All Episodes
Previous Next
Nov. 14, 2022 - Stay Free - Russel Brand
01:10:07
The Dark Truth About Bill Gates - #034 - Stay Free with Russell Brand
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
The sound of the heart beating.
The heart beats faster.
The heart beats faster.
The heart beats slower.
The heart beats faster.
The heart beats slower.
The heart beats faster.
The heart beats faster.
In this video, you're going to see the scene circle.
Hey, you're watching Stay Free with Russell Brand.
Finally, a broadcast that you can rely on.
Hey, this is much too, this is coming, I'm getting feedback out of these cans or something.
Yeah, I've hit you twice.
Yeah, once is difficult, twice is unbearable.
Where's that coming from?
That's coming out of here.
Blimey.
OK, thanks for joining us.
We've got a fantastic show for you today.
Here are some headlines for you to consider.
With me, of course, is Gareth Roy.
Gareth Roy produces the show with me and helps to create the wonderful content that you're about to enjoy that's going to give you a new, awakened and enlightening perspective on world events and, I hope, on your inner life.
Thanks for joining me, Gareth.
It's a real pleasure, Russell.
And over there is young Putin.
Do we have a camera on young Putin?
Don't think so.
No, quite rightly, because he's somewhat... He's part of the reason we're even on this channel, because of his strike-inducing content over at the other place.
If you're joining us on YouTube right now, click over to Rumble as quickly as possible so you can enjoy this content free from censorship.
You know that there's all sorts of infiltration to be considered.
And let's get into the news.
Shall we get immediately into the news?
Let's do it.
Straight into it.
Like professionals.
Zelensky visits liberated city of Kherson.
There he is visiting it.
We'll be talking about that and we'll be talking in particular about how the mainstream news reports on that.
Of course if you are a member of the Kherson community, if you're a resident of Kherson, this will be tremendous news and cause for great celebration.
But Are there aspects of this story that ought be more responsibly covered?
That's something we'll be doing.
We'll talk a little bit about Remembrance Day and how ceremonies of this nature are used to galvanise jingoistic sentiment without perhaps drawing attention to the genuine sense of connections that ought to underwrite a nation, i.e.
are these empty gestures or are they legitimate and real?
We'll be fact-checking Biden because he's claimed falsely that student debt forgiveness has been passed by Congress.
That's simply not true.
Of course, Pfizer and Moderna are launching clinical trials to track health issues such as myocarditis in the years following diagnosis.
That is in mainstream media now.
So YouTube fact-checkers, watch out.
That's an NBC story right there.
Joe Biden and Chinese leader... Can you say his name for me?
Xi Jinping, I think.
Thank you.
A meeting during the G20 summit in Biden.
And actually, they haven't got a nice time.
Yeah, in Bali, not in Biden.
They're not doing it in Biden.
Some of it's happening inside of Biden.
It's a good point.
Inside of his mind.
That's true.
Where a lot of things happen.
Yeah, this is happening.
So what the claim is here is that they're getting on ever so well.
They're smiling and shaking hands and things.
This, as the United States prepares to deploy up to six nuclear capable B-52 bombers to Northern Australia, Where they would be close enough to strike China.
That's just a coincidence though, and it's unlikely to irritate the powerful nation of China.
Don't be worried about those nuclear-capable B-52s.
Also, Jeff Bezos's cleaners are forced to climb out of a window to use the toilet when he's home.
If Jeff's home, you've got to clamber out of the window just to use the lavvy.
Doesn't seem very kind.
No.
It seems unkind.
No, it does seem unkind, because that's even worse than... What are those places where you get, like, a door for just the working people?
Like, a poor door.
Tradesman's Entrance.
One of those.
It's not even that anymore.
It's the Tradesman's Window.
Why should we waste good money on an entrance?
You can clamber out the same way we'd let a wasp out!
Get out there!
I need the toilet, Mr Bezos!
And I didn't even do the accent I assumed would be appropriate, which I believe would be a Central or Latin American accent.
I don't know exactly where Jeff Bezos lives, but I imagine that's the kind of labour that will be exploited and forced to clamber out of the window.
They developed infections because they couldn't use it for long periods.
I'm not part of that.
Do you think he's just employing the same tactics that they have at actual Amazon warehouses?
Because they're not allowed to take toilet breaks, are they?
I thought that the lack of toilet breaks was incidental rather than this is my belief.
People should not take toilet breaks.
Seems like a pretty fundamentalist.
That's his main thing.
Main thing is no one go for a wee.
Also, would you like things delivered to your home quick, smart, pronto?
That's number two.
But number one is my real priority.
No one doing number one.
I guess maybe the two are affected by each other.
You know, the parcels get there quicker due to the lack of loo breaks, maybe.
And the house gets cleaner due to the lack of loo breaks.
But I think at the point that you're getting a bladder infection, I would be inclined to just go.
As you know, Gareth, I have Simply Weed on command.
That's what all of us do, I suppose, when we take a wee.
Not in front of the rest of us, though.
No, and it was only once, and it was for a stunt-oriented TV show that I briefly participated in.
Now, should we look a little more closely at Zelensky?
This isn't about him visiting Herson.
We watched ABC News reporting on events in Herson and what I was interested in is the celebratory, thank you, tone.
Justifiably celebratory, but is there more complexity to this story?
Let's give you a bit of a hint.
Is this war against a country that has nuclear capacity?
And is there some complexity to the forces fighting within the Ukraine?
And were that complexity elsewhere in cultural life, would it be the focus?
I'm speaking obviously particularly about the... Am I going to say the word Nazi?
Yeah.
Nazis within the Ukrainian forces.
Not that I'm suggesting that, I mean, that that's the, you know, the significant number of the forces, but there's an inconvenient bit of footage.
Okay, so this is how mainstream media will give you the story of the, let's call it the liberation of Herson.
And by the way, if you're a Ukrainian person, or if you are particularly, what do I want to say, sort of sympathetic to the plight of Ukrainian people, then of course I share with you in the joy of people being able to return To their homes and the idea of a peaceful resolution to this war.
I'm certainly not a pro-Putin person.
No, this is a comment on the media, isn't it?
This is a comment on the media.
This is the media I'm commenting on.
Let's have a look at how ABC News, in the form of this human, reported on the story.
Jubilation in the Ukrainian city of Kherson.
The country's troops liberating residents after months of Russian occupation.
This soldier returning to the arms of his emotional grandmother who dropped to her knees.
Right now that, first of all, I would say that that's...
Needlessly emotive.
Of course wars do include returning service personnel being greeted by grandmothers, grandfathers, family members and that is pretty beautiful but to highlight that in a news package is obviously biased and it's a sort of a guiding ideal.
Here is a grandmother on her knees welcoming home It is important, and it's beautiful, but wouldn't you also like to hear, for example, that in October, Putin warned that any direct clash of NATO and Russian troops could lead to a global catastrophe, while the head of Russia's Security Council recognised that Russia is now fighting NATO in Ukraine.
That's something that I'd also like to say.
That grandmother is very, very happy.
But, also though, like all grandmothers everywhere, She will be less happy if there were a nuclear war.
Unless she's one of that rare category of grandma that just loves Armageddon.
She's an Armageddon-loving granny.
They will exist.
They're out there.
I don't know if you could sort of base a Coca-Cola campaign on hitting that as your target audience.
We want to get those Armageddon-loving grannies as a big group.
Or like you're saying, Lisa Marie That's Me says, it's a Wag the Dog moment.
And of course that's a reference to the De Niro and Dustin Hoffman movie that shows you how war was
Utilized to sort of create I think sort of popularity for an incumbent president. Not I'm suggesting there's any
comparison Now we're only going to be on YouTube for another minute
If you want to join us and see how we report on Trump and how we want to cover the rest of this story then
click over to rumble right now Let's carry on watching the rest of this news Tom Sufi Burrage
from Ukraine where there are fears that a humanitarian disaster looms
Tonight euphoria in Herson a major Ukrainian city now free from Russian rule
now free from Russian rule.
That as well, like seeing people with the flags, that's very positive.
I can only imagine what it will be like to be able to return to your homes after a foreign invading force had occupied your city. I feel completely, I feel sympathy
for them, I feel total support for those people, but wouldn't it be responsible to also
mention that Russia possessed 6,000 nuclear warheads and its military doctrine explicitly states that
it will use them before it will accept an existential military defeat? Don't you want that
included in the news? Yeah I think you probably do. Yeah. Yeah you do.
But that seems important as well.
What Jeffrey Sachs came on and told us is that this war essentially happened, or was initiated, a long time before what was being stated recently by the media and by governments.
And essentially what we're now, this narrative pertains to what we've been told the war is, as in it happened, you know, at the start of this year.
It doesn't go back any further, but we know in 2008 William Burns, the US ambassador to Russia, wrote a long memo warning the US policy of trying to turn Ukraine into a NATO proxy on Russia's borders was a red line that could lead to civil war.
So we know this goes back much further.
And it's also difficult to argue that the mainstream media aren't being reductive in their reporting when a news report focuses and centres on a happy grandma, like when it reduces the story down to Here's a happy grandma.
That's the level that we want you to receive this information at.
Of course, the celebratory tone is perfectly understandable.
With the people of Ukraine, I join in celebration.
I love Ukrainian people.
I'm so happy that the people of Kherson have got their homes back.
I think it's terrible that their country is invaded.
And I think the only things that could be worse than what's happened to Ukrainian people would be, obviously, a global apocalypse in which everybody was similarly... There isn't one mention of a proxy war in this news report, is there?
No.
That's one thing they are not explicitly covering.
We'll be talking to Max Blumenthal later from Greyzone, and he'll be, I think, articulating some of the complexities for us.
And I'm going to be really pushing back, actually, on that.
Oh, yeah.
Yeah, I am.
I'm going to be saying, are you sure about that, Max?
Yeah.
Max, are you sure that you're not got some biases?
You're not telling... Right, first question I'm going to say is, tell us all of your biases, so as I know exactly what it is you're telling us.
Sponsorships.
Who's sponsoring you, mate?
Big Pharma, is it?
Is it Big Pharma?
Let's see what else is going on in this news report.
Ukrainians hugging and kissing their soldiers, treating them as heroes, autographing flags.
Right, we're seeing the grandmother again!
That's twice!
You've not mentioned proxy war once, you've not mentioned the lethal aid, you've not mentioned NATO infringement on former Soviet Union territories against the peace deal struck between Gorbachev and Reagan, but twice on the kneeling grandmother.
I think the kneeling grandmother is an important moment that epitomises a certain aspect of war.
That war tears families apart.
The people that are willing to give their lives to fighting conflicts are heroes.
The Ukrainian people have suffered.
These are all important pieces of information, but also what is important to know is, for example, that, um, well, okay, the relentless stream, in the absence of any public discussion of what the U.S.
is doing to seek an end to the conflict, has signals, creates a recognition there's no end in sight to the war, and that the U.S.
is committed to supporting Ukrainian defense efforts for the long haul.
Rather than pursuing a negotiated end to it.
That also should crop up in the report.
It probably should.
grandma down on her knees reunited after months apart and tears of joy.
So it's a motive, an emotional reporting on a complex geopolitical issue that involves
resources, a proxy war, NATO infringement, ongoing imperialist projects on both sides
whether it's the imperialism of Putin and Russia to reclaim territories that they've
always regarded as part of Russia and I know that's sort of like a complex and ongoing
issue and that the people in Ukraine are clearly overjoyed to have regained sovereignty of
their city and that's, I totally sympathise and I agree with them but what we're focusing
on is the emotion.
Don't you feel that when you personally are receiving information on an emotional level
you are perhaps not best poised to appreciate complexity?
Who wanted to separate Ukrainians, says Elena, we are united as never before.
The Russian retreat revealing a trail of destruction.
With many basic services cut off here, an entire population in need.
But it's a symbolic and stinging defeat for Vladimir Putin.
Ukraine saying it's recaptured 1,700 square miles, an area nearly the size of Delaware in just the...
We've got a Delaware back.
Often when I sort of hear stuff, though, about, like, Russian retreat and territory maps like this, I can't help but think of the old Second World War, where the Russians were able to demonstrate a considerable degree of tenacity on a summit in Spiagol 2020.
Delaware is tiny, by the way.
Okay, but...
I'm certainly not suggesting that this is not an important victory for Ukrainian people, particularly people that are directly affected by this horrible conflict, who deserve peace and deserve to live freely.
What we are trying to assess is the objectivity in the news reporting, and beyond objectivity, which is perhaps impossible to achieve, responsibility.
Now have a look at this clip that sort of again demonstrates an aspect of this war that people perhaps are unwilling to address because of the haste to present a simplified narrative.
Have a little look.
It's just a member of the Ukrainian military celebrating the recapture of Kherson.
Just good old-fashioned celebrations.
Let's have a look.
Residents there have been celebrating their long-awaited freedom.
Back in Ukraine, back in Herson.
Oh, just a... Wait, what's that?
I recognise that wave from somewhere.
Cheering wave.
The old cheer.
Just having a good old cheer.
Now...
If you're willing to use that gesture as a reason to criticise and condemn rallies for Trump supporters, then it ought be mentioned as a component in this ongoing and complex story.
Certainly what I feel we, ordinary people, deserve from our media is some balanced reporting, not what ultimately amounts to propaganda for the aims and agenda of, in this case, the military-industrial complex.
I think that's what this is all about, isn't it?
I mean, even the BBC back in 2014 reported that the Ukrainian state has provided funding, weapons and other forms of support to extreme right-wing militias, including neo-Nazi ones.
And really what we're saying about this is, obviously, the celebration of this, of people's freedoms and of people getting their cities back, is incredible.
And that is something to be celebrated.
Should be celebrated.
Of course it is.
But this has happened.
Partly due to, for example, the U.S.
passing a $40 billion aid package for Ukraine, including $24 billion in new military spending.
For Americans, that's $110 million a day over the last year.
So this is no doubt being achieved in part due to the help of the U.S.
And whilst, you know, members of, I mean, as I said before, the U.S.
ambassador to Russia has spoken about how this is a proxy war between U.S.
and Russia.
So now that we know it's a proxy war, it's being funded by the Americans, and Putin has said explicitly that we will use our 6,000 nuclear warheads if we see any kind of existential military defeat, then this is only going in one direction.
I think what you've done there, Gareth, is you've forgotten about the importance of a grandmother.
Of course.
Perhaps you need another look at a grandmother who's not even using her entire leg to greet her grandson.
So there we have it.
The reporting of the mainstream media seems somewhat irresponsible, focusing solely on Ukrainian jubilation, an important story Important for people reclaiming their city and their homes to be acknowledged.
But in the context of a potential nuclear apocalypse, in a potential proxy war evidently funded by the American military-industrial complex, do you think you're capable of handling that level of complexity?
Would you prefer to be told stories like an adult rather than as a child?
Let us know in the chat.
Let us know in the comments.
And remember, Smash that rumble button like your life depends on it, because it might actually depend on it, because perhaps we are the last potential road to freedom.
That's too grandiose.
I can't say we're the last road to freedom.
But I can tell you now that the political shape is shifting in America.
Trump as the libertarian messiah, as the rouser, as the swamp drainer, may finally be an era that is at an end.
Certainly he's lost a powerful ally in the Murdoch family, because now he's being reported on, not As a saviour, and I know a lot of you lot, you adore Trump, don't you?
A lot of people watching this will love Trump, a lot of people watching this will hate Trump.
Me, I tend to try to remain transcendent of the Trump phenomena, focusing on the fact that figures like Trump emerge in political landscapes where many people feel that political systems do not respond to them, where many people feel That the state and corporations are operating in harmony to exclude the will of ordinary people being met.
But that's just so much verbiage when compared to an image of Donald Trump looking like Humpty Dumpty.
So there we go.
Don, who couldn't build a wall, right, mentioning that wall, had a great fall.
Can all the... It's weird to mention that just to justify the... Yeah.
The Trumpty Dumpty pun.
Yeah.
Isn't it?
We'll keep going with this.
We'll persist.
We're calling him Trumpty Dumpty.
Well, hold on.
Isn't Humpty Dumpty mostly known for sitting on a wall?
That is what we're mostly known for.
Hold on!
Donald Trump, he had that wall.
He was always going to build a wall.
It's going to be the best wall.
Right, bring that wall up, even though the wall's not actually relevant now, other than to facilitate this pun.
Can all the GOP's men put the party back together again?
And the future, so that's what it is.
They're saying that DeSantis is now the future of the Republican Party.
This is essentially, this is a departure.
The Trump narrative, at least as far as the Murdoch press are concerned, is over.
Yeah, I mean Trump obviously has had an amazing response to it.
I've printed you out something here.
So Trump says, despite having picked so many winners, I have to put up with fake news.
For me, Fox News has always gone, even in 2015-16 when I began my journey, but now they're really gone.
We'll show a clip of Fox News to support that.
News Corp, which is Fox, the Wall Street Journal and the no longer great New York Post is all in for Governor Ron DeSantimonious.
Let me know what you think.
Do you think that the Trump era is over?
Do you think that DeSantis is the future?
Let's have a look at what they say on Fox News.
So going into 2024, the Republicans are going to be looking for candidates who are focused on winning, not just making a point or settling a score.
So to really change the country, We're going to have to win and we have to win over voters outside our traditional base.
That means young people too.
That's got to be the goal for the next presidential election.
The populist movement is about ideas.
I suppose what's significant about this is whether it's in the form of the New York Post or Fox News, you're seeing Murdoch media turn away from Trump.
And that's, I suppose, that's surprising and new.
Could we have a little look though at the image of Trump as Humpty Dumpty again?
Because I've got a little bit more, I would call it, Jungian analysis to offer on that.
Now I know a lot of you people, a lot of you watching, a lot of our glorious Awakening community Like Trump, I think because of Trump's ability to skewer and criticise the establishment from a position of authenticity.
I was just thinking about what the Humpty Dumpty myth, if I can call it that, represents.
And I think it's fragility, and I think it's egotism.
And I wonder if on some linguistic level, the word egg, which Humpty Dumpty is, and as Ricky Gervais pointed out in his brilliant special, there's no actual... It never says anywhere that Humpty Dumpty is an egg.
That's just something we've all just assumed as a culture together.
But I reckon that the reason for that assumption is because of egg, because of that first syllable.
So like I reckon what we're being invited to look at is the fragility and egotism of
Trump as a figure rather than what was previously presumed is that he had the power as someone
that's seen both sides of the veil to report on establishment power and corruption and
also ultimately to change it.
Some of you feel that Trump did that.
Like I know if I ever say what did Trump really do though in government that meaningfully
changed the lives of ordinary Americans people say he did this thing that meant that there
was manufacturing industry more manufacturing and it was no wars and definitely no wars
is a good thing although I think he carried on with the droning.
But if we're going to talk about this, we should probably look at Dave Chappelle on SNL, whose analysis, yeah, we don't want to see Fox News again, Dave Chappelle on SNL, whose analysis, as you would expect from perhaps the greatest stand-up comedian ever to have lived, let me know in the chat, let me know in the comments if you think that that is, if that's how you'd describe Chappelle.
Talking about something that you don't see people on mainstream media acknowledge enough.
And obviously we can't explain it as well as Chappelle does, but let's have a look at Chappelle's analysis of Trump on SNL.
And note in particular The discomfort of the audience as they are invited to look at Trump from anything other than a reductive, vilifying and demonizing perspective.
Even if you're not celebrating Trump, even if you don't like Trump, you know, this is America.
We're meant to be free to like and dislike people according to our personal tastes.
People have been kind of trained to hedge their responses to even a mention of Donald Trump.
Let me know in the chat, in the comments, what you think of this as Chappelle invites us to look at the phenomena I'm watching the news now, they're declaring the end of the Trump era.
Now okay, I can see how in New York you might believe this is the end of his era.
I'm just being honest with you, I live in Ohio amongst the poor whites.
A lot of you don't understand why Trump was so popular, but I get it because I hear it every day.
He's very loved.
And the reason he's loved is because people in Ohio have never seen somebody like him.
He's what I call an honest liar.
I'm not joking right now.
He's an honest liar.
That first debate, that first debate, I've never seen anything like it.
I've never seen a white male billionaire screaming at the top of his lungs, this whole system is rigged, he said.
And across the stage was a white woman, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, sitting over there looking at him like, no, it's not.
I said, now wait a minute, bro.
It's what he said.
And the moderator said, well, Mr. Trump, If in fact the system is rigged, as he suggests, what would be your evidence?
You remember what he said, bro?
He said, I know the system is rigged because I use it.
I said, God damn!
And then he pulled out an Illuminati.
Yeah, that's I suppose the moment that many of us acknowledge that something unusual was happening in
American politics and that that territory had been created by the inability of, let's call it the mainstream media and
the mainstream political establishment to have an honest discourse about the nature of corruption,
The fact that ultimately the both American political parties respond primarily to their donors and to lobbyists and not to ordinary American people.
Donald Trump occupied that space with an incredible dexterity and vivacity and that was something that didn't seem to be able to be talked about.
I mean and I suppose that in a way perhaps Chappelle saying this now, do you think that's another reason why we should think that the Trump phenomena I don't know how you could ever put anything past Trump anyway.
I mean, even when he was saying this about Fox, even in 2015, 2016, when I began my journey, Fox was always gone.
I mean, did he ever really need Fox?
I know he has that affinity with Sean Hannity.
I don't know.
Why would you put anything past him?
It feels like... I think the other question is how effective is mainstream media in terms of how much impact does Murdoch have now?
I don't know.
It'd be very interesting to see that.
Certainly we're beginning to think that print media is over and mainstream TV is over but if you look at the results of the midterms we do a great story which I think we'll be showing that tomorrow, Gareth.
We did a story on How Biden's pledge to eliminate student debt, while in effect incomplete and possibly even downright untrue, has been very effective in mobilising younger voters.
So we recognise now that politics is a strategic game It's not about the simple delivery of, what is it you want us to do?
Oh okay, we'll do that then.
It's about manipulation, deception, performance and spectacle.
So if you create that as the climate, that as the environment, then a sort of what I've heard him refer to as a master persuader, like Trump, is going to be able to operate in that space more effectively than these wonkish, bureaucratic, dry old fuddy-duddies from the Democrat Party.
What is DeSantis?
Is he Trump Mark Two?
Or is he Trump Light?
Is Trump, once again, what he called him, average, didn't he?
Not average.
And that's it, like he has another one of Trump's skills.
And again, I don't agree with the politics of Donald Trump.
I don't agree with the institutions within which he sits, whether that's the Republican Party or Congress or the The White House, I think all of that needs to be radically revised in favour of decentralised political systems.
We're simply talking about the phenomena of Trump in the manner that the great master Dave Chappelle is there.
Let me know what you think in the comments and chat.
And let me know if you think, as Gareth is suggesting, that Trump is transcendent of old media anyway.
He's found a way of reaching the sort of anger centres of dispossessed and infuriated people.
People that don't feel that there's a political class that serves them anymore, if they ever did.
For a long time, I've used the phrase politically homeless.
I feel like a vagrant.
I don't think that the left or right cares about what I want.
Ultimately, I see sort of...
aspects of libertarianism that I believe in, leave people alone to be whoever they want,
regardless of what aspect of their lives that is, and not hurting other people, culturally,
sexually, traditionally or progressively. But also I believe in community. I believe
that if we don't help one another, voluntarily, but integrally, then we are living in a nihilistic
and atrophying society. Really then, we need to find a way of fusing together these ideas.
Individual freedom, community responsibility. But this shouldn't be an imposed community
responsibility and perhaps never can be again, as long as we know that the government primarily
is interested in liberating your money from you and giving it to private interests, whether
that's the military industrial complex, big pharma, big media or other aspects of big
That's certainly a question I want to put to you lot.
And what kind of politicians and what kind of political movement do you want to belong to?
How many of you there see as the center of your ideology the right to control what other people do sexually, the right to control what other people do economically, the right to how other people respond to certain vital hot-button topics?
Let me know in the chat, let me know in the comments.
I think it's with Trump, isn't it?
What Chappelle's talking about here is, I guess, Trump's ability to own his own hypocrisy.
Whilst you can say he probably doesn't do that in every situation, in that situation he did.
And maybe that was the moment where people went, this is different, this is something different, even if it didn't turn out to be anything different.
He lit something in people where they saw a politician, or a potential future politician, own up to the fact that he uses all these rigged tax codes in the same way that the Democrat donors do as well.
And, you know, when it comes to, say, Ron DeSantis, you know, I was reading here, Ron DeSantis invoked a capital riot to reintroduce and pass into law a repressive anti-protest bill that had previously failed.
In a video promoting the bill, his party even placed footage of the Capitol breach side-by-side with that of George Floyd protesters, making the case that such out-of-control protesters need to be subdued.
So DeSantis has a history of shutting down protests.
That's not something that necessarily he would even own in a way that, say, Trump might do, like Chappelle is talking about.
I don't know.
It's going to be interesting to see how this goes.
Obviously, the reason why Murdoch is picking DeSantis is because he thinks he's got a better chance of winning.
But who knows what will happen?
OK, well, let us know what you think in the comments and the chat.
A lot of people here saying that they think that Tulsi and DeSantis would be an unstoppable ticket.
But my personal opinion is that within these institutions, within these systems, you will not get results that meaningfully change your reality.
Now, I feel like we're not even going to get to the end of this fantastic clip from Chappelle, because we have to move towards our, well, it's our beautiful item.
Here's the news.
No, here's the effing news.
We talk about Bill Gates now.
Bill Gates now is either someone that's sort of deified and lauded by a certain portion of the political and mainstream world and vilified in extremists in certain portions of certain online spaces.
But the reason I like this story is because it rationally demonstrates Bill Gates' Potential nefariousness, but certainly his irresponsibility when it comes to agriculture.
We've had Vandana Shiva come on the show many times and explain to us the negative impact of Gates' ideas on Indian agriculture.
But many of you will be unaware of just how harmful his ideas have been to farmers across the continent.
Here's the news.
You'll love this because it shows how centralising, globalist, technocratic, technologically dictatorial
forces have stepped in to control what ought be the territory of ordinary people.
Here's the news.
No, here's the effing news.
He's the answer to all the world's problems and anyone who criticizes him is a conspiracy theorist or a considered academic concerned about him colonizing and monopolizing the world's resources.
You're gonna love this.
Whenever people talk about Bill Gates, it's usually as a kind of sort of megalomaniacal tyrant or as the savior of the world.
When he is harshly criticized, people often think it's a kind of conspiracy-oriented argument derived from his actions during the pandemic or the considerable power of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.
Recently, 50 agricultural organisations got together to write Bill Gates a letter condemning his approach and suggestions to the problem of food sovereignty.
It's a beautiful letter, it's brilliantly articulate, and the reason we want to present it to you today is because it demonstrates that criticising Bill Gates doesn't make you a conspiracy theorist, and it demonstrates Two, that Bill Gates's actions and influence are nefarious and harmful.
Stay to the end of this video because we are equipping you with arguments so that you can have a conversation with people and go, oh you're a conspiracy theorist, you're a conspiracy theorist.
This is not conspiracy theory.
This is Harmful policies that are designed to centralise power and control food.
And people are answering back from a position of authority, integrity and expertise.
This is not woo woo clap trap or QAnon bullshit.
This is important, integral information.
But before we get into that, let's see Bill Gates present in solutions in a way that definitely doesn't make you query his motives.
After all, he's got a little trolley full of corn.
When you see something like that, do you straight away think, this is going to be propaganda?
Otherwise, why has Bill Gates got a trolley full of corn?
Alright, just watch over that there, Mark.
Yeah, Mark, you watch over that, you bloody idiot.
Well, I brought some corn with me.
Some people call it maize.
Because this letter by the Community Alliance for Justice stroke Agriwatch is much more articulate and authoritative than I could ever be, let's get right into it because it addresses the patronising nature of this video and also the fact that Bill Gates is just plain wrong.
And it alludes to the idea that there may be more nefarious objectives afoot because almost everything that Bill Gates suggests empowers Bill Gates and interests comparable to Bill Gates while disempowering ordinary people.
It's brilliant.
Dear Bill Gates, I like that they've called him his full name.
You were recently featured commenting on the global state of agriculture and food insecurity.
It is your preferred high-tech solutions, including genetic engineering, new breeding technologies, and now digital agriculture, that have in fact consistently failed to reduce hunger or increased food access as promised.
So straight away, Bill Gates's suggested solutions do not work and have made the problem worse.
In two recent articles, you make a number of claims that are inaccurate and need to be challenged.
Both pieces admit that the world currently produces enough food to adequately feed all the Earth's inhabitants, yet you continue to fundamentally misdiagnose the problem as relating to low productivity.
We do not need to increase production as much as to assure more equitable access to food.
In addition, there are four specific distortions in these pieces which should be addressed.
Namely, one, the supposed need for credit for fertilizer, cheap fertilizer, to ensure agricultural productivity.
Two, the idea that the Green Revolution of the mid-20th century needs to be replicated now to address hunger.
Three, the idea that better seeds, often produced by large corporations, are required to cope with climate change.
And four, your suggestion that if people have solutions that aren't singing Kumbaya, you'll put money behind them.
What I like about this first paragraph is the initial statement that food poverty could be solved immediately.
That the world produces enough food for nobody to be hungry.
Now, as countries like the UK and the United States enter into a cost-of-living crisis and likely conditions of poverty not seen for nearly a century, it's important to address that the problem is not a lack of resources.
The problem is therefore a political one.
That means it relates to systems of the imagination and mind brought into being for the convenience and benefit of hierarchical elites rather than a necessary problem that relates to resources.
And I also like the promise that we're going to break down the four assumptions that Bill Gates has made and one by one take them down.
First, synthetic fertilisers contribute 2% of overall greenhouse gas emissions and are the primary source of nitrous oxide emissions.
Producing nitrogen fertilisers requires 3-5% of the world's fossil gas.
They also make farmers and importing nations dependent on volatile prices on international markets and are a major cause of rising food prices globally.
Yet you claim that even more fertilizer is needed to increase agricultural productivity and address hunger.
Toxic and damaging synthetic fertilizers are not a feasible way forward.
Already, companies, organizations, and farmers in Africa and elsewhere have been developing biofertilizers made from compost, manure, and ash, and biopesticides made from botanical compounds such as neem tree oil or garlic.
These products can be manufactured locally, thereby avoiding dependency and price volatility, and can be increasingly scaled up and commercialized.
The agricultural protests that we're seeing across the world are a result of edicts that they reduce emissions.
Meanwhile, Bill Gates is suggesting measures that would increase emissions yet further, claiming that they're ecologically motivated and that they're going to solve problems.
So it doesn't make sense, does it?
Measures are introduced that persecute ordinary farmers, while simultaneously people that
have enormous influence in the agricultural field are suggesting measures that will lead
to an increase in emissions, while flying around the world on a private jet to COP27
and other meaningless gesture conferences in order to espouse how normal people have
got to change their behaviour.
Second, the Green Revolution was far from a resounding success.
It did very little to reduce the number of hungry people in the world or to ensure equitable and sufficient access to food.
It also came with a host of other problems, from ecological issues like long-term soil degradation and socio-economic ones like increased inequality and indebtedness, which has been a major contribution to the epidemic of farmer suicides in India.
So of course this indebtedness could perhaps be seen as part of the solution.
I've been told before, look at what the results of some of these measures are.
And then forget what they told you they were doing it for.
Just look at the results.
And if the results are, oh, indebtedness or the ability to lock people down, then you can start to think, oh, that's why they did it then.
Judge them by their fruits.
It's literally biblical.
Your unquestioning support for a new green revolution demonstrates willful ignorance about history and about the root causes of hunger, which are by and large about political and economic arrangements, not about a global lack of food.
So you're not even told the true nature of the problem, let alone the inefficiencies of the solution.
Third, Climate resilient seeds are already in existence and being developed by farmers and traded through informal seed markets.
You know that most investments have been in maize and rice rather than locally adapted and nutritious cereals like sorghum.
Yet AGRA, the Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa, which your foundation, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, created and financed, has been among those institutions that have disproportionately focused on maize and rice.
In other words, you are part of creating the very problem you name.
The AGRA initiative, which your foundation continues to fund, has also pushed restrictive seed legislation that limits and restricts crop innovation to well-resourced labs and companies, centralizing power, preventing informal seed markets, disempowering ordinary farmers.
These initiatives don't increase widespread innovation, but rather contribute to the privatization and consolidation of corporate monopolies over seed development and seed markets, almost as if that was the intention.
Finally, Your assertion that critics of your approach are simply singing kumbaya rather than developing meaningful and fundable solutions is extremely disrespectful and dismissive.
Well, of course it is.
There are already many tangible ongoing proposals and projects that work to boost productivity and food security, from biofertilizer and biopesticide manufacturing facilities, to agroecological farmer training programs, to experimentation with new water and soil management techniques, low-input farming systems, and pest-deterring plant species.
So there are already measures in place that can be controlled and implemented by the communities themselves and don't require the centralization of power, the patenting of seeds and crops, the technologicalization of the process of agriculture, all by the way by a fellow who seems to be buying up Farmland, at the moment, by coincidence.
What you're doing here is gaslighting.
Presenting practical, ongoing, farmer-led solutions as somehow fanciful or ridiculous, while presenting your own preferred approaches as pragmatic.
This is an approach that we see all over the world.
Solutions that benefit ordinary people and allow ordinary people to continue to control our lives, control our food.
These things are seen as somehow Vulgar, or kumbayari, like all spiritual, stupid, ill-considered.
Do you think there's an agenda at play?
Let me know in the comments, let me know in the chat if these solutions are pragmatic, or pragmatic only in so much as they empower Bill Gates.
Yet, it is your preferred high-tech solutions, including genetic engineering, new breeding technologies, and now digital agriculture, that have in fact consistently failed to reduce hunger or increase food access as promised.
And in some cases, the solutions you expound as fixes for climate change actually contribute to the biophysical processes driving the problem, e.g.
more fossil fuel-based fertilizers and more fossil fuel-dependent infrastructure to support them.
So even the stuff they talk about, the stuff that they do in those conferences, all of their sort of hand-wringing about, we've got to save the planet, we've got to save the climate, they are simultaneously presenting ideas that make the problem worse.
So do they really care?
Or exacerbate the political conditions that lead to inequality in food access, e.g.
policies and seed breeding initiatives that benefit large corporations and labs rather than farmers themselves.
That's not a coincidence that we're seeing this worldwide agricultural movement that is presented as being against climate change measures.
Meanwhile, digital agriculture and centralisation of resources and ideologies is being presented as the solution.
In both articles, you radically simplify complex issues in ways that justify your own approach and interventions.
You note in the New York Times op-ed that Africa, with the lowest costs of labour and land, should be a net exporter of agricultural products because their productivity is much lower than in rich countries and you just don't have the infrastructure.
However, costs of land and labour as well as infrastructures are socially and politically produced.
Africa is in fact highly productive, it's just that the profits are realised elsewhere.
Through colonisation, neoliberalism, debt traps and other forms of legalised pillaging, African lives, environments and bodies have been devalued and made into commodities for the benefit and profit of others.
Infrastructures have been designed to channel these commodities outside of the continent itself.
Africa is not self-sufficient in cereals because its agricultural, mining and other resource-intensive sectors have been structured in ways that are geared towards serving colonial and then international markets rather than African peoples themselves.
Although you are certainly not responsible for all of this, you and and your foundation are exacerbating some of these problems
through a very privatised, profit-based and corporate approach to agriculture. So Bill
Gates is presenting himself as a solution when in fact he is the problem. And many of these arguments
about the exploitation of Africa and racial differences and colonialism and imperialism
actually centralise on the figures that are trying to make a kind of social profit
from saying they're helping.
We gotta have a fairer world.
Let's put badges on things.
Let's support stuff.
Let's do the right hashtags.
These are the guys that are causing the problems.
There is no shortage of practical solutions and innovations by African farmers and organizations.
We invite you to step back and learn from those on the ground.
That's a flood web, so fuck off Bill.
At the same time we invite high profile news outlets, mainstream media, to be more cautious about lending credibility to one wealthy white man's flawed assumptions, hubris and ignorance at the expense of people and communities who are living and adapting to these realities as we speak.
I wonder why the mainstream media are so eager Well, I brought some corn with me.
Some people call it maize.
as if they are somehow financially indebted to him and have commercial relationships with
Bill Gates and affiliate organizations that prevent them from telling you the truth and
making you realize that wow, all the people of the world have the same problem.
Those bloody idiots!
They work with less than a hectare, which is about two acres.
Stupid!
So just about 12,000 times as much as what's sitting right there.
Blarf!
Fucking damn, you ain't got farm!
As Ndidi said, the Green Revolution was a miracle.
There's a counter-argument for that.
Amazingly, despite low land costs, low labor costs, Sub-Saharan Africa still imports billions of dollars of crops every year from all over the world.
Yeah, well, there's a reason for that.
And it's not because they're all idiots.
There are complex historical and corporate and commercial reasons for it.
And that's the reason why the war in Ukraine is now causing a hunger crisis.
Yes, there's definitely no subplots there or skullduggery to look at.
Look at how the whole thing is simplified.
There's just one problem.
Well, there's Putin and there's these idiot farmers and I've got the solution to all of it.
Let me be in charge of everything.
Don't think.
And the answer is innovation.
Oh, could anyone help us with this innovation, Bill?
Is there anyone around here with innovation?
Oh, me, mummy!
Please pick me!
Please pick me!
Let me be in charge of everything!
And we have some good examples from the past where we did drive innovation.
We certainly do, Bill.
You can speak to the grieving widows of the farmers of India.
The Gates Foundation funded a group of researchers in Africa To breed drought tolerant varieties of maize.
Which the letter tells you is one of the crops I don't need so much of!
In Kenya, that's enough to feed their family for the whole year and have excess maize to sell for about $880.
Bill Gates was boasting that they have magic seeds, crops engineered to adapt to climate change and resist agricultural pests, which ironically is what the people of Kenya call Bill Gates.
Because this is the trend, the one thing that will push against that population and climate change.
No, no, no, Bill.
I think they're saying that many of the fertilizers you're suggesting flying around the world on a private jet.
Hey, use some more fertilizers.
But aren't those fertilizers costly?
Bye!
Bye!
We can develop the tools and the systems to make sure that people have enough to eat, even despite the negative effects of climate change.
Thank you.
So there you have it.
Bill Gates likes to look at the world as simple data.
What I offer you is this question.
Is Bill Gates trying to help or is Bill Gates simply suggesting that the solution to all of these problems is to give Bill Gates more power?
You let me know in the chat.
Let me know in the comments what you think.
See you in a second.
Synchronicity525.
They're trying to control our water.
They're going to sell off our water.
That's Flash629, actually, says that.
They're trying to control food, air, water.
Now, we have to be careful, don't we?
And if you're new to the show, remember, if you hit the Rumble button, it helps to promote our content on Rumble.
And if you're joining us for the first time, welcome.
This is a place where we use free speech to unify people, not to drive people apart.
I invite you to join this community and help us to become more and more educated and enlightened.
Why I like that story is because it's, the one that we've just watched there, is because it's based in fact, it demonstrates the efficacy of real power and the willingness of the media to comply with powerful individuals pursuing aims that they say are undergirded by real science But are clearly underwritten by something more plain and more plainly malfeasant.
Greed.
A desire for power.
Microsoft remains one of the biggest corporations in the world.
The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation is a significant donor to organisations like the WHO who have power that's not just symbolic but real legislative power and If you want to know someone who's been at the arse end of it while I look no further, then your friend Ol' Russ here, who has a strike on the YouTube, simply for speaking out against the WHO.
And I love the people that watch us over there on YouTube, but that's why we had to come here, so that we had the ability to speak plainly and openly.
Gareth, we've got to go to Max Blumenthal, because you do not keep a man like Max Blumenthal waiting.
He's waiting to talk to us now.
We're going to have to put Headphones on so we can just absorb his information.
Max, earlier in the show we were talking about the mainstream media's reporting on the Ukraine-Russia conflict, in particular the jubilance and jingoism that has framed the return of Ukrainian forces to Herson, and anyone would understand and support the victory of Ukrainian people who have known such suffering during this conflict, but Is there something irresponsible in presenting just one side of the story?
And do you think we're being given a fair depiction of events in the Ukraine and Russia war right now?
And what in particular do you think is being neglected?
And why, Max?
Well, you're right, Russell.
There's been a lot of celebration of the Ukrainian military's successful offensive in the Kherson region, and specifically the city of Kherson in southern Ukraine.
And Russia has retreated from the West Bank of the Dnieper River and established a new line of defense.
This is not something that Russia really wanted to have happen.
But whose victory are we talking about among the Ukrainian people?
And who are the Ukrainian people?
See, these are questions that go to the heart of this conflict and help us provide a context for understanding why this conflict is taking place, what motivated Russia to enter in February, and how this war has actually been going on for eight years.
As we see now in Herson, and you're going to have to look on social media to see this, you can look at my Twitter account, you can see it on Telegram channels, and CNN has inadvertently shown some of it along with the AP.
Members of that 30% of the Ukrainian population who are ethnic Russian, who have been officially disenfranchised, had their language stripped as an official language, been attacked, slaughtered, jailed, threatened by the regime that was installed with a US-backed coup in 2014, they are being tortured, disappeared, And kidnapped inside her son right now, because they're suspected of Russian sympathies by the Ukrainian so called liberators so for them this is not a liberation.
It's why Russia before withdrawing its forces evacuated 80,000 civilians from her son because they would all.
be targets of the Ukrainian military and they've done this all across areas that they've supposedly liberated before this we saw it in areas outside Harkiv, like this, the town of coupons for example, neo Nazi.
Battalion leader named Maxim Zorin actually published on Telegram video of his men dumping the bodies of civilians into a mass grave that they just executed after accusing him of Russian sympathies.
And now we see the same thing happening in Kherson.
Soldiers torturing, mocking, bound civilians.
Civilians being bound to poles and mocked by the local pro-Ukrainian population.
And we've also seen the soldiers coming in with Nazi insignia on their uniforms, like the Totenkopf, which was worn by the Nazi SS in World War II.
One apparently pro-Ukrainian civilian was, I think it was an accident, shown by CNN on a national broadcast yesterday sig-hailing as he rode through the town with a Ukrainian flag.
I mean, maybe he was sig-hailing, maybe he was just stretching his arm.
After torturing collaborators, I don't know what was happening there, but it was an obvious SIG Heil.
So what happened the next day?
The Ukrainian government banned CNN and Sky News and other networks from the town because they said that their so-called stabilization activities were not complete.
So, you know, we're not just talking about some anomalous situation.
This is the violence that the entire ethnic Russian population or much of the ethnic Russian
population in Ukraine, a large segment of the Ukrainian people, has faced for the last
eight years.
And it's what fuelled this conflict in the Donbass region.
And that's that's a picture that the American public just doesn't get from their media.
They're constantly told this is just an unprovoked invasion by a madman who wants to re-establish
the Soviet Union.
Do you think that these stories are not reported in the mainstream media just because it's
too complex for people to handle that there's good and bad on both sides of any conflict?
Why is it that we're continually offered, as we were in that report, like sort of saccharine scenes of a grandmother Greeting a soldier, which of course, you know, that's kind of beautiful that that's happening.
I'm not suggesting that the Ukrainian people that have suffered as a result of this war don't deserve sympathy and support.
What I'm more interested in is the reason that we are just given such a simplistic rendering of this story.
Whose objectives are better met by extracting complexity from this narrative?
Why is it that we're not allowed to be given the information?
Look, there's some complexity here.
We participate in this way.
How do we find ourselves here, Max?
Why is it so diluted and so anodyne and so reductive?
Well, the answer is pretty simple.
The American public which is detached from the war physically and geographically, needs to not question where their money is going.
And some $80 billion of American money has flowed into the pockets of Ukrainian warlords, into arms dealers, and into the contractors in one of the greatest money laundering operations since Afghanistan.
I mean, we remember Julian Assange when he commented on Afghanistan in 2011.
He said, this war is just about Extracting trillions of dollars from the public and running it through the weapons companies and the big contractors, but running it through Afghanistan.
They just need a justification for doing that.
So you can't start telling the American public that there are political complexities here.
That this is not a battle of good and evil, that this is not a new World War II, or that Ukraine is actually not a democracy.
It is an authoritarian state that, like Russia, is cracking down on opposition media.
It's basically banned all opposition media.
That Zelensky has banned all opposition parties.
That he's had his main opponent, who ran against him in 2019, jailed and beaten by the Ukrainian SBU.
that human rights activists inside Ukraine who question the war are being disappeared, you can't tell that to the American public.
On the human rights issue, it will start to weaken liberal support for the war, and conservative support for the war will start to be weakened when you start to tell them that this is not a moral crusade.
So these scenes from Kherson are coming at a time when the Biden administration is pushing back on calls for negotiations.
And who are they pushing back against, Russell?
They're pushing back against the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of the U.S.
military, of the Pentagon.
Mark Milley, who's saying this is a time to start talking about peace.
Why?
Because there's another aspect to Harrison that is extremely dangerous that Americans need to understand.
It will be, if Russia's defense is somehow broken on the other side of the Dnieper River, a launching pad for attacking Crimea.
And that is the ultimate red line for Russia.
If Crimea is attacked, that can take us towards nuclear war.
It can lead towards which could lead towards a direct intervention from NATO, and what Millie is doing is drawing a line in the sand against the chicken hawks in the Biden administration Secretary of State Tony Blinken NSC director Jake Sullivan who've never seen war, and who don't have the lives of thousands and thousands of men.
on the line.
And he's saying, I will not commit US troops, he's getting out ahead of them.
So this is really a significant and actually terrifying moment in US politics, especially after the midterms.
We can verify, of course, that the expenditure has exceeded what has been spent in Afghanistan and certainly at a pro-rata rate.
What terrifies me, Max, is the willingness in pursuit of what appears to be little more than blunt profit and geopolitical and resource-based goals.
To take us to the precipice of the apocalypse.
We spoke to Jeffrey Sachs when he was on the show about the same thing.
Do you think that this is something that... How could you not consider that outcome?
And why would you be willing to take the planet so close to annihilation if you had considered that potential outcome?
Yeah, why wasn't this considered in the beginning?
Why wasn't it considered when the Minsk Accords were on the table?
This was the path towards peace that the Donbass Independent Republics agreed to with Kiev.
And every ceasefire was broken by Kiev with US encouragement.
So this was going on for the last eight years.
There were so many opportunities to prevent this conflict.
And then once it broke out, And Putin demonstrated that he wasn't bluffing.
They invaded.
You constantly heard in U.S.
media that we can continue to increase our involvement and pour more money and pour more advanced weapons in, like the HIMARS rocket system, which is enabling the Ukrainian advance, and Putin will not escalate.
And now we see that that escalation is taking place.
Okay.
One of the main symbols that Putin is most proud of is the Kerch Bridge between Crimea and the Russian Federation.
It cost $4 billion to make with advanced engineering tactics.
It was attacked by the Ukrainian SBU.
And according to our reporting at the Gray Zone, it looks like there was at least British assistance there.
Read Kit Clarenberg's report on our site.
It's a blockbuster.
They attacked that, knowing that, taunting him to escalate.
And what did Russian forces do?
They started attacking Ukrainian electrical infrastructure, and now large parts of Ukraine are having blackouts.
So the escalation continued.
Well, the U.S.
media promised, and all the experts in the think tank said this wasn't going to happen.
And now they're saying, you know, fanatics like the neocon Ann Applebaum, Who's a confidant of Hillary Clinton, major pro-war pundit in the US.
She's saying we should call Putin's bluff on tactical nuclear weapons and continue to escalate and tempting fate once again, but this time with nuclear weapons.
These people are insane and they don't care about us.
They care about their profits and this is their war, not ours.
I live in Washington.
I live in Ward 8 in Washington, D.C.
It's a mostly monolithically black area of the city.
You do not see Ukrainian flags there.
And you go across the river to the areas that are filling up with the contractors living in these new luxury condos, or you go across the Potomac River to Northern Virginia, and you see Ukrainian flags everywhere.
Why?
Because the people living there have skin in the game.
The money that's going out to Ukraine from From Ward 8 taxpayers and taxpayers across the country whose communities are being flooded with fentanyl and are facing all kinds of social problems, that's coming right back to those affluent areas in Washington D.C.
where the contractors live.
Half of the Pentagon's budget goes to contractors, not to the troops.
We're not supporting our troops with this money.
We're not actually supporting Ukrainian troops with this money.
What appears to be the truth to me, Max, and I've had a number of conversations that have verified this view, is that there are several strata of reality.
One that is accessible to ordinary people, a sort of a saccharine-covered version of events that invites you to view ...global affairs from behind a lens of simple, reductive, good-evil narratives.
Meanwhile, there are interests that span administrations, agenda that take decades to fulfill, that we are not invited to contemplate and consider.
We're given images of, like, returning troops hugging grandmas and celebrating crowds.
Returning home.
And here on our channel, we're not suggesting that those aren't, in a way, certainly victories for Ukrainian people, for the residents of those towns, for people that have had their lives disrupted and destroyed by war.
And I'm certainly not suggesting that Putin is anything other than a sort of a powerful world leader who has his own agenda and his own worldview.
Merely, what troubles me is the way that we are given information.
The inability of the mainstream media and centralised political forces to say, this is what's happening, this is the complexity, these are the potential consequences, the entire thing leads me to believe that we're regarded as idiot children, only trusted with limited information, and I suppose...
I'm obviously beginning to query whether or not they have our best intentions at heart.
Even your anecdotal example of the difference between the ward within which you live and the neighbouring one suggests that only a certain set of interests are being represented and the rest of us have to make do with a kind of a palatable version of reality.
Max, I could obviously talk to you for ages, but we have to wrap up this show now.
One question for Max, if there's time.
No, there isn't, because there's 63 minutes.
If you ask Max a question, your question will take two minutes.
Max's answer will take seven minutes, and I think that we have to... I can keep it short if you want to go for it, but...
Okay, Max.
Go on then, Gareth.
I just wondered, Max, in light of the news that we were told last week that apparently the US was nudging Ukraine towards peace talks, I just wondered, when you twin that with what we kind of have come to know about Boris Johnson going to Kiev in April and pressuring Zelensky to cut off peace negotiations with Russia, When we look at this news footage and we talk about what we've been fed by the media, I think part of the analysis is not to say people shouldn't be celebrating.
It's more to say, well, hang on, if this could have been ended back in April and yet what we're not being told is, well, Boris Johnson went over there to cut off negotiations.
What do you read into this supposed nudging now?
Is it real or do they just want to prolong this?
Well, two quick points.
First, the story about Boris going to Ukraine to push Zelensky not to negotiate was reported by Ukrainian media.
And it's amazing how much discipline the British media has shown in not reporting this, or not reporting on the incredible leaks that Kit Clarenberg has reported on British participation in the war at the Grey Zone, or the labor leaks that Al Jazeera's investigative team reported.
This is a huge story.
Let's look at the timing.
That was in the spring.
Summer was coming up.
That's the time for the offensives.
That's the time to flood Ukraine with advanced weaponry.
And NATO's calculation was kind of correct that Ukraine was going to start making some offensive gains on the battlefield and they needed to do it before winter.
And what else happened?
Right after Boris Johnson's visit, it was the big $40 billion vote in the US Congress.
So they were starting to pump all that money into Ukraine.
The money that I say is going back into Washington, back into the wealthy contractors pockets in London as well.
So they needed to extract more money.
And they needed to have a bigger war.
And you know what's so frightening right now is that the U.S.
is now establishing a new command center in Stuttgart, Germany, with a three-star general presiding over it all to continue the war into 2023.
So obviously this war has been a great racket that they want to continue for some time.
So whatever you think about this conflict, and however much you support Ukraine, having listened to Max describe this situation, and having watched the ABC footage that focuses on the hugging grandmother and not so much on the Sieg Heiling, make your own decision as to whether this war is being accurately and responsibly reported on, whether there are agenda that are being concealed, and whether or not peace has been deliberately averted in favour of profit.
I have my suspicions, but I want to know what you think.
Let me know in the chat.
Let me know in the comments.
Max, thank you so much for joining us.
Will you come back on?
And oh, and if you're interested in following Max's wonderful reporting and that of his colleagues, you can follow him at The Grey Zone.
We'll put a link in the description so that you can follow Max's excellent work there.
Thank you so much and can't wait to rejoin you and there's an invite for you sometime in the future at the Grey Zone.
I'll be on that Grey Zone.
We'll come on there together.
We're already choosing outfits.
We're seeing a stylist.
We're consulting.
Max, thanks very much for that.
Well, everyone, thank you so much.
We're approaching the conclusion of our show today.
Thank you so much for joining us.
If you want to stay with us and ask us some questions directly, you have to join Stay Free AF.
That's our members community where we do Intimate little shows where we sometimes do live events and where you get our content first and in full.
For example, tomorrow I'll be talking to Michael Singer at 12 p.m.
GMT.
Michael Singer wrote the book Untethered Soul and it's conversations like these that help you to awake, not awaken spiritually, it's a bit grandiose, but certainly to serve yourself spiritually so that after hearing something like that, that can be sort of debilitating and bewildering, to be confronted with the fact that, oh my god, there are powerful global commercial interests that will not allow me to receive the truth, that will
bypass democracy and keep me kind of dumb and in the dark.
In order to cope with that kind of reality, you need to have deep resources within yourself.
And Michael Sinha is a brilliant writer.
Not military ones.
I'm not getting into that conversation.
When we had Jocko Willink on the show, he was so fantastic.
I said to him, do you think, is it possible that that North Stream pipeline was blown up?
He went, yes.
And then he goes, we talked for a while about self-defense and that kind of stuff.
He goes, well, any woman should know jujitsu.
It's fantastic, because as soon as somebody grabs you, you're doing jujitsu, whether you like it or not.
And as a jujitsu practitioner, I was nodding along.
Yes, yes, this is great, Jocko.
This is great.
And he said, and of course you should carry a concealed firearm at all times.
We're in England!
We're in England, Choco!
What you're saying is tantamount to revolution.
Listen, join us in a minute and join the Stay Free AF community where you can ask us questions.
I'll see you in a few seconds.
Remember, all of our stuff is up on Rumble, in full, uncensored, unexpurgated, all the time.
If you remember the Stay Free AF community, See you in a minute if you're a member and if not we'll see you tomorrow for another show.
What are we going to be talking about in the show tomorrow, Gareth?
We've got, well, we're recording Michael Singer so you won't be getting that unless you're a member of the Stay Free AF community.
We will be talking about potential manipulation of the electorate by Biden in the midterms and so much more.
We'll be giving you facts because we believe that you are adults and you can take them hard facts right where it hurts in your sweet, sweet soul.
See you shortly if you're in the Stay Free AF community.
There's a link in the description to show you how to join.
▲
Export Selection