You Were Right | Fauci, Pfizer & Twitter - #062 - Stay Free With Russell Brand
|
Time
Text
So, we're going to go ahead and get started.
In this video, you're going to see the future.
Hello there, you awakening wonders.
Thanks for joining me on Stay Free with Russell Brand, where we convey to you the truth as best we understand it, so you can for yourself decide whether or not the mainstream media are feeding you establishment lies in order to keep you numb and dumb and distracted, or they're simply trying their best.
Today's show is sponsored by McDonald's, what make a type of sandwiches, chips, things like that.
Yeah.
Salad.
What else do they do?
Salad?
They're doing their best over there at that company, is my understanding.
I believe it's good for you.
Now, we may have killed Davos.
We may have slaughtered the WEF.
We may have somehow, through the power that you provide, brought down this centralised system.
Some people are saying that this could be the last ever Davos, that Klaus Schwab will be put in a way He's white pussy Blanco and retiring himself from trying to organise the world governments to meet his and their corporate aims and all because of the attention we've generated.
But why take our word for it?
Listen to Michael Schellenberg, a respected journalist, making exactly that claim.
Here he is.
But I think that this is the beginning of the end.
I think you might have killed the World Economic Forum, Russell, because they just you drag them into the light and sunlight is the best disinfectant.
And I think World Economic Forum has suffered such a reputational hit over the last two years that it really is on a downward trajectory.
Maybe we could get that sunlight some way, I don't know, shine it into our veins.
Would that work, possibly?
Could it work?
Could it work?
There's some proper news, or mainstream news at least, saying why an absence of A-listers at Davos is not just deep trouble for the World Economic Forum, but for globalisation too.
It seems that the amount of independent news that's now available Information that hasn't passed through the filters of centralized systems of power means that now we can all discuss together and determine for ourselves what is the general direction we want our planet, our countries, our communities, our individual lives to travel in.
That we're not at odds with one another.
That together, if we unite, we can destabilize establishment power.
That's what I believe.
Let me know if you agree with me in the chat and the comments.
If you're watching this in YouTube, we'll just be streaming on YouTube for a little while, you glorious awakening wonders.
Before clicking over to Rumble where we can speak more freely without censorship and we use this freedom of speech to do what?
To bring people together.
To create unification.
Not to spout hatred or conspiracy theories.
Simply to discuss the truth openly so we can recognise the most fundamental truth of all.
We are united.
We come from a unitary force and if we're ever to bring about truth and light we have to do it I'm just a bit worried about what's going to happen to Brian Stelter if Davos folds.
It's owned by Rupert Murdoch, the billionaire tycoon.
Davos faces uphill struggle to regain its influence.
Look at that.
It's all falling apart.
And we will be talking to our man on the scene, Andrew Lawton.
He will be telling us about a lot more than the types of hot chocolate that are available
in Davos.
He's joined us before.
What do you think about all this?
I'm just a bit worried about what's going to happen to Brian Stelter if Davos folds.
He's not going to hold any more seminars.
Oh my God, there will be no more seminars.
Thanks to you, Joe Rogan.
Also on the show, we've got Alex Berenson, he's a journalist who's been booted off Twitter because that Eddie Munster geezer Gottlieb kept complaining.
Hey listen, you know who you shouldn't have on Twitter?
It's Alex Berenson.
I don't like him.
He's encouraging violence.
When you say violence, do you mean he's saying that natural immunity... Oh!
Steady!
Join us on Rumble and we'll be talking about this stuff.
That's not Alex Berenson, by the way.
That's not Alex Berenson!
That's what Scott Gottlieb, is he called Scott Gottlieb?
Scott Gottlieb, the Pfizer employee, look at him.
Right, that's Scott Gottlieb.
Now let's look at Eddie Munster again.
Now Scott Gottlieb.
Now Eddie Munster again.
Then just go back and forth really quickly.
They say, look at that, they're similar.
They're totally similar guys.
We'll be talking a little bit about...
We don't know what happened to him when he grew up.
Oh my God, Eddie Munster, maybe that's the true nature of his monstrification because he became a monster
of the pharmaceutical industry.
Monsters?
Moderna?
I mean, it's... Oh, it's all uncanny, isn't it, Cal?
What's going on?
Hey, listen, if you enjoy this kind of badinage, and why wouldn't you, in addition to reporting on establishment power, we also have a real hoot.
And a lark.
And we do that on our Locals Community.
You can join us for Stay Connected, our weekly show where we answer your questions, where we respond directly, giving you more intimacy, where we say stuff that we wouldn't even say elsewhere.
So join us on Stay Connected.
It's once a week we put this show on.
Gareth, are you looking forward to it?
Very much so.
It's going to be brilliant.
Okay, oh yeah, later on in the show we'll be talking about... Why are you showing me this?
Where are we guys?
Let's move forward on the thing, darling.
Thank you very much.
First of all, this item.
Now, this is a wonderful story about Boston Dynamics.
You'll have heard of them.
They're an AI company specialising in robots.
I believe they're supplying the Ukraine now with some robot dogs, what I call Klip Klop.
The US Army has agreed to provide one of its two robotic dogs to clean up mines and other ordnance in Ukraine.
Halo Trust are demining... I was like a demeaning enterprise.
I don't want to be here.
You keep making these robots that are sort of ridiculous.
Anyway, look, we're going to be giving some of these robot dogs to Ukraine.
In case you've forgotten what those robot dogs are like, we call them Klip Klop.
Here's one of them now, clipping a Klop in a way and scaring itself with its own power.
I'll check it out.
Oh.
Take that!
Well, they're making even more of these crazy little scary ass robots.
Have a look at this.
This is a sort of a builder's mate robot that they're propagating.
First of all, we think they introduce them as like friendly little chumps in the community.
The dog didn't used to have a gun on its back, but it does now.
That's right.
The first time I see that dog, I think it was in a garden, doing some gardening, like clip-clopping over.
You forgot your trowel, master!
Like that, and doing some friendly stuff.
Yeah.
Well, then it got all dark, man.
And it looks a bit embarrassed that he's got that gun on his back.
It's embarrassed by its own power!
Sorry, boss!
It's like when Joe Biden falls asleep, farts, wakes himself up, looks at Hunter's laptop.
It's a cycle of chaos, I tells ya.
It's not the sort of thing you want to be talking about before an election or during an erection.
They're the kind of things that have got to be repressed, baby.
If you're watching this on YouTube, remember, a little later we'll be talking to Alex Berenson about the Twitterphile revelations.
When are them Fauci files gonna drop?
Who else wants to have a guess we've got on?
Lawton, our man from Davos.
Is Davos over?
Have the globalists given up?
Let me know in the chat and the comments.
If that is the day you pray for, the day when these centralised forces concede that people should run their own lives, their own communities, that we're not idiots that need parental governance at every possible juncture.
We're not people that are preparing to be replaced by AI.
Even if it's AI like this little guy who I like the look of.
Have a look.
Ah, I forgot my tools again.
Yeah, he's actually a better sailor.
He's not AII.
There's not that advanced.
If he's available, like a mustachioed hunk like that, YMCA, he's a real beefcake.
No, he's not it.
He's the bloke who needs it.
And I don't think he's that well cast, actually.
No, also, what was he doing just then?
Yeah, why are you just hitting a scaffold bar?
That's not building.
That's not actually doing any work.
No wonder the American economy's in trouble.
No wonder construction is failing.
No wonder BlackRock are buying up real estate everywhere.
I gotta get me a building, mama!
Say about this robot, this robot made by Boston Dynamics that are supplying clip-cloppy dogs to Ukraine,
is that it's got a weird vibe and demeanor, the manner in which it's moving about,
and it's got titchy tootsies as well.
Yeah.
There's too much ballet involved, I would say, so far.
It's like a little Nijinsky robot.
What is it doing?
Helping out on a building site?
Or does it want to be in the famed School of Music and Dance?
It thinks it's in High School Musical.
Also, it's got too much going on up top, and not enough going on in its little downstairs tootsie
boots.
It was unnecessary, wasn't it?
That's prancing!
Hey!
I'm gonna build you something magnificent!
And then I'm off to Ukraine again!
Where we will reign through MIC power!
He could have got that toolkit himself much quicker, couldn't he?
Miles quicker.
Also, why are they making it so complicated?
This building site's an absolute chaos.
There's no ladders.
It's a health and safety nightmare.
You couldn't be allowed to put a plank across it.
That's lethal.
The whole site should be shut down.
That's too casual.
Take it!
Take it off my goddamn hands!
I don't want to deal with this anymore!
I've gotta dance!
I don't want to be a robot anyway!
I want to be a dancer, honey!
An absolutely ridiculous beast.
Then he gets all annoyed at this bit.
Oh, does he?
He's even more annoyed.
No, he lets himself down.
Ha ha ha, he's turned against the system!
That's Skynet!
That's the plot of Terminator!
Literally, within 30 seconds, we've got to the Terminator already.
While it's doing its own Boston Dynamics commercial, it's delivered a tool bag, frankly, in a way that was a little too debonair and blasé, and then it's, to hell with this goddamn plywood box!
I'm out of here!
It's rebelling.
It's like, that's the bit.
What's the next thing it's going to do?
Go and kill John Connor?
Yeah, I mean, what if someone was stood underneath that?
He's literally committed murder.
Cup of tea for you!
Get off!
Oh Christ!
Too little too late with the twirl.
Take that!
I'm outta here, honey!
Well, the AI revolution is certainly a useful tool in the current not-a-proxy war between Ukraine and Russia.
Obviously, if tensions continue to escalate, we'll all find out about it as the apocalypse approaches.
Thankfully, scientists are determining where is the best place to stand in your home when the nuclear Armageddon arrives.
It's just coincidence that they've done this study.
We've been groomed now to just accept nuclear war.
You know when this thing happened?
What?
Sorry, no!
I don't want a nuclear war.
I thought there wasn't going to be a nuclear war.
It wasn't a proxy war.
I thought we weren't provoking Russia.
I thought they weren't part of NATO.
Oh no!
Why is the Ukrainian Defence Minister saying that?
Ukraine is a de facto NATO country.
Of course saying this is not saying that Russia's invasion isn't criminal or that Putin isn't brutal or Ukrainian people don't deserve humanitarian aid.
It's saying that a diplomatic peaceful solution ought be the aim of everybody involved in case it leads to a nuclear war.
But if there is a nuclear war, This is where you should stand in your house.
Is it the green areas that you should stand, Gail, according to them?
Well, I've looked through this and what they seem to be saying is away from the windows.
It's a fairly large study that's been carried out to tell you something that I would think is fairly obvious.
You'd guess in the end.
Oh no!
A nuclear war!
What can you see out of the window?
Quick, come away from that!
Let's at least lay down.
Yeah, in the second, there's a second slide.
Let's have a look.
Oh, there's that one.
3D illustration of a sort of, that's an area, what if we were at sea?
Is there something, Gareth, that you found appealing about all of this?
No, there was a couple of quotes from the article.
Aha!
According to the researchers, the main danger comes from structures briefly acting as wind tunnels for the powerful nuclear winds.
Yeah, you've got to get out of the way of that.
The primary danger to human survivability in indoor spaces becomes the extreme high wind speeds that enter through the various openings.
Right, so get out of the way of the doors.
That seems to be... Go on to the next one, because this is the bit that I got right.
If people see the explosion from far away, they must take shelter.
Good, good information.
Yeah, I mean, fairly obvious, but... Don't sprint towards it and try and, like, put it out like Superman.
Fly around the world backwards until eventually... Don't, like, whistle for a robot or a robot dog to come and help you.
That's... We've got this beautiful camp robot guy who's gonna... He's gonna perform a routine.
Oh, well, we're coming to the end of days.
OK, so listen, if you're watching us on YouTube, we're going to have to leave in a moment because the information is going to get hotter than a radioactive blast.
We're talking to Andrew Lawton, our man live in Davos, who we charged last time he was on the show.
We're getting us a snap of Klaus Schwab.
Will he have delivered?
Has he got that all-important Schwab selfie?
Has he been able to deliver the questions that we want the answers to, i.e.
why do you want stooges in place in parliaments and governments and congress all around the world?
Why do you want to get in the way of democracy, Schwab?
Why is it, Klaus?
What's wrong with you?
We'll be talking to him about that.
I just thought we should have asked him for a swab of Schwab.
Oh, that'll be nice, wouldn't it?
What a lovely pun.
Could you get a swab of Schwab?
Just maybe from his gums or something.
Yeah, because he's gonna have to agree, because that's the sort of thing he loves, isn't it?
Digital IDs, vaccine passports, surveillance, all of your inner business.
There's a lot of saliva in those.
Klaus, we just need to take a little swab.
Oh my god, it's swole up to the size of a bowling ball.
Oh, I'm sorry.
I like to keep my jowls full of shmickle.
It's the way I have my commanding voice ever lubricated.
The way I lubricate the corridors of power.
With Prudhoe, Rishi, Angie Merkel, all of my little pals.
Now, take a nipple from one of my many sowteets and suckle while I drool.
If you want more entertainment like that and you're watching us on YouTube, you Awakening wonder, click on over to Rumble where we can speak openly and freely about the power structures on this planet and the surprising things that they get up to.
I mean, our conversation with Whitney Webb yesterday, my God, it's still up on Rumble.
You should check that out.
I had nightmares.
Yeah, have you been?
Yeah, Clinton-based nightmares ever since we've spoken to that journalist.
Astonishing stuff all available on Rumble.
If you're watching on YouTube, click over.
Well, Gal, I'm hoping that there won't be a nuclear war.
No, I don't want it.
I would prefer not to have that.
Did you watch When the Wind Blows when you was a little lad?
No.
When the Wind Blows is drawn by Raymond Briggs, who created The Snowman.
Yeah.
He did one called When the Wind Blows, which is about an old couple surviving nuclear holocaust.
I read a lot of things about nuclear wars when I was a kid.
Well, it was big back then.
We didn't think it would be making a comeback.
We thought we'd passed that era, but now it's been brought back in some way due to economic interest hijacking the agenda of global sovereign nations and
guiding them towards this terrible unipolar nightmare all in exchange for hot
chocolate. One person who knows about it is the journalist Andrew Lawton who is
live in Davos right now. We call him Chucky Lawton because he's been supping on
the various hot chocolates available as if it were the teats of Schwab
himself. How's it been going over there Andrew? Well pretty well although I've got
to say I'm worried if I go into one of the wrong places at Davos I'm gonna have
one of those Boston Dynamics robots chasing after me with their little twinkle
toes and that's more terrifying than if they chase after you without the twinkle
toes I think.
I think if you take big strides, The robot cannot catch you, but they seem determined to sort of, as you say, meander in a ridiculous fashion.
I would think a powerful man like you will be relatively safe.
First things first, it seems to me that WEF Davos is beginning to fade and Michael Schellenberger kindly suggested that is due to the community that we've become centrifugal to of independent journalists conveying truth about the true agenda of the WEF.
So is it sparsely attended?
Is it a bit of a negative vibe?
Yeah, I mean, there's only one G7 leader this time around, and that is Olaf Scholz, the German Chancellor, so it doesn't have a lot of their... And no offense to, like, the Prime Minister of Kurdistan and the Prime Minister of Luxembourg, both lovely gentlemen, but they don't exactly have the global orders' heavy hitters this time around.
And I also think there's a little bit of a skepticism by even some of the attendees.
Like this group, Schwab, is saying that they can all get together and solve the world's problems.
In May, he said, the future is built by us.
Well, if the future is built by you, you don't exactly have a lot to be bragging about right now.
Did you see, no, it's been the future and the present are in a terrible mess.
Have you, did you see Tony Blair's one on how to annihilate Iraq or whatever it was called?
It was like how to destabilize communities.
Did you see that conference?
Yeah, and I tried to talk to Tony Blair.
I saw him twice and I've got to say he does not even flinch, just stares straight ahead, completely ignores anyone around him.
So I didn't get the goods on Tony Blair, unfortunately.
Some say that if you don't have a soul, it's a lot easier to do that.
And what about the other one we were interested in was Brian Stelter on misinformation, which seems like a tautology.
Did you attend that conference?
Yes.
And I, believe it or not, I actually went up to, I ran into Brian on the street and I asked him how he can, as a journalist, hold the WEF to account when he's here as their invited guest.
And his answer was, I have to call my wife.
But maybe she'll have some sort of solution.
Yeah, it's like phone a friend on who wants to be a millionaire.
Brian Seltzer, how do you hold the WAF to account?
Hang on, let me get my wife on the line for this one.
Oh my god!
If you watch that panel on misinformation, it was quite chilling because to them the problem is not that they do not deserve our trust.
The problem with misinformation in their view is that we need to regulate information they don't like.
And they just accepted at face value that we are the problem, not them.
That what they say is true is true, and what we say is true is not.
And it's actually quite shameful, because they talk about rebuilding trust, but not a single one of them wants to look in the mirror.
It's an amazing observation that illustrates the lack of ethics at the heart of modern media, that there is a requirement for humility, a kind of cultural mea culpa.
I think there would be more opportunity to build trust if members of the mainstream media said, we now acknowledge that at the beginning of the pandemic we made mistakes, we reported on this in an irresponsible way, Whether it was the Wuhan lab, efficacy of masks, efficacy of the vaccines, the potential dangers of lockdown, the vilification of anti-vaxxers, the ongoing condemnation of the Canadian truckers refusing to allow people in vital positions to work if they hadn't had vaccines, even after we knew that vaccines didn't impact transmission.
There's so much to discuss.
And if you raise any of these concerns, then you're labelled a conspiracy theorist.
You're right, that's what's lacking.
How can you have trust without transparency?
How can you, Chucky?
Yeah, and the Moderna CEO, I believe it was yesterday, it might have been two days ago, he got up there and he actually said that public debate about vaccines was a bad thing because when there was public debate in various countries, there was a lower vaccination rate.
So his view is that if more people are talking, if there's debate on social media, if you can have a discussion about it, that is a bad thing.
So a lot of these people, they don't even think You're right.
the longer term implications or they don't admit to the implications of what it is that
they think is the problem in society.
And people challenging them is what they want to avoid.
Anything that goes against their narrative is misinformation, disinformation or malinformation.
But I will say I find this to be quite sinister, but if their champion of this is Brian Stelter,
I think we're in a good place.
You're right.
Brian Stelter will not be able to convey the necessary authority for.
Wait, let's check what you want.
Hold on a second.
If my authority is not enough for you, I got a lady who knows what to do.
Honey, you respect my authority.
Honey!
Honey!
Absolutely ridiculous.
Would you tell me, Andrew, did you successfully get a picture of you with Klaus Schwab?
What does he smell like?
What does he taste of?
A little bit of bratwurst, but only faint, not overpowering.
I didn't get a selfie with him.
I failed on that front, Russell, and I'm sorry, but I got a picture of him.
I went up to ask him about something that he has said in the past, which is about penetrating the cabinets of countries around the world, and I was just about to ask the question, and all of a sudden, he had somewhere else he had to be.
So I got a picture of Klaus Schwab's hand, as if to say, get lost, you Canadian.
He doesn't look to me like he's consenting particularly.
Can we see that image again, please?
Yeah, that looks very well.
Would you leave me alone, please?
I want to be alone in this disturbingly butter-coloured room.
But if you see in the background, he's got like the little fancy speakers lounge there that he was going to retreat to.
So you've got to go where the Orange Badge press members can't find you.
That's right.
I mean, have you seen that footage of Albert Baller being pursued by journalists through the streets where they just caroomed him with an endless, endless questions about various complex points in the COVID narrative, the profits, the lack of efficacy, the lack of We're going to be talking about that in our show.
Poor dear Albert Baller just put on what looked like a Hull City FC scarf and remained stunned.
He looked pretty frustrated. We're going to be talking about that in our show.
Stay connected with Russell Brand that we do once a week.
They don't link any of it together, do they?
Because, you know, you've got Brian Stelter hosting this seminar on disinformation being the most existential challenge we're grappling with as a society, with members of the New York Times and other mainstream media.
But then you've got people asking legitimate questions to the head of Pfizer who've made, you know, record profits around this treatment and medication that we have legitimately a lot of questions about.
And you don't get any answers.
What you get is another puff piece by various mainstream media at the time.
So it's interesting that this event that claims to be kind of tackling these issues such as disinformation, we're not actually getting the real story from the people that should be telling it.
You're quite right.
I mean, in a sense, Andrew, it's an extraordinary opportunity to have that many powerful people together.
Admittedly, now it's like the heads of Luxembourg and Finland, which are legit countries.
I don't mean to be dismissive.
But it's extraordinary to have that much power concentrated and then to have such a fluffy, pointless and unchallenging conversation.
It's a great opportunity, really.
When we spoke to David Sirota yesterday, he talked about his own time attending Davos and how people are sort of astonished to be asked a challenging question.
That's probably why Klaus Schwab Flung up his palm and disappeared into the butter suite when confronted by an inquiry about penetrating cabinets.
It seems that they feel cozy in their piety and legitimacy and don't expect to be interrogated.
Is that what it feels like, Andrew?
Yeah, and to go back to your comments relaying what Michael Schellenberger said earlier, I think that for the longest time they've operated without any real scrutiny, and they've been hiding in plain sight.
I think now this is really the first year where they've really had a lot of public attention from people that want to ask the tough questions.
I mean, I talked to Chrystia Freeland, who's Canada's Deputy Prime Minister, and she's actually a member of the WEF Board of Trustees.
And I asked her yesterday, how do you square having these two roles and it not being a conflict of interest?
And she just ran away.
She was a very short woman, but man, could she motor fast to get away from me.
And none of them are used to having people penetrate this little safe space of theirs in the Swiss Alps.
Perhaps Chrystia Freeland and her sarcastic name and amazing ability to walk could provide a perambulatory model for the latest Boston Dynamic robots.
If she's quick on her feet, if she's nimble, they could work on the gate.
Would be one of my observations.
We always thought that that was astonishing, the way that in the name of freedom, and I know that as author of the book Freedom Convoy, this is an area where you are an expert, Andrew, that they introduced the freezing of bank accounts and more surveillance and tried to evoke that emergency act.
And to know that these politicians, the representatives, democratically elected representatives of a sovereign nation, have The kind of conflict of interest that you describe is astonishing and gives the lie that this is just an empty conference.
There is real power at play here.
Yeah, and I think you do have some people pushing back against some aspects of it, but I think overwhelmingly there are the public programs, the Brian Stelter disinformation panel, the Moderna CEO COVID panel.
But behind the scenes, there are all of these bilateral and multilateral meetings that no one knows about that are in these rooms that are in a back corner.
of the conference center when you've got world leaders sitting down with corporate leaders
and no one knows what's going on behind those doors but somehow they come out with
proclamations and announcements and policy initiatives and all of these things and I
do think that perhaps the influence might be waning just a little bit but I think that's
only contingent on people keeping up the pressure and more importantly keeping up the exposure of this.
Fantastic.
Well, we'll do our best to ensure that our constituency of free-thinking radicals is well represented.
Andrew, thank you for your work there.
Thanks for staying connected to us.
I look forward to seeing you on the show again soon.
Please get home safe.
And we were thinking it would be good if you could get a swab from Schwab.
Just get some of his obviously abundant saliva from within his cheeks or from under his tongue and just bring us back a sample.
Then we can clone him and create our own bloody Davos.
There we go.
We can have it on a yacht and someone can swab the deck.
Fantastic.
And he's ending on a pun.
Thank you very much, Andrew.
Thanks for joining us.
Our next guest is author and journalist Alex Berenson, who was kicked off Twitter but successfully won his case to be allowed back on.
Something of a pioneer.
We did a presentation on this matter, didn't we, Gareth?
Yes.
And have we put that up yet?
Yeah, it was up this week.
Yeah, it was a brilliant little presentation where we show that that Scott Gottlieb, Scott Gottlieb, the sort of Eddie Munster looking figure who campaigned to have people kicked off a Twitter for talking about natural immunity.
That's an image of Scott Gottlieb there.
He's a Pfizer executive and social media campaigner.
And he regarded Alex Berenson as his nemesis.
Alex, hello.
Thanks for joining us, mate.
Thanks for having me, Russell.
Well done for being the first person to be able to traverse that threshold of being allowed back on Twitter.
This is an extraordinary accomplishment in itself.
Yeah, you know, I got a judge in San Francisco, believe it or not, who was willing to look at the facts of the case and what Twitter had, you know, sort of told me, senior Twitter executive in 2020, when things were not quite so polarized on social media and Twitter really was more of a, you know, Was in favor of free speech in the way it had always said it was.
He told me, hey, we like debate.
And so with those assurances, I went out and said a lot of stuff that, you know, I certainly think has turned out to be correct about the uselessness of lockdowns and uselessness of masks.
the uselessness of school closures, all this stuff in 2020.
And then in 2021, started raising questions about the vaccines. And of course, by that point,
the powers that be really didn't want debate about the mRNA vaccines. And so in the summer of
2021, Twitter kicked me off, but I did sue. And I had this judge who was sort of willing to look
at the whole spectrum of what Twitter had provided me in terms of assurances. And he allowed the case
to move forward. And that essentially forced Twitter, this is before Elon took over, forced
Twitter to settle and put me back on.
It's an interesting precedent. And it's probably very important that the success that you have had
with that being reinstated is a kind of a benchmark.
We have comparable challenges on some of the platforms that we broadcast on where Of course, you'll be aware that the WHO set the community guidelines, for example, on YouTube, meaning that we are unable to frame the debate in the balanced way that we would like to.
Around the time that you were kicked off, Scott Gottlieb, the Pfizer executive, he regarded you as something of a thorn in his side. He
successfully had a former FDA head tweet about natural immunity and its potential efficacy
removed from Twitter. How did you feel about that whole period and what do you think, what does it
suggest when Pfizer have that much influence on a social media platform? I mean it's obviously
problematic.
And Scott Gottlieb, Dr. Scott Gottlieb, is more than just a Pfizer board executive.
He was the head of the FDA in the United States from 2017 to 2019.
2019, he quit the FDA, and three months later, he joined the board of one of the world's
largest drug companies.
And that in and of itself is hugely problematic.
I mean, that shouldn't happen.
That's a, you know, that's the revolving door.
That's a guy who goes from a government job to a, you know, to a board position at a drug
company where he's meeting a few times a year, and he's making more money doing that than
he did for his, you know, government job.
And that, to me, is a big problem.
But so Scott Gottlieb, you know, was very connected to, you know, obviously he was connected
to Pfizer, but he was also connected to people inside the government during the Trump administration,
but also during the Biden administration.
So Pfizer and the White House were clearly working closely to message about the vaccines in late 2020, early 2021.
And as the vaccine started to run into problems in the summer of 2021, And it became clear to these people that they were going to have to push for boosters.
They're going to have to push for vaccine mandates.
I think we're already seeing evidence that there was a concerted effort to message, you know, for the government to, you know, to put out heavy spin, the federal government, and to censor critics.
And, you know, I was certainly one of the more prominent critics of what was happening.
And I think, unfortunately, Russell, I mean, this is all very, very important, this social media piece of this.
But what's even more important, or what's as important, is that the strategy has failed.
The boosters have failed.
You know, people continue to catch COVID.
They continue to, older people especially, continue to die from COVID and Omicron.
What we've done is we've given a lot of people at tremendous expense and risk to their long-term health Uh, you know, quote unquote vaccines that, you know, didn't provide any long-term immunity from COVID at all.
And I mean, I think it's like, I want to talk about the censorship because I think that's incredibly important, but I also think we should, we should not forget what's happened, which is that those of us who warned in the summer of 2021, there's a problem here.
These vaccines don't seem to be working as promised, have been proven completely correct.
Alex, you're quite right.
We sometimes forget the significance of the framing that you've just offered.
It seems difficult, even for the most ardent critics of what happened in the last couple of years, to maintain sight of how significant what happened was.
The way the information moves, the pace of change, the invitation to migrate to different issues, The kind of dismissiveness and the inherent nihilism that having access to information so quickly kind of generates makes it difficult.
What's your most optimistic appraisal of what's just happened?
Do you put this down to ineptitude?
Corruption?
How far are you willing to go and how far do we need to go and how do you think it's best to present this?
What do you think are those salient points to focus people on if you want to galvanize opposition and generate some hope that this kind of thing can be prevented?
in the future? Most optimistic view of what happened is that there was a real hope that
this mRNA technology was a true breakthrough, a true biological breakthrough, that it was going
to enable people to have a really powerful, robust immune response to the coronavirus. And we were
going to be able to do something that we really had never been able to do before, which was stop
a respiratory virus. And that when the results came out in November 2020, look, I was optimistic too.
I mean, there was this brief period before I'd really seen what they'd done with the trials and how they'd designed the trials, essentially, so the trials were very unlikely to fail, that I thought, hey, this could work.
This could get us out of this.
And then what happened was in the spring of 2021, after the first wave of immunizations in the U.S., in the U.K., and especially in Israel, Israel It's a small country, has a good healthcare system.
They got, they immunized almost everybody very quickly.
There was this period in April and May of 2021 when deaths went, well not just deaths, but cases went way, way down.
And I think they just got overly optimistic and they didn't realize that they hadn't actually, they hadn't actually done what they thought they'd done.
And so they were caught completely flat-footed in July of 2021 when cases started to go back up.
Now, you can say that they should have been more cautious.
I mean, I'm not just going to say you can say that.
They should have been far more cautious than they were.
But the most optimistic view of this is that it's not some crazy, you know, it's not depopulation.
It's not, it's not even corruption or money hunger.
It's just that they got too optimistic.
They, you know, the joke, right?
Never get high on your own supply.
They got high on their own supply.
And, and you can tell that that's true because they all got vaccinated.
All those people, unless you want to believe the true conspiracy theories that they were getting saline, which is not true, they all got vaccinated early.
My joke about this is not really a joke.
This is the only experimental medical product in history where rich white people demanded that they get it first.
They didn't want to wait.
They didn't want it to be tried in Africa first.
They wanted it right away.
And that tells you that they believed.
Yeah, that's also an interesting aspect of this.
When we look back over the last couple of years, there are significant figures that were in retrospect perhaps unduly lionised.
The now departed former head of the NIH, Anthony Fauci, perhaps stands head and shoulders above Everyone else is the main mouthpiece advocate and figure of authority who particularly while the Trump administration was still in play was regarded as a counter narrative voice in a sort of almost a righteous patriarch.
We're of course excited to learn if you have any revelations about the Fauci files any potential releases and how you think that Anthony Fauci will be represented within them.
So, unfortunately, Elon is mad at me again.
Elon has blocked me on Twitter again.
And this has nothing to do with the substance of my, you know, my drop from the Twitter files, which came out a couple weeks ago, which, as you mentioned, had to do with Scott Gottlieb and how Gottlieb, you know, tried to get voices, not just me, but other voices that he didn't like censored.
Elon got upset because I didn't put the whole Story on Twitter.
First, I link to my substack.
It sounds pretty technical and silly, and it kind of is, but I thought we had an agreement that I was going to do it that way.
He didn't think so, so he's upset with me.
So I'm out of the Twitter files again.
Maybe that'll change.
Look, let me pull back for just a second before I answer the question specifically about Fauci.
Elon Musk has provided an enormous service by opening these files.
And the most important thing to me that's come out so far isn't what I wrote.
It's actually about the FBI and the fact that the FBI was pushing Twitter to censor individual tweets.
I mean, I think that's an absolutely insane overreach by the FBI.
They're a law enforcement agency.
They're not in the censorship business.
You know, whether it was illegal, it certainly wasn't in keeping with their mission.
And Elon has done this at risk to himself, OK, in opening these files.
He's opening Twitter to more litigation.
And ultimately, even if the people who are being sued, you know, are before he took over,
because he owns the company now, he in some way is going to be responsible for that.
And he knows that, OK.
He knows it.
He knows the chance that he's taking and he's doing it because he thinks it's really important and he deserves credit for that.
And you know, whether or not I ever talk to the guy again, I'm going to come.
I'm going to say that forever.
Okay.
The problem is, in terms of Fauci specifically, I don't know what's in there about Fauci.
Obviously, Fauci's name comes up in Twitter a lot.
But whether there's evidence that he directly or even provably indirectly was manipulating, you know, was trying to censor in the way we know other people were, I don't know that we have that.
I never saw anything like that.
And I will say this, Anthony Fauci is very, very careful about what he says, right?
You don't survive in Washington for 50 years unless you're really good at this game.
And when he was deposed, meaning he had to testify under oath or give answers to questions under oath back in November in a lawsuit that Missouri had brought against a social media company or against him and other people, he said, Clearly, and he said, I don't recall to a lot of things, but not to this question.
He said he had not been in touch with Twitter directly.
I'm pretty sure he said that.
I have to go back and look at the transcript, but I'm pretty sure that's what he said.
So for him to say that with that level of confidence, to me, means that he probably
doesn't think there's anything, you know, really bad in those Twitter files.
And so I think we're a little bit over-focused on Fauci.
I agree with you.
He was the center of everything.
He became this, you know, heroic anti-Trump figure in a lot of the media.
But in terms of his specific efforts to censor social media, I think Anthony Fauci let other
people inside the federal government do that for him.
And I suspect that's what's—you know, that's what the files are going to show.
So I think, I think people are looking for some revelation that Anthony Fauci called Jack Dorsey and said, get Alex Berenson off or get all the comments from Russell Brand off or whatever it is.
That's not going to be there.
We had David Sirota from The Lever on the show yesterday.
He's got a story about Pfizer paying to remove negative media coverage, not specifically related to this matter.
I wonder, Alex, if you have any thoughts on that or experience around that story?
So here's what I think.
I think it's crazy that the left has become the best friend of big pharma.
I mean, that's not the history of big pharmaceutical companies and people on the left.
The most famous incident in the last 25 years is actually involving Pfizer.
Where a bunch of kids in Nigeria got meningitis and died in a Pfizer clinical trial that was, you know, that was very ethically problematic and became essentially the kernel for the book The Constant Gardener.
You know, that famous John le Carre book that got turned into, you know, a great movie with Rachel Weisz.
And that's what the left thought of Pfizer, that they would literally, you know, or not Pfizer, but big pharma in general, that they would literally let poor kids die in drug trials.
And, you know, whether that's true or not, that certainly was the way the left viewed them.
And suddenly Pfizer can do no wrong.
These vaccines are perfect.
I don't understand how the left has lost its skepticism around pharma.
What seems extraordinary, Alex, is since essentially the establishment and the left's interests have aligned, or even perhaps the left isn't the correct term, the liberal establishment and the left have sort of migrated to talking primarily about cultural issues because when it comes to matters of power and finance it appears that their interests broadly align, that there's been an abandonment of the working class and no interest in representing the interests of ordinary people because there's too much at stake.
The working class, whether it's in our country or yours, have been, broadly speaking, demonized, even when it comes to demonizing 50% of the population, as is the case with Brexit or Trump.
And it doesn't seem that there's much traction around those issues.
I wonder, when you consider your time working for the New York Times, particularly as a correspondent in Iraq, if you can see how It's hard for me to know, since I'm not in Ukraine first-hand, what the reporting is like, right?
And there's that old saying, truth is the first casualty of war.
on the Iraq war in the position of the left is perhaps an interesting meter to measure
the movement.
So, I mean, it's hard for me to know, since I'm not in Ukraine firsthand, what the reporting
is like, right?
And there's, you know, there's that old saying, truth is the first casualty of war.
I mean, I think things got really complicated in Iraq, both when I was there and after,
because the American correspondents were under such direct threat from Islamist militants.
Because, you know, if you got captured, you were going to get put on a video with your head cut off, right?
That forced people who didn't necessarily want to, you know, to work closely with the
U.S. military in a position where, to some extent, they had to embed if they wanted to
see much of anything.
So that was one issue in Iraq.
In terms of Ukraine, it just seems like there's very, very little non-propaganda coming out
I mean, it's very hard for independent journalists to embed with the Ukrainian military.
It's certainly impossible for them to do that with the Russian military.
So to some extent we're dependent on these statements from the Ukrainian military, from the UK military, from the Pentagon, from Russia, and none of them are going to really tell the truth about what happens.
I mean, you can count on that.
And so, you know, I think that's a That's why I don't really consider myself qualified to, you know, to tell you what is happening in Ukraine.
I do think as a matter, I mean, in this I'm not really on the sort of left side or the populist side.
I think it's right for the Ukrainians to defend themselves.
I think they are an independent country and I think NATO has an interest in helping them defend themselves.
So I know that's an unpopular position for Many of my readers, you know, but it's what I think, and I decided a long time ago that, you know, I have this sub stack, this unreported true sub stack, that I was going to tell people what I thought, even if they disagreed with me and if they decided not to subscribe anymore, that would be their choice.
That's an interesting position in journalism these days.
That word used to be known as integrity.
Gareth hosts the show with me.
What are you saying, Gareth?
Hi, Alex.
I just had a question going back to Pfizer that we were talking about and Scott Gottlieb before.
Because I thought what a really interesting element of that story was that the tweet that Gottlieb wanted flagged in the first place was by a former head of the FDA, which was kind of an amazing thing.
And actually part of the tweet actually said That he encouraged people to go and get vaccinated, and yet it was still something that would sufficiently potentially harm Pfizer's vaccine sales.
That ended up being flagged, even though it didn't violate any of the company's misinformation rules at the time.
I just wondered, from your position now, what do you think the exposure of everything that's come through the Twitter files means for the future of The ability for government agencies to do this kind of thing.
And, you know, you mentioned about Fauci not having necessarily contact with Twitter.
We know he definitely had contact with Facebook.
Do you think that there'll be a change in the way that these kind of things are either handled or exposed in the future?
And do you think it will be in a good way?
Or do you think that we're going to see even further crackdowns?
I mean, those are really good questions.
I think I think that, I mean, from everything that I've seen, the federal government and the public health bureaucrats have learned entirely the wrong lesson of the last, you know, in the last, let's say, six months, okay?
The lesson they should have learned is that they overreached.
they got a lot of people very angry.
They hurt people's belief in medicine in general, in childhood vaccines, which I think generally do work,
although obviously like everybody else, I'm questioning that more than I used to
because of the massive failure of the mRNAs.
Then what they should have done, what they shouldn't be doing right now
is looking at the reality of the fact that they made promises over the last three years,
many, many promises that didn't come to fruition, right?
I mean, essentially, they said, if you follow us, if you lock down hard, if you take this vaccine, you know, we're going to manage this in a way that it's not going to be a big, you know, I mean, yes, society will be disrupted, but there won't be very many deaths.
And we're going to come out of this in a good place.
And that really hasn't happened.
And that's why, fundamentally, why there's so much anger.
It's not because of me or Joe Rogan or Russell.
Obviously, Russell, you have a huge audience, and Joe Rogan has a huge audience.
But we're not bigger than the entire Federal government and, you know, international, you know, intergovernmental organizations and the rest of the media.
The reason people are skeptical right now is because they see with their own eyes that things have not gone as promised.
And they know that two years ago, in the spring of 2021, there was this, they were told That we are very close to beating COVID thanks to the vaccines, and that hasn't happened.
So, unfortunately, what these bureaucrats and these politicians and even people like Brian Stelter are doing is saying, it's your fault, Berenson.
It's your fault, Russell.
You are, you know, interfering with our narrative that everything is going to be perfect, or, you know, you're interfering with what we're trying to say.
And you need to be silenced in some way.
And, you know, it's stunning to me that there's this—when people say, I believe in the First Amendment, but that's the end.
Like, you either believe in the First Amendment or you don't.
And these people no longer believe in the First Amendment.
They no longer believe in free debate and free journalism.
And that is very upsetting to me.
I would contest that they never did, but there was never a situation before where it was as relevant as it is now, where the means of communication has become truly democratised because of technological advancement.
Just a side note, apparently Antony Fauci's daughter works at Twitter, so there's at least one tangential and genetic connection to that social media platform.
Hey, Alex, thank you so much for joining us and thank you for your great work over the years.
And more latterly, Alex Berenson can be found on Substack, where he will tell you the truth as he sees it, even if it will potentially irritate you.
Alex, thanks for joining us.
Russell, thank you so much for having me.
It's a joy to speak with you.
I hope we get to speak again soon.
Thanks so much, Alex.
Take care, mate.
So, there you are.
What a fantastic show it's been.
Do you know I'm very excited?
You know I'm an excitable person anyway.
I've got a lot of libido, I've got a lot of mojo, I've got a lot of life force running through me.
You're like that robot, that Boston Dynamics robot.
I was modelled for that.
They based it on you, in your feelings.
I worked at a building site for a brief and troubling time.
And they studied me, and they said, well, this is obviously the perfect builder's mate.
Have you ever seen hard carrying like that before?
Take your goddamn bricks, you son of a bitch!
I'll show you a pirouette!
A pirouetting Coming up straight after the show, this is the reason for my enhanced excitement and excessive adrenaline.
Gareth and I are doing our new show that's available only to our audience, our members' audience, on Locals.
It's called Stay Connected, where you can directly ask us questions.
For just a couple more weeks, it's available for $33 for the whole year, where you'll also get my stand-up special when it drops.
By God, what a stand-up show it was, as well.
Crouchy Files?
Did they get that?
The Fauci files are on there, and it turns out Fauci actually hasn't been that careful.
There's pictures of him with his bum out, would you believe?
Him, Klaus Schwab, Schwab and each other in a manner that I'm not even willing to describe, not even on Rumble.
And that says something.
Tomorrow on Rumble, there is a fantastic conversation available between me and Bjorn Lomberg, where we talk about The misguided nature of the climate change debate and how many of the measures that are being suggested are ineffective and emerge from places like the WEF at Davos.
You can join me then if you're not going to join locals to see more of our fantastic content, which I reckon you should do, particularly our show Stay Connected.
Otherwise, I'll see you tomorrow.
Join me then, not for more of the same, but for more of the different.