:01:36.000 His film is called Nuclear Now.
00:01:38.000 And also, although he has forgotten it, he did once make a documentary with me.
00:01:43.000 Please welcome to Stay Free with Russell Brand, Oliver Stone.
00:01:47.000 Hello, Oliver.
00:01:47.000 Thank you for joining us.
00:01:49.000 Hi Russell, nice to see you again.
00:01:51.000 You look great, by the way.
00:01:52.000 Thank you for starting with a compliment and I'd like to begin our exchange for apologizing for my broad conduct during a time when we made a documentary.
00:02:02.000 If you remember anything about it at all, it will be the moment that I had to write a letter of apology to Donald Trump.
00:02:07.000 After I met him, which you organized, because I think you were working with him because of Wall Street 2, and I did an interview with Donald, and then subsequently made a bunch of jokes with him when I was doing stand-up, and it led to a whole furore.
00:02:22.000 It was a long time ago, but nevertheless, I apologize.
00:02:25.000 I see it hasn't impeded your ability to make other documentaries, and thank you for agreeing to come on our show.
00:02:33.000 It's a pleasure.
00:02:34.000 I don't remember it that way.
00:02:35.000 I remember you as being very exciting and vital, and it was fun.
00:02:39.000 Of course, I know a lot of loonies in this business, so you didn't stand out particularly as a madman, but I see you've gotten to be what you are.
00:02:50.000 It's a genuine article.
00:02:52.000 Oh, thank you, Oliver.
00:02:52.000 That's fantastic.
00:02:54.000 Before we talk about things like censorship and Oliver Snowden, and before we delve into JFK and RFK, I'd love to talk to you about your film Nuclear Now.
00:03:04.000 Obviously, this has always been a controversial subject.
00:03:07.000 The connotations of Chernobyl, the broad fear around nuclear power is as prevalent now as it always has been.
00:03:17.000 Is that why you've chosen to make this documentary?
00:03:20.000 Well, You asked a lot of questions.
00:03:24.000 The big picture for me was climate change.
00:03:27.000 And you can't ignore it, especially since Al Gore's film An Inconvenient Truth in 2006 made me very aware of it.
00:03:36.000 And of course, his solution in that film was renewables, which were essentially sun, solar and hydro.
00:03:45.000 14 years have gone by, 15, 16 years have gone by, and the IPCC has just said that the carbon and carbon CO2 in the world and the methane gas just keeps climbing up.
00:03:56.000 So it hasn't been solved.
00:03:59.000 We're going worse and getting hotter and hotter and hotter, as you can see from the heat wave around us.
00:04:04.000 I just got back from Europe and boy, was it hot in the southern part of Europe.
00:04:08.000 Very hot.
00:04:09.000 And I just don't see it get any better.
00:04:11.000 And the world is going to get worse and in the sense of quality wise and my children and your children, grandchildren, it's all it's going to be a mess.
00:04:20.000 And I think there's going to be more tension and more Dissatisfaction, unhappiness, wars, revolution, and so forth and so on.
00:04:27.000 So, we have to do something, Russell.
00:04:29.000 This is the most important issue I think we have in the world.
00:04:32.000 Beyond anything else, beyond wars, beyond... Well, we'll talk about wars later, but this is really crucial.
00:04:38.000 So, scared out of my mind, I started to read more about it.
00:04:43.000 And I came across this book, A Bright Future, by Josh Goldstein and Stéphane Scavist, who's a Swedish nuclear scientist.
00:04:54.000 In that short book, they lay out a very common-sense plan saying that, look, go back and think about nuclear energy.
00:05:02.000 You've completely misjudged it.
00:05:04.000 You've completely mischaracterized it.
00:05:06.000 It is not what you think it is.
00:05:08.000 And it is the miracle that it originally was when Marie Curie founded in 1895.
00:05:15.000 Albert Einstein endorsed it by saying it will change everything in this world.
00:05:19.000 It will unleash new powers we don't even know of.
00:05:22.000 Except our way of thinking.
00:05:24.000 That's what he said.
00:05:25.000 It's a very interesting comment.
00:05:26.000 And it turns out to be true.
00:05:28.000 Nuclear energy was confounded from the moment it started in World War II, when we became aware of it with a bomb at Hiroshima and Nagasaki, which was an ill usage of the bomb, as you know.
00:05:39.000 Well, we don't want to talk about that history, but it was badly used.
00:05:43.000 And it scared the shit out of the whole world.
00:05:45.000 It scared the shit out of everybody.
00:05:47.000 And it really dominated our dialogue And the Cold War for many, many years.
00:05:52.000 But the truth is that nuclear energy for civilian purposes is completely the opposite.
00:05:59.000 It is not enriched uranium.
00:06:02.000 It is low-level uranium, which is which is what is processed. To make a bomb is very
00:06:09.000 difficult. It requires 80-90% enrichment.
00:06:12.000 That's why you see all these test tubes and you see all the Iranians going crazy.
00:06:16.000 Here in the civilian world, we don't have that problem. But people think it's going to blow up.
00:06:22.000 They think that a low enriched uranium is dangerous.
00:06:28.000 It is only when it explodes, and even then, as we saw in Chernobyl, it is limited in its damage.
00:06:35.000 Limited in its damage.
00:06:36.000 We explored the Chernobyl phenomenon in the film.
00:06:40.000 And you know, 50 first responders died there.
00:06:44.000 After that, there was a leak.
00:06:46.000 That went over northern Europe because there was no containment structure in the turnable reactor that which is of course been corrected.
00:06:55.000 There's now everywhere.
00:06:56.000 All the reactors have containment structures.
00:06:58.000 But that didn't.
00:06:59.000 And it leaked into northern Europe all over the place.
00:07:02.000 And they still after all those years the U.N.
00:07:04.000 went back and back and back and the World Health Organization went back.
00:07:08.000 And they could only find that possibly, they said possibly 4000 people died from cancers after the fact.
00:07:16.000 Even that has been in question and some estimates are lower.
00:07:19.000 So the dangers of radioactivity have been very exaggerated over time.
00:07:23.000 And when you get into it, and we do in the film, I hope you see it, it's really important to understand that low-level radiation is a part of the world.
00:07:31.000 We have radiation in our bodies.
00:07:33.000 We have the ability to fix it.
00:07:35.000 We have DNA discovered by Crick and Watson and proven that it repairs our body tissues.
00:07:42.000 It repairs damage to our bodies as we go.
00:07:45.000 We have a double helix.
00:07:47.000 It's, you know, get into all that if you want, but essentially we are not We are not in danger from radiation any more than other things like the other, let's call it oil, gas and arsenics, poisons, toxic waste from oil.
00:08:07.000 We release it into the universe.
00:08:09.000 It just throws, and it's part of the problem that we have with with the pollution that we have.
00:08:14.000 The waste from radioactivity is closely, closely monitored in caskets and underwater in caskets, and it's kept there for years.
00:08:25.000 And after that, if necessary, it's buried deep in the earth.
00:08:28.000 It's nothing compared to what chemical and oil and coal waste is.
00:08:35.000 Nothing compared.
00:08:37.000 I see that your advocacy is founded on the best conceivable principles, addressing a problem that elsewise seems almost impossible to alter.
00:08:50.000 Throughout your career, Oliver, you have presumably intuitively understood stories that have been necessary to tell.
00:09:01.000 Stories of high-level corruption, stories of needless war, Geopolitical conflicts reported erroneously.
00:09:10.000 Simultaneous historical narratives left untold because they contain, indeed, to cite the title of Al Gore's film, inconvenient truths.
00:09:21.000 With the subject of this film, my concern, and like I'm watching the chat now, like people are watching this in our locals community, a lot of people have a strong aversion to nuclear power.
00:09:33.000 Perhaps it's because of the reasons that you're addressing, that they understandably associate nuclear energy with nuclear destruction and the notable disasters that you've already cited, in addition to the militaristic use of nuclear weapons.
00:09:48.000 But the point I'd like to take you up on is a slightly different one.
00:09:52.000 If we don't address our attitude towards consuming Then I feel that we are going to sustain significant problems.
00:10:00.000 Or we'd be looking to alter the manner in which we live, rather than looking for methods to sustain what appears to be, by its nature, unsustainable.
00:10:13.000 Good point, but I don't agree with you.
00:10:15.000 I don't think it's going to be possible to change human nature.
00:10:18.000 I think it's if you go to the to the poor countries in the world, you see a stark example of it in India.
00:10:25.000 Of course, they're going to look for electricity.
00:10:27.000 They want electricity for their tools in order to cut sugarcane.
00:10:31.000 It's just natural that people who are poor are going to want easier ways to do things.
00:10:36.000 And this is true about China, Indonesia, all these populous countries that are coming into heavier usage of electricity.
00:10:44.000 And not only that, cars, transportation, which is not electricity, and industries which have not been electrified yet, such as cement making.
00:10:55.000 In all countries, they're going to make cement.
00:10:57.000 They're going to continue to have agriculture and fertilizer, and there's going to be demand for For steel.
00:11:04.000 I mean, it's natural.
00:11:05.000 So you're not going to stop the demand and that's consumption.
00:11:08.000 Now, I know the Greta Thunbergs of the world believe that we should all punish ourselves, but I don't think that's going to happen.
00:11:14.000 So that's why nuclear power, which is infinite, infinite in its power, millions and millions of times more powerful than coal or oil, it's just a miracle, actually, that it was found.
00:11:25.000 But we misused it.
00:11:26.000 As we do it, let's say you have a knife.
00:11:28.000 Of course you can misuse a knife to kill people.
00:11:31.000 That happens all the time.
00:11:33.000 Guns, this, that.
00:11:35.000 Everything has been misused by human beings.
00:11:37.000 But to go to some biblical equation of Abel and Cain, let's say, and say everyone's going to miss you, is not valid because most people will use things well, will use things for positive reasons.
00:11:50.000 It's just human nature to want things.
00:11:53.000 Wanting does appear to be part of human nature, but there is no question that human nature responds to the systems within which we exist, and certainly I welcome a conversation that is about systemic and resource change, rather than measures that are continually punitive to the individual.
00:12:13.000 15-minute cities, for example, Or impeding people's ability to, inverted commas, progress in nations such as you have already listed.
00:12:23.000 I recognise that that's an important story to tell, an important conversation to have.
00:12:30.000 But what I sense is, you know, God, we're all going to have different approaches to these matters, but my personal approach is how do we start to address the fact that we're living in a deeply corrupt, Deeply hypocritical, deeply war-torn the society currently.
00:12:48.000 And I suppose another advantage that your film presents to us is the ability to abate and prevent these resource wars.
00:12:57.000 There's no doubt that the Ukraine-Russia conflict has a component that is to do with territory as well as resources.
00:13:04.000 The so-called Middle Eastern wars are all undergirded by a necessity for fuels, as you've already listed.
00:13:11.000 And your position on war and indeed the reporting on war has significantly shifted many people's perspectives on it.
00:13:19.000 Oliver, would you talk to us a little about the current Ukraine-Russia conflict and indeed how energy has often been the driving factor behind military conflicts of a global scale?
00:13:34.000 Yeah.
00:13:36.000 First, I just want to just say one quick rejoinder to what you were thinking about consumption.
00:13:41.000 I just want to say the fact is that electricity, the use, the need for electricity is going to grow and grow until the IPCC gives 2050 as an endpoint, saying that from there on, there'll be a tipping point and so forth and so on, the Earth will not be able to recover.
00:13:57.000 Be that as it may, by 2050, any realistic estimate of the use of electricity will go up from Two times to four times, four times more electricity will be acquired.
00:14:08.000 Some people even say five.
00:14:12.000 Russell, you have no idea how many gigawatts, terawatts that means in the world.
00:14:16.000 That is just going to be an overload completely.
00:14:19.000 We don't have it.
00:14:20.000 We don't have the grid structure, and we don't have the generators in place.
00:14:25.000 It's just going to be worse and worse and worse.
00:14:28.000 So it's a real problem unless you face those statistics.
00:14:32.000 As to war, what a tragedy.
00:14:34.000 It's a huge waste of human Resources as we all agree about wars.
00:14:40.000 It's like watching World War I all over again.
00:14:42.000 And you see the waste and the death and the destruction.
00:14:46.000 You have to... War is not good, but you have to look at the reasons for this war.
00:14:51.000 And whenever you do, you know, the Americans like to simplify and say it's a question of a Russian invasion of Ukraine.
00:15:00.000 That's very simplistic and very black and white.
00:15:02.000 And I think you know the story behind it.
00:15:05.000 I made a film back in 2017-16, I produced it, I didn't direct it, Ukraine on Fire, which explains the origins of this war in the coup d'etat of 2014, which was sponsored and supported thoroughly by the United States.
00:15:24.000 It was a very deep plan to penetrate the Soviet, to penetrate the Russian Federation.
00:15:31.000 From the beginning, the neoconservative movement who started the war in Iraq going back to the 1990s, they've been at war with Russia, these people, and they're deep inside our government and the State Department.
00:15:43.000 Victoria Nuland, you know these names.
00:15:47.000 Jake Sullivan, the National Security Advisor.
00:15:51.000 Anthony Blinken, Secretary of State.
00:15:53.000 They seem to have control.
00:15:55.000 Biden is an old Cold Warrior, and he really hates the old Soviet Union, which he mistakes, confounds again, with the Russian Federation, which is not communist.
00:16:07.000 I really bemoan this because I say this because Russia and China, which are our two leading enemies now, a few years ago, are still our allies or friends, potential friends, and we blew the opportunity.
00:16:22.000 And we still can make that opportunity work because Russia is the leading producer of nuclear energy in the world.
00:16:31.000 They've done the most advanced work.
00:16:33.000 Why?
00:16:33.000 Because in the 1940s they started to develop civilian energy.
00:16:40.000 And they've been doing it steadily.
00:16:42.000 And now they have Rosatom.
00:16:44.000 Rosatom is a state agency with 250,000 employees who know everything to know about nuclear energy.
00:16:51.000 They do every department.
00:16:52.000 And they export their generators to all these new countries, Bangladesh, to India, to Turkey, to the Middle Eurasia.
00:17:06.000 I mean, they're the biggest sellers of it.
00:17:09.000 They deliver turnkey factories.
00:17:12.000 Turnkey, which is the essence of this thing.
00:17:15.000 How to build nuclear reactors fast on an assembly line, like airliners.
00:17:19.000 This is what has to be done.
00:17:21.000 And they're really our potential allies.
00:17:24.000 They are not our enemies.
00:17:26.000 And I've been saying this.
00:17:27.000 I made the film on Putin.
00:17:28.000 You saw it, I hope.
00:17:30.000 You know, I asked him very honest questions and he answered.
00:17:33.000 I didn't sense any belligerence.
00:17:35.000 He kept calling the United States his partners, if you remember, in the film, my American partners.
00:17:40.000 Okay, he may have been a little soft on his perception of the United States, but he is not the monster that has been pictured by the American propaganda machine.
00:17:50.000 So this is an unfortunate tragedy, as is China, because we alienated them too.
00:17:55.000 They are also coming up very strongly in nuclear energy.
00:17:58.000 They started late.
00:17:59.000 But most recently, they've announced a program, a half a trillion dollars, $440 billion going into an investment of making 138, 130 some new nuclear reactors.
00:18:05.000 into an investment of making 138, 130 some new nuclear reactors and by 2038
00:18:14.000 that's almost 10 a year, okay? 10 a year by 2038.
00:18:18.000 And President Xi has committed himself to a zero growth policy on carbon dioxide by 2060.
00:18:26.000 These are big, significant statements, and they're important.
00:18:29.000 We try to let them honor them.
00:18:31.000 But by competing with them instead of cooperating with them, we're making things far worse.
00:18:38.000 But with the kind of reductive reporting that surrounds subjects like the war, and when you made your film with Putin, you were called a Putin apologist.
00:18:47.000 You remember, I'm sure, the reaction from the audience when you spoke to Stephen Colbert about Putin, like that the audience are just not willing to listen to nuanced information.
00:18:58.000 And throughout your career you've been iconoclastic and you've been willing to tell difficult
00:19:03.000 stories about war, about corruption indeed, including the assassination of JFK of course.
00:19:12.000 So why do you remain confident that you can make an impact on a subject like, you know,
00:19:19.000 like with your film Nuclear Now?
00:19:21.000 Because if there isn't an appetite to monetize this form of energy currently, if the old
00:19:22.000 If there isn't an appetite to monetize this form of energy currently, if the old model
00:19:28.000 is still one that's being sustained through forever wars and the types of relationships
00:19:28.000 model is still one that's being sustained through forever wars and the types of relationships
00:19:34.000 that surround them, how likely is it that popularizing these ideas with the public is
00:19:34.000 that surround them, how likely is it that popularizing these ideas with the public is
00:19:42.000 the route to success with these methods?
00:19:45.000 You faced, like I remember the time of JFK, you faced a lot of cynicism, skepticism and
00:19:53.000 outrage with the Putin films, with the films around Cuba, with your alternative history
00:19:58.000 to America.
00:19:59.000 What impact do you believe that you can have when there is a media that works so hard to
00:20:05.000 curtail alternative narratives and to enforce and continually impose accepted wisdom, albeit
00:20:13.000 warped wisdom?
00:20:14.000 Bye.
00:20:15.000 Well, I agree with what you're saying completely.
00:20:18.000 I think you understand the problem.
00:20:21.000 It is a establishment media that denies what's facing them, looking them in the face.
00:20:28.000 Don't forget the Vietnam War, too.
00:20:30.000 I questioned, I trashed it.
00:20:33.000 I completely think that was a bogus war, bogus reasoning.
00:20:36.000 Every war the United States has been in since World War II.
00:20:40.000 Starting with Korea has been for these specious reasons and many lives have been told and this is documented by now.
00:20:46.000 People should know it.
00:20:47.000 They should be studying their history if they were interested and they should read alternate media, alternate sources as to what happened in our lifetime.
00:20:55.000 I lived through this lifetime.
00:20:56.000 I was born in 46.
00:20:57.000 I can guarantee you that there's been a cold war against Russia for most of my life.
00:21:03.000 It's a hatred, a phobia, a phobia, which is a fantasy, about the dangers that they We're going to take over the United States.
00:21:12.000 This is the 1950s.
00:21:14.000 They were in our State Department.
00:21:15.000 They were in our schools.
00:21:16.000 They were teaching us that they were... It was all John Birch kind of stuff, mad stuff, and paranoia.
00:21:22.000 That was the American point of view on Russia.
00:21:24.000 It eased off finally when Reagan, who was a great Russia hater, came along and looked him in the face.
00:21:30.000 He met with Gorbachev and he said, Oh God, these guys are not so bad.
00:21:33.000 They're human beings, you know?
00:21:35.000 And what happened was we had a little bit of a detente, a long Nice area.
00:21:39.000 And then until, of course, the Soviet Union fell apart and the Russian Federation came into being.
00:21:47.000 And, of course, right away NATO started to worry about them.
00:21:51.000 They never let up.
00:21:52.000 They never identified the new regime as non-communist and so forth as our enemies.
00:21:57.000 Putin was always trying to be our friend.
00:21:59.000 All that period he cooperated with us in Afghanistan.
00:22:02.000 He cooperated with us with so many different things.
00:22:05.000 He was trying to reach out.
00:22:07.000 But there was no real attempt by either Bush or by Obama or Trump to really change the picture.
00:22:19.000 Trump tried a little bit, but he got backed off very quickly.
00:22:22.000 So there's been sort of a Consistent phobia about Russia.
00:22:25.000 Going back, I can trace it to 1919, the Red Scare in America.
00:22:30.000 It was all originally about our labor situation in the United States and the strikes that we had.
00:22:36.000 This is the fear of communism.
00:22:38.000 It grew into this monster, two-headed monster, three-headed monster.
00:22:42.000 It's become something that's unbelievable.
00:22:44.000 It's almost like radiation poisoning, where you see the 1950s horror films and you see these monsters that come out of the sea.
00:22:50.000 And they're radiation monsters, right?
00:22:53.000 Same kind of fear of Russia.
00:22:55.000 The thing is that money It's proven that you have to accept that the way to do nuclear power is not going to do it through private enterprise.
00:23:04.000 That's not going to work because it's so difficult to build, and it takes time, and you have to invest, and it's a long haul.
00:23:11.000 But it can be done with government agency, and it has to be.
00:23:14.000 That's what Russia did with Rosatom.
00:23:15.000 That's what France did.
00:23:17.000 France has been nuclear since 1965-70.
00:23:21.000 They've gone nuclear.
00:23:22.000 They have EDF, which is now completely owned by the government.
00:23:25.000 It wasn't before it was 80%, but now it's owned by the government.
00:23:29.000 And China, too, has its own agency.
00:23:31.000 You need government agency to do this because it requires that kind of will for insurance reasons, etc.
00:23:38.000 There's a thousand reasons.
00:23:40.000 You've got to cut through the red tape.
00:23:41.000 But that's not going to happen in a so-called democracy where people can express, push a button and say, I'm scared of nuclear power because it's in my backyard, blah, blah, blah.
00:23:52.000 It's easy to be scared.
00:23:53.000 Scaremongering is the easiest tactic of all, and that's what we've been doing for years in our country.
00:24:00.000 So my point is that, my big point is, unless we change our direction and change our thinking, which is the hardest thing to do, We're taking Russia to the edge now.
00:24:13.000 We are really going to the edge.
00:24:15.000 This is crazy what's going on and nuts.
00:24:17.000 It's suicidal.
00:24:18.000 We are going to hurt ourselves in a big way.
00:24:21.000 This is a potential World War III.
00:24:24.000 This is the same situation as World War I in a sense.
00:24:27.000 The stupidity of it because of the alliances and the fears and the built-up phobias.
00:24:33.000 If we don't stop this, what Biden is doing, this guy is, I voted for him, I made the mistake of thinking that he was an old man now that he would calm down, he'd be more mellow and so forth.
00:24:44.000 I didn't see that at all.
00:24:45.000 I see a man who maybe is not in charge of his own administration, who knows, but he's going to fall down somewhere.
00:24:52.000 But it seems that he's dragging us stupidly into a confrontation with a A power that's not going to give.
00:25:02.000 This is their borders.
00:25:03.000 This is their world.
00:25:04.000 This is NATO going into Ukraine.
00:25:06.000 This is a whole other story.
00:25:08.000 This is not as bad as we did.
00:25:09.000 We did a lot of terrible things from 2001 on.
00:25:13.000 We put, we NATO-ized a lot of these countries in Eastern Europe.
00:25:19.000 Who are anti-Russian because of old hostilities and, you know, you get dragged into Balkan wars here.
00:25:24.000 This is really the same thing as World War I. Our allies are rabid anti-Russian people, the Ukrainian government.
00:25:32.000 And who are they fighting?
00:25:33.000 They're fighting ethnic Russians in Ukraine.
00:25:36.000 This is the madness of it and our media does not recognize that The, what do you call it, the ethnic Russians in Ukraine are really the ones who want their autonomy.
00:25:48.000 That's all they asked for in 2014, autonomy.
00:25:51.000 And they were about to get it.
00:25:53.000 There was a deal about to be made with Putin and Ukraine right in March of 2022 when the war started.
00:26:01.000 There was a deal about to be made.
00:26:02.000 The America squelched.
00:26:03.000 They didn't want the deal.
00:26:04.000 They don't want the peace treaty.
00:26:05.000 They don't want to give autonomy to Donbass and Lugansk.
00:26:09.000 Now, look where we are.
00:26:10.000 It's gotten worse, and it's going to get worse.
00:26:13.000 Yes, there is an inability to address the complexity of the conditions that led to this, the ongoing infringement of former Soviet territories.
00:26:22.000 As you have said, and as you have documented, the sponsorship of the coup in 2014 and the unwillingness to acknowledge atrocities within Ukraine or
00:26:33.000 at least complexities of an ethnic nature within Ukraine, within those regions.
00:26:39.000 And indeed an inability to hold complex stories is perhaps one of the
00:26:42.000 great determinants of our time and it's something that you've never shied away
00:26:46.000 from trying to do whether that's with your fictionalized and scripted movies
00:26:51.000 or with your documentaries.
00:26:54.000 I'd like to ask you a little bit now about your film Snowden, which was, uh, you were unable to make through the studio system, perhaps because he is such a critical figure in modern America.
00:27:07.000 A pivotal figure when it comes to understanding the nature of power within the era of big tech.
00:27:15.000 Who has exposed the degree to which there has been a globalised exploitation of data, globalised surveillance, ongoing lies around war.
00:27:25.000 His story is of course connected to the incarceration without trial of Julian Assange, imprisoned in my country now, potentially awaiting extradition.
00:27:34.000 I wonder if you feel that it's going to be increasingly difficult to tell these stories, whether it's your current movie, Nuclear Now, or whether or not if you were an emergent filmmaker that you would have been able to make a movie like JFK.
00:27:49.000 I know you were established, but would you have been able to tell stories like Platoon or JFK, let alone Snowden?
00:27:56.000 And do you think increasingly we'll see films like Sound of Freedom that have alternative
00:28:02.000 economic and indeed PR models that independent media now can viably promote movies, bypassing
00:28:11.000 the conventional centralised media structures?
00:28:15.000 And that there are indeed audiences for content that perhaps the mainstream media would prefer
00:28:21.000 people didn't see?
00:28:23.000 was naked his day. Everything you say has been so apparent.
00:28:28.000 What did Snowden do?
00:28:29.000 What did Snowden really do?
00:28:30.000 He gave us information that the public has a right to know that their government is eavesdropping on the world as well as on them.
00:28:39.000 That's all he did.
00:28:41.000 And that's big news.
00:28:42.000 And that was what was worth the film making.
00:28:45.000 Making the film is worth it.
00:28:47.000 It was worth it no matter what happened.
00:28:48.000 And I did pay a price for it.
00:28:50.000 Because frankly, I couldn't get distribution.
00:28:52.000 I couldn't get financing out of the United States.
00:28:55.000 I had to do it out of Germany and France.
00:28:57.000 They gave me the most.
00:28:58.000 And then eventually a small American distributor jumped in and gave me the finishing money.
00:29:04.000 However, gave us the finishing money.
00:29:06.000 However, it was badly distributed, poorly distributed.
00:29:11.000 And the film was condemned in some quarters, but really appreciated.
00:29:15.000 It's a good film.
00:29:16.000 It's nothing.
00:29:18.000 I'm very proud of it, but it didn't make the impact because people are scared of this issue.
00:29:24.000 Are we really a bad guy?
00:29:25.000 That's what people think.
00:29:26.000 I think, is the United States really doing this?
00:29:28.000 It's hard to believe some of the things we show in that movie, where the eavesdropping is going on everywhere, everywhere.
00:29:34.000 We go from Brazil to Europe to Asia.
00:29:37.000 We show the degree of intervention the United States does, which is a hegemon.
00:29:42.000 Basically, listening to everybody, including Germany, including Brazil.
00:29:47.000 Remember the Brazilian president?
00:29:49.000 It's What we do on a daily basis with cyber warfare and with eavesdropping is shocking.
00:29:56.000 And at the same time, we make these accusations against China and against Russia, but they're a pale imitation of what we have done.
00:30:05.000 We have set up a worldwide network of surveillance, bar none, with the most financed and the most sophisticated equipment.
00:30:14.000 All this has changed, Russell.
00:30:16.000 In my lifetime, I was 50 years old when 2001 happened.
00:30:21.000 I was, I have to say, it changed.
00:30:24.000 A mentality set in that, oh, they got, they went after us.
00:30:28.000 They went after, whoever they is, they went after us.
00:30:31.000 They have to pay.
00:30:32.000 It's us against them.
00:30:34.000 Us against them.
00:30:35.000 And that mentality set in with this idiot For our worst president, George Bush, with no comparison to anybody else, George Bush Jr.
00:30:43.000 became the guy who said, we have to fight the world if necessary.
00:30:48.000 Global War on Terror it was called, but many people describe it as the Global War of Terror.
00:30:53.000 And it hasn't stopped since 2001.
00:30:56.000 He has been, George W. Bush, and it's difficult to query your verdict there, but he's been very much rehabilitated by the mainstream, portrayed now almost risibly as an avuncular elder statesman, a chummy figure who can hang out with Barack Obama, and perhaps these kind of relationships, this new corrupt Carnal Mount Rushmore of modern establishment criminals tells you, really, that electoral democracy is redundant.
00:31:26.000 And I have to query, Oliver, that it seems that the premise of your film, Nuclear Now, is that if you can de-stigmatise nuclear power, if the public, if we, the people, to use a phrase that was once popular in your nation, accepted the efficacy of nuclear power, there would be no resistance.
00:31:41.000 But with new censorship laws, Being introduced in the Five Eyes countries, and indeed in the EU, public opinion is becoming increasingly relevant.
00:31:51.000 Even while independent media voices and channels like ours, and like Joe Rogan, I've watched your appearances with Joe Rogan, who I adore, even though these new voices are becoming significant, I believe approaching the point where it will be impossible to convey stories that the establishment doesn't want told.
00:32:12.000 How have you seen this phenomena of censorship amplify over your career as a content creator and as a man who has always been willing to tell difficult stories?
00:32:29.000 Well, personally, we went to Davos with Nuclear Now last year, or earlier this year, I'm sorry.
00:32:36.000 And Davos is supposed to be a highly intelligent, educated group who are obviously concerned with the future.
00:32:44.000 This is their big play.
00:32:48.000 Carl Schwab is the German fellow who is behind it.
00:32:52.000 He's a leader.
00:32:53.000 And we brought the film there, and we were received grudgingly, I have to say.
00:32:59.000 We got our screening space at our own expense, and we did our best to promote the film everywhere we went in those few days.
00:33:07.000 And what shocked me, I suppose, above all, was here is this group concerned with the future.
00:33:12.000 And here, they don't even have nuclear energy on the menu, which is to say, it's been swept aside, somehow forgotten about.
00:33:19.000 I compared it to the Cinderella story.
00:33:21.000 I said, this is like putting the Cinderella in the kitchen scrubbing floors while the uglier sisters are out there preening and frowning themselves and wearing all their dresses and going out to the parties to meet Prince Charming.
00:33:34.000 Finally, they discover, of course, that Cinderella is beautiful, and they bring her out of the closet.
00:33:40.000 That's sort of the same story which is going on with nuclear.
00:33:43.000 It just is not talked about.
00:33:45.000 It's ignored because of these superstitions.
00:33:49.000 Superstitions that are no place in the modern world.
00:33:52.000 Science has to be the predominant The predominant educator here.
00:33:57.000 Not faith.
00:33:58.000 So we have a lot of idiots running around saying stupid things.
00:34:01.000 And the environmentalists, to some degree, are part of that because they haven't studied nuclear energy.
00:34:06.000 And that's what we did in this film.
00:34:08.000 What is nuclear energy?
00:34:09.000 We went to the basis of it.
00:34:11.000 What is it?
00:34:12.000 And it is a great gift.
00:34:14.000 It's like Prometheus giving the fire to mankind.
00:34:17.000 And we have ignored it.
00:34:19.000 Oliver, I'm sure I don't need to tell you what happened to Prometheus, and I'm astonished that you considered taking that film to Davos.
00:34:29.000 Here in our community, the WEF are regarded as the kind of greenwashing, sportswashing, propagandist unit.
00:34:37.000 ...for the establishment, ensuring that any globalist measures that are taken never impact the interests of the powerful and are always punitive towards individuals.
00:34:47.000 The name of Klaus Schwab around these parts is akin to saying Blofeld.
00:34:54.000 Maybe you understand the picture better, but we had to try.
00:34:58.000 We have to try to penetrate these establishments.
00:35:01.000 And to some degree, we have been successful because we find that many people in big business are very pro-nuclear, but they don't get anything done.
00:35:09.000 They're not able to push their agendas.
00:35:11.000 A lot of the big banks, they're pro-nuclear.
00:35:15.000 Nuclear is popular in the sense that 60% of the American public Support nuclear, but you know, getting us to a place where the government, which supports nuclear bipartisan, the Department of Energy, they are not putting big enough money into it.
00:35:15.000 And it is.
00:35:30.000 They're putting good money, but now better money with Biden, and they did it with Obama and Trump.
00:35:34.000 It's not like they're ignoring it, but they just don't understand that it's important to be on the menu.
00:35:40.000 Not the only solution, but the centerpiece solution.
00:35:43.000 It is the biggest volume and scalable and cheapest in the long run of any of the energies and less damage to the earth.
00:35:51.000 So it's...
00:35:54.000 It is what it is.
00:35:55.000 I understand all of that and I hear your passion and I respect that you are often, usually ahead of the curve when it comes to making popular issues and controversial and difficult ideas accessible.
00:36:07.000 I'm not surprised to learn that a community that prides itself in a scientific approach remains cynical and skeptical because in our own investigations we have found that science appears to be a subset of Commercial endeavors in the last few years has become particularly palpable.
00:36:29.000 The particular aspects of science are amplified.
00:36:32.000 Other aspects of investigation and science are definitely muted.
00:36:38.000 Oliver, while I still have you, I really would love to ask you about the candidature Of Robert F. Kennedy.
00:36:44.000 We've spoken to him several times on our show, and in fact, I'm about to embark on a contentious, difficult, and likely doomed pull-up competition against him.
00:36:55.000 I don't know if you've noticed his upper body, but the guy's pretty shredded, and I'm challenging him, he's challenged me as a matter of fact, to a pull-up competition that I'm not likely to win.
00:37:05.000 I would like to ask you about the ongoing censorship around the murder, assassination of JFK.
00:37:15.000 He openly says that it was a CIA operation.
00:37:21.000 Joe Biden, after claiming that further documentation would be released, has only released heavily redacted data.
00:37:29.000 Why Does this story still consume the American imagination?
00:37:37.000 What is it about this story that means that it can never be told truthfully?
00:37:44.000 Well, it's the greatest lie of the last century.
00:37:50.000 It was not an investigation.
00:37:51.000 It was a fraud.
00:37:52.000 And I've done my best with a documentary last two years ago.
00:37:57.000 It's called JFK Revisited.
00:38:01.000 And it's actually a big seller on Amazon after two years.
00:38:04.000 It's one of the number top, top documentaries.
00:38:08.000 It's because people know in their gut there was a lie.
00:38:11.000 It's just the Warren Commission is a joke.
00:38:13.000 It's fairy tale.
00:38:15.000 And it's never been scientifically supported except by People who are just, we call them in some cases, just enthusiasts for getting this over with, keeping it buried, that they accept this ridiculous scenario because it's convenient and allows the government to continue.
00:38:34.000 But if we really examine the case and you say that there was a change of power in 1963 that was illegal and our government was involved in it, getting rid of a president who was in the way, You raise a whole host of questions that fundamentally undercut the state.
00:38:49.000 And that's what needs to be done.
00:38:50.000 We have to be honest, like Germany was honest with itself after World War II.
00:38:56.000 We need to lose a war, it seems, in order for us to wake up to what we've done.
00:39:01.000 And it's going to be a long list, true.
00:39:03.000 But the United States keeps keeping up to the fairy tale.
00:39:07.000 And I suppose they're scared.
00:39:08.000 Keep the fairy tale going.
00:39:09.000 Keep the Cinderella story going so that people don't question it.
00:39:14.000 Robert Kennedy, I support in many of his positions.
00:39:18.000 Unfortunately, as you know, he's anti because he was a lawyer in it.
00:39:22.000 He's anti-nuclear, but he's anti-nuclear in the sense that I believe for the United States.
00:39:27.000 I don't agree with his position on that.
00:39:29.000 I don't think he is up to date.
00:39:30.000 And I wish you'd see my movie and really comment on it.
00:39:33.000 But I think he's got to reexamine some of his positions.
00:39:36.000 Not everybody's right about everything.
00:39:38.000 John Kennedy, his uncle, was a big supporter of nuclear, as was Dwight Eisenhower, who was a pro-military man, but he was selling atoms for peace.
00:39:47.000 Those two presidents would have pushed nuclear onto the United States economy for sure, and if by 2000 we would have been a nuclearized society, let's say 70% of our electricity and energy would have come from nuclear.
00:40:02.000 But that wasn't the case.
00:40:03.000 It was cut off, as you know, in the 1980s by people like Ralph Nader and Jane Fonda and so forth, and the accidents that happened at Chernobyl.
00:40:16.000 By the way, you asked earlier what happened to me, but I was saying, yeah, no question, I got cut off.
00:40:21.000 After I did JFK, the media shifted and it began shifting.
00:40:25.000 And when I, of course, voiced my opposition to our anti-Russia policies, Out of fear of going to war, I was completely, how do you say, I've been appearing only on shows like yours and Joe Rogan, you know, offbeat.
00:40:42.000 I'm not allowed back on mainstream television.
00:40:48.000 And I'm glad because, I mean, frankly, I turned on the TV the other night.
00:40:51.000 I was in Israel.
00:40:53.000 And guess what?
00:40:54.000 Jake Tapper, who I suppose represents as much the establishment as As Walter Cronkite in the old days, although a big difference, he had General Petraeus on telling us how Ukraine was winning this war.
00:41:08.000 It was fantasy time.
00:41:10.000 Yeah, well, mainstream media spaces have become deeply anodyne and highly controlled environments, and they, I don't think, can contain voices like yours anymore.
00:41:22.000 In fact, almost by definition, it's only permissible to have information that is not threatening.
00:41:29.000 And this is a Quality and phenomena that has increased even in the time that I've been working in media.
00:41:38.000 That's why I think the emergence of populist figures, whether that's Donald Trump, who our audience are very keen on and whom I can certainly see the pedagogical powers of, there's no doubt about that, and voices like RFK.
00:41:54.000 This is, I think, important that there's a new type of populism emerging.
00:41:59.000 And I think if there's to be any hope I haven't seen your film Nuclear Now yet, but I will because I trust you and I see you as an educator as well as a creator, so I'll watch it.
00:42:09.000 even though there's people in our chat that are still asking questions about nuclear waste,
00:42:13.000 although Oliver did touch on the ability to sensibly curtail and contain the propensity
00:42:20.000 for uranium contamination elsewhere. But what I will say is that there is no chance of popularising
00:42:28.000 difficult ideas at a time when the mainstream media is such a heavily curated space. But
00:42:34.000 I would also invite you again to comment on the possibility that new media models are
00:42:39.000 emerging. Even your films, I'm sure, are funded now in ways that would have been unthinkable
00:42:46.000 20, 30 years ago. And with the phenomena of Sound of Freedom, which has been sort of crowdfunded
00:42:53.000 and is like number two in the box office now, and even the candidacy of RFK, and perhaps
00:42:58.000 you could even look at the Trump presidency, where it was a social media presidency, where
00:43:02.000 as people said at the time, there was governance through Twitter, until of course he was kicked
00:43:06.000 off of there.
00:43:08.000 Do you think that these new models of funding and promotion mean that stories like Nuclear Now can be told?
00:43:17.000 And do you think that it's going to require a different type of politician to advance ideas that are outside of the mainstream, Oliver?
00:43:25.000 I don't know about different.
00:43:26.000 I mean, I would rather see evolution than revolution.
00:43:29.000 I believe in that.
00:43:31.000 So there's no possibility.
00:43:32.000 I always believe in evolution in terms of a person with policies that are ignorant.
00:43:38.000 Learns from them and opens his mind like Reagan.
00:43:41.000 Look what Reagan did once he opened up to Gorbachev in Russia.
00:43:45.000 He opened his mind and he saw his wife maybe played a role in it or maybe his astrologer.
00:43:49.000 I don't know, but he saw a different way and that was crucial.
00:43:54.000 Same thing happens with people all around the world.
00:43:55.000 Do you remember the world before 1989?
00:43:58.000 All of a sudden the Berlin Wall came down.
00:44:01.000 And there was a new let go, a relief in the world.
00:44:04.000 Something happened.
00:44:05.000 You could feel it in the air, a springtime.
00:44:07.000 And that existed for 10 years almost.
00:44:10.000 So I always believe that change is possible from within, and I believe that's the best way to do it.
00:44:15.000 Because revolution is very painful, and a lot of people get hurt, and it's not fair to everyone.
00:44:21.000 I mean, it destroys the whole structure.
00:44:23.000 I do believe we can evolve the structure.
00:44:25.000 So I may be different in that respect than you are.
00:44:28.000 I want to just say the film is just to I know you have to close out the Biden stuffed the JFK Act.
00:44:35.000 The JFK Act was passed as a result of my film in 1990.
00:44:39.000 That was an act to let the American people see these classified files.
00:44:47.000 That was obeyed, so to speak, in a very halting way for years, and things were released.
00:44:53.000 Trump, of course, backed off on the last pages, which I don't know what they're about.
00:44:59.000 They could be very much about the CIA, I hope.
00:45:01.000 Because the CIA, those people who work there, are the key to understanding those agents that were in place back when.
00:45:08.000 We'd like to know more about them.
00:45:09.000 But that act was stuffed the other day.
00:45:12.000 On Friday night, before the July 4th weekend, make sure that nobody paying attention, it was stuffed by Joe Biden, who was very disappointing.
00:45:21.000 He just said no more declassification except by the CIA has to be involved in all that stuff.
00:45:27.000 He destroyed the essence of that action by Congress.
00:45:32.000 He broke the law without knowing it.
00:45:34.000 But essentially, breaking the law is commonplace these days.
00:45:37.000 Whenever a government official doesn't like something we're doing, he breaks the law, including going to Iraq or whatever.
00:45:45.000 Sending weapons parallel, bar none, to Ukraine is an act of war, and we don't even admit it.
00:45:52.000 We don't even act like we admit it.
00:45:54.000 So anyway, the film is available on Nuclear Now on Amazon.
00:45:59.000 You can get it.
00:46:00.000 Google Play.
00:46:02.000 Rumble, wherever you are on YouTube, go for it.
00:46:06.000 It's coming out in July in the United States.
00:46:06.000 It's a DVD.
00:46:09.000 We're spreading it gradually to all these countries in Europe and Asia.
00:46:14.000 We have sales coming up soon.
00:46:17.000 I can't get it all out at the same time.
00:46:19.000 I wish Netflix had it, but that's not the kind of film that they're going to want.
00:46:23.000 No, you're not going to be able to get that on there, Oliver.
00:46:27.000 You radical iconoclist, you firebrand, you.
00:46:30.000 To watch Nuclear Now, go to nuclearnowfilm.com and we'll post a link in the description to Oliver's new film for you straight away.
00:46:40.000 Oliver, throughout this conversation I've been reminded of Satish Kumar, the Indian
00:46:45.000 teacher and activist who, when he met Bertrand Russell, Bertrand Russell was heavily involved
00:46:50.000 in the campaign for nuclear disarmament, and when he spoke to Satish Kumar, Satish said
00:46:59.000 like, what is the point in banning nuclear weapons if you don't change the mindset that
00:47:05.000 created them?
00:47:06.000 Bertrand Russell said this issue is too vital, too important to sort of approach so sort
00:47:10.000 of metaphysically and ideologically, we simply have to ban nuclear weapons because of their
00:47:15.000 capacity to destroy the world.
00:47:16.000 Now, of course, this is a conversation that took place in the 1960s, and you have made, you know, very plain that you want to draw a distinction between the destructive use of nuclear power and the creative use of nuclear power.
00:47:29.000 But the point that I feel to be significant is that it's the consciousness itself Our attitudes themselves and systems that need to radically alter if we're to have any chance at all.
00:47:42.000 So when I talk about revolution I'm talking about a significant shift in perspective and the necessary disobedience to bring that about and significantly the decentralization of power and the radical re-evaluation of some of our institutions rather than a sort of a conventional armed struggle and all the pain and misery that such a thing would bring about.
00:48:05.000 Yeah, evolution versus revolution.
00:48:09.000 I remember what I said earlier about what Einstein's quote was, the unleashed power of the atom has changed everything except our way of thinking.
00:48:19.000 And I don't know if we're going to be able to change that.
00:48:22.000 However, as I said, give them what they want.
00:48:26.000 And if they want more electricity, let's give it to them, because we can do it.
00:48:29.000 We have infinite power in the atom.
00:48:31.000 Infinite power, and that's what Einstein understood.
00:48:34.000 We can't just turn our backs on it and go back to Luddite age or an earlier age.
00:48:40.000 It's not possible.
00:48:42.000 Oliver, obviously I agree with you and I also appreciate you a great deal.
00:48:47.000 I appreciate the incredible work you've done over the years.
00:48:50.000 I appreciate your ongoing passion and your refusal to conform, your intrepidness and your endless endeavors to bring complex stories to people.
00:49:00.000 And I thank you very much for joining us today on Stay Free.
00:49:03.000 Thank you, Oliver Stone.
00:49:04.000 Bless you, Russell.
00:49:05.000 Bless you.
00:49:06.000 Thank you, sir.
00:49:07.000 Thanks for joining us.
00:49:07.000 You've become quite a citizen.
00:49:11.000 And it's not over yet.
00:49:12.000 Thank you.
00:49:14.000 Thank you so much.
00:49:15.000 Thank you for joining us, Oliver.
00:49:16.000 I appreciate your time.
00:49:17.000 Coming up next week on Stay Free with Russell Brand, we have Vandana Shiva talking to us, of course, about the horrors of big agriculture, her true feelings about Bill Gates, the necessity to support Farmer protest movement.
00:49:33.000 Also, Callie Means will be exposing the truth behind big food and big agriculture.
00:49:38.000 Plus, Wim Hof talking about, explicitly, how we can heal ourselves without recourse to pharmaceutical measures and the ideologies behind them.
00:49:48.000 And also, the scientific undergirding of his methods.
00:49:52.000 These are fascinating conversations.
00:49:54.000 Until then, here's the news.
00:49:56.000 No, here's the effing news.
00:49:58.000 Stay free.
00:50:02.000 Here's the fucking news!
00:50:05.000 A Supreme Court judge is banning Biden officials from censoring information that they shouldn't.
00:50:10.000 Is the tide finally turning?
00:50:15.000 A Supreme Court judge has banned, or at least limited, Biden administration officials' ability to use social media sites to censor information that ain't favorable to them.
00:50:25.000 Now they can only meddle with social media if it's a criminal matter or a matter of national security.
00:50:31.000 what it should have been in the first place rather than we don't like that or what if
00:50:34.000 I've a hunch that's not true. Not just stuff you reckon, that's how you govern countries.
00:50:39.000 Shouldn't even do that in your own life basically or just stuff you reckon. Okay so let's have a
00:50:43.000 look at a news report on the subject and we'll delve into it more deeply together.
00:50:47.000 Just this afternoon a federal judge barred parts of the administration
00:50:51.000 from contacting social media platforms about online content.
00:50:55.000 They've basically had to do an injunction on the government.
00:50:58.000 Like, the government's like an ex-boyfriend.
00:51:00.000 Hey, what you doing?
00:51:01.000 What you wearing?
00:51:02.000 Move on, Mike!
00:51:03.000 I got a new guy now!
00:51:05.000 You goddamn bitch!
00:51:06.000 I still love you!
00:51:07.000 Keep taking that message!
00:51:09.000 Now, the ruling came in response to a lawsuit brought by Republican-led states alleging that the White House went too far in its efforts to curb content that challenged vaccines or threatened elections.
00:51:21.000 The judge said certain departments should not reach out to companies like Twitter, Facebook, or Instagram for, quote, the purpose of urging, encouraging, pressuring, or inducing any manner, the removal, the deletion, the suppression, or the reduction of content containing protected free speech.
00:51:37.000 I'd like to urge, encourage, pressure and induce you to remove and delete your free speech.
00:51:43.000 That shouldn't be happening in the first place.
00:51:45.000 There's been an attempt to conflate free speech with hate speech.
00:51:48.000 Of course there is hate speech.
00:51:50.000 People say hateful stuff, prejudicial stuff, nasty stuff that shouldn't be said.
00:51:54.000 But that can't be used to shut down our Ability to communicate freely.
00:51:59.000 Free speech is something I believe in strongly.
00:52:02.000 Free speech might be a fundamental principle that undergirds all freedom because without free speech you can't freely converse, see what other people believe in, can't talk about what the government might be doing.
00:52:11.000 The fact that this is happening suggests that there's obviously Evidence that the government have been doing exactly that, otherwise this judgment wouldn't have to be passed, right?
00:52:20.000 So we can imagine what was going on during the pandemic, what gets censored around the war, what happens when there are stories that are not favorable to the Biden administration.
00:52:28.000 Let me know in the comments what you think this is about.
00:52:31.000 The ruling singles out several government agencies, including the Department of Justice, of State, the CDC, as well as HHS.
00:52:39.000 Now when I see those emblems, I've been trained now over time to not see them as like, oh look, there's that flag and that eagle, CDC.
00:52:46.000 I see them as oppressive forces.
00:52:49.000 They almost create a negative response in the way that some more famous flags evoke a negative impact.
00:52:54.000 He has made combating disinformation a big part of his agenda.
00:52:58.000 How much of a blow is this judge's orders to those efforts?
00:53:02.000 Well at the heart of this case, Tom, is what happens when constitutionally protected rights like the right to free speech come into conflict with public health and safety.
00:53:12.000 That bloke looks like he don't believe what he's saying.
00:53:14.000 He's staring too blankly.
00:53:16.000 Plus he looks like a baby Steve Carell.
00:53:18.000 I feel like the minimum amount of regulation possible will always be the aim.
00:53:24.000 The maximum amount of community control should always be the intention.
00:53:28.000 It seems that overreach when it comes to censorship and authoritarianism is generally on the rise.
00:53:34.000 We've told you many times now, and I hope you're listening, that the EU, that's, you know, where we live, although we did Brexit our way out of that little old EU, the EU are looking to introduce regulatory measures to censor and fine social media platforms that don't censor in accordance with their wishes.
00:53:48.000 The UN have got a A raft of legislation around similar issues.
00:53:53.000 And of course, the five highest countries, Australia, New Zealand, England, USA and Canada, are all drafting bills that seem designed to prohibit free speech.
00:54:02.000 This becomes significant, I believe, when you have the WHO lobbying to be able to implement pandemic measures, including lockdown, mandatory medications.
00:54:13.000 Not that that's the only application.
00:54:14.000 It's just an example of an area where you might see censorship.
00:54:18.000 The more you grant centralised authority unchecked powers, the more likely it is to be exploited.
00:54:23.000 And in this case, based on the very long list of individuals and agencies that a judge is saying that the administration cannot be in contact with social media companies, it has to do with what happens when, especially as it relates to COVID-19, the White House, the administration, feels that the public health and safety is potentially harmed by the spread of disinformation here.
00:54:44.000 The judge backed claims that the US President's administration, including the White House, had engaged in a massive attempt to stop Americans questioning the efficacy of vaccines online.
00:54:55.000 The injunction came after it was revealed last month that UK ministers set up a counter-disinformation unit which was used to target lockdown critics and those questioning the mass vaccination of children.
00:55:05.000 I think in any world, the mass vaccination of children has to be something that's only undertaken after significant questioning.
00:55:13.000 Even if the conclusion is, yes, let's mass vaccinate children now.
00:55:17.000 You'd want that, wouldn't you, as a parent or someone that's been a child or loves children or believes in common decency, that to be at the end of a process of inquiry and investigation and rigour and conversation and surely you would understand if not everyone in the world had the same opinion.
00:55:31.000 What's the alternative?
00:55:32.000 What is implicit when centralised authority takes that kind of role and prevents that kind of discussion?
00:55:39.000 What is it really?
00:55:40.000 It seems like hyperbole and hysteria when people talk about tyranny and fascism, particularly because the fascism that we've previously experienced is so garish, lurid and murderous.
00:55:50.000 And this is sort of evidently bureaucratic and technocratic.
00:55:53.000 But nevertheless, the principle of centralising control without inviting discourse or democracy is tyrannical, isn't it?
00:56:00.000 The UK government used an artificial intelligence firm to monitor social media sites and flag opposition to vaccine passports.
00:56:08.000 You start to realise that the government is doing things that you didn't ask it to do, that you don't want it to do.
00:56:14.000 It's supposed to be an administrative body.
00:56:16.000 If you look at the history of our country, the power of the sovereign slowly transitioned to the power of parliament.
00:56:22.000 The reason for that was that the sovereign's power was presumed to be feudal and tyrannical.
00:56:27.000 Power is somehow emulating its original condition. Do you notice that when there's a
00:56:32.000 revolution in Russia and they say it's not fair having this czar, they just replace him with a
00:56:36.000 communist fair system. What does it end up being? Exactly like having a czar. There's a tendency to
00:56:42.000 centralise and return to systems that are somehow invisibly magnetic and these are the
00:56:47.000 observable symptoms of that kind of polarising power. The right to free speech is an issue in
00:56:52.000 both administrations but this case is putting a spotlight at least on the Biden administration's
00:56:56.000 use of this. How did the right to privacy become repackaged as a right-wing talking point.
00:57:03.000 How did that happen?
00:57:04.000 Snowden's revelations were made at a time when it was presumed that it was a liberal issue.
00:57:09.000 Liberalism and liberty have a connection.
00:57:12.000 Hey, they don't have any right to our data.
00:57:14.000 They shouldn't be spying on us like that.
00:57:16.000 The pandemic was of course framed as an issue around care and responsibility, wasn't it?
00:57:21.000 If you don't follow these measures and you don't take these medications, it's because you don't care about others.
00:57:26.000 As the inquiries around those ideas have started to unfurl, unfold and reveal different dynamics, shall we say, It shows that vaccine passports are exactly the kind of draconian spying that previously would have been opposed by the left at the time of the Snowden revelations.
00:57:44.000 So, if you have a clear principle, you can't be pulled into, well, this is a left-wing talking point or a right-wing talking point.
00:57:50.000 There are some things that are a little more simple, like privacy and individual freedom.
00:57:54.000 Prosecutors in the Republican states of Louisiana and Missouri brought the case and accused the federal government of being involved in a censorship enterprise.
00:58:02.000 They claim that the Biden administration violated the First Amendment by trying to block social media users exercising their right to free speech.
00:58:10.000 It's as simple as that really isn't it?
00:58:11.000 It's a free speech issue.
00:58:13.000 You can't say in this instance we're going to ban free speech because we don't agree with it.
00:58:18.000 What you've done there is you've ended free speech and tried to sort of do it on the side.
00:58:22.000 I'm not really touching your I can feel your hand on my ass!
00:58:26.000 That's ass-touching!
00:58:27.000 I thought I saw a wasp!
00:58:28.000 We only did it thousands of times!
00:58:28.000 We didn't hardly do it!
00:58:29.000 communications between government officials and technology companies during the pandemic
00:58:33.000 have been collected and presented in the court case. We didn't hardly do it, we only did it
00:58:38.000 thousands of times. Would you please stop touching my ass?
00:58:42.000 I only did it thousands of times.
00:58:44.000 Yeah, well, don't do it anymore.
00:58:45.000 It's been judged to be illegal.
00:58:47.000 In his ruling, the judge banned government departments from contacting social media companies for the purpose of urging, encouraging, pressuring, or inducing in any manner the removal, deletion, suppression, or reduction of content containing protected free speech.
00:59:00.000 That's just like they've had to go back and go, you know free speech, yeah?
00:59:02.000 It's free speech!
00:59:03.000 Stop trying to limit free speech by pretending that you're being nice.
00:59:07.000 That's just the same principle again.
00:59:09.000 That's like how I have to raise my children.
00:59:12.000 Clean them!
00:59:13.000 I've told you already.
00:59:14.000 You have to invent new ways of telling them.
00:59:16.000 You know what I just said about cleaning your teeth?
00:59:18.000 Yeah, I'm not doing it.
00:59:19.000 Clean them!
00:59:19.000 Did you guys suppress free speech?
00:59:21.000 Well, no.
00:59:22.000 We may have urged and encouraged and pressured and induced people to remove and delete and reduce the content of free speech.
00:59:31.000 Yeah, that is what I'm saying, actually.
00:59:33.000 Oh, yeah, no, well, yeah, we did do that.
00:59:35.000 In the injunction, he said that the Attorneys General from Louisiana and Missouri had produced evidence of a massive effort by defendants from the White House to federal agencies to suppress speech based on its content.
00:59:46.000 A massive effort!
00:59:47.000 Why don't they make a massive effort to do stuff that's actually good for people?
00:59:50.000 If the allegations made by plaintiffs are true, the present case arguably involves the most massive attack against free speech in United States history.
00:59:58.000 Did you try to suppress free speech?
00:59:59.000 It was only the most massive attempt in United States history.
01:00:02.000 Oh, carry on then.
01:00:04.000 Social media and other technology companies have in the past communicated regularly with the government, including during elections and in the pandemic.
01:00:11.000 Since acquiring Twitter last year, Elon Musk has echoed Republican arguments, releasing internal company documents to chosen journalists, suggesting what they claimed was collusion between company and government officials.
01:00:22.000 When we spoke to Jack Dorsey, he admitted it was wrong to ban Donald Trump from Twitter.
01:00:27.000 He said it was right for the company, wrong for the country.
01:00:31.000 Probably the right decision for the company, but the wrong decision for the world.
01:00:35.000 And obviously, I'm guessing that Jack Dorsey is not a pro-Trump type person, but in retrospect, looking at it, he says it was wrong.
01:00:44.000 It seems to me, even the people that are in these private organisations are starting to recognise that just because you happen to have a particular political perspective, you can't use your position to prevent other people having an alternative one.
01:00:58.000 In July 2021, Mr Biden claimed Facebook was killing people by spreading misinformation about coronavirus vaccines.
01:01:05.000 It's so easy to imagine that being framed as hysterical misinformation.
01:01:10.000 If someone said Facebook are killing people, well, were they?
01:01:14.000 Is there evidence of that?
01:01:15.000 Was that the problem?
01:01:17.000 What we live in is a time where information is so Strongly curated, where certain information is amplified, other information is ignored.
01:01:25.000 Principles shift in accordance with agenda.
01:01:28.000 It's very, very difficult.
01:01:29.000 That's why I continually return to the idea of decentralization.
01:01:32.000 Because I can't see now how you can have one strong, central authority that governs everybody.
01:01:38.000 Because I feel that people really do believe different things.
01:01:42.000 And in order to diffuse this, you're gonna have to maximize, localize freedom.
01:01:47.000 The evidence presented in the case includes an email sent in April 2021 by Rob Flaherty, the White House's Director of Digital Strategy, to Google officials.
01:01:55.000 In it, Mr Flaherty wrote that YouTube is funneling people into hesitance about vaccines.
01:02:01.000 I don't know that that's a fair analysis there, that YouTube was funneling people into hesitance.
01:02:07.000 Since then, Lockdowns have been queried.
01:02:09.000 Social distancing has been queried.
01:02:11.000 Masks has been queried.
01:02:12.000 Medications have been queried.
01:02:14.000 Side effects have been queried.
01:02:16.000 Natural immunity has been queried.
01:02:18.000 Various other medications have been queried.
01:02:20.000 The principle is never hesitate.
01:02:22.000 Is that the principle?
01:02:23.000 Never hesitate?
01:02:23.000 Right, let's go!
01:02:24.000 It's not a principle, is it?
01:02:25.000 It's like, oh, you're encouraging hesitancy.
01:02:27.000 What they're referring to as hesitancy could be called freedom.
01:02:31.000 You might be hesitating because you disagree with something.
01:02:34.000 Since we have more access to diverse information because of the technological advances of the last few decades, people are likely to survey, consider, and contemplate information in different ways, and sometimes that might take time.
01:02:50.000 The removal of hesitancy is actually an invitation to obey immediately.
01:02:55.000 Hesitancy implies that you're just sort of pausing before doing what you're told.
01:03:00.000 What that actually might be is, well, I disagree with you.
01:03:03.000 Hesitancy itself, reflection, pause for thought, is being somehow criminalised, at least delegitimised.
01:03:10.000 It's interesting that when the Iraq war happened, millions of people marched around the wall like, hey, wait a minute, there might not be weapons of mass destruction.
01:03:18.000 There absolutely are weapons of mass destruction.
01:03:21.000 Well, we might hesitate for a minute and have a little march and think about that.
01:03:26.000 Nowadays, you don't get marches.
01:03:27.000 You get little pockets of resistance that coalesce around issues where people have educated themselves.
01:03:33.000 As you did years ago.
01:03:34.000 People go, no, excuse me, this might not be right.
01:03:36.000 I think they're censoring information.
01:03:37.000 I've noticed on my Instagram account.
01:03:38.000 I've noticed on my Facebook account.
01:03:39.000 I've noticed my comment was deleted.
01:03:41.000 We read your comments, so we know what you're saying.
01:03:43.000 Now what they do is they just malign and criticize those communities.
01:03:46.000 They're conspiracy theorists.
01:03:48.000 Carry on.
01:03:48.000 They're hesitating.
01:03:49.000 Hesitancy is your right.
01:03:51.000 That's pause for thought, reflection, consideration, curiosity.
01:03:55.000 That's where many great advances and changes and transitions come from.
01:03:59.000 Hesitancy isn't a problem.
01:04:01.000 Hesitancy is your right.
01:04:03.000 They're trying to criminalise thinking.
01:04:06.000 So there you are.
01:04:07.000 While all these laws for censorship are being passed around the world, while your moments of reflection and thought and contemplation are being delegitimised and even criminalised, it shows that there is a movement towards a counter-argument because people are starting to recognise that free speech is not hate speech.
01:04:23.000 That hate speech is not free speech.
01:04:25.000 Free speech is the ability to communicate.
01:04:27.000 Pausing to reflect is not a A crime.
01:04:29.000 But that's just what I think.