All Episodes
Previous Next
Feb. 16, 2023 - Stay Free - Russel Brand
01:00:05
Heart Attacks - Why Is This Happening Now? - #082 - Stay Free With Russell Brand
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
so so
you you
Hello, you Awakening Wonders!
Thanks for joining me on Stay Free with Russell Brand.
Wherever you're watching this right now, the whole show is only available on Rumble.
Join us there for the unexpurgated, uncensored version of this show where we use freedom of speech to unite people, to bring people together.
God knows it's needed now more than ever.
Press the red join button to join us on Locals.
That's where I always respond to the comments and speak to my Little community on there.
God love them.
Watch here.
Hold on a second.
There's a stream session happening right now.
One second.
There you are.
Can someone come in and sort that out for me, please, if you don't mind?
It's actually quite complicated.
Thank you.
Hey, we've got a lot to tell you.
You happen to be joining us on the very day that surveillance reached ironic levels.
Yep, look at this.
Commemorative plaque to George Orwell is also the site of a surveillance camera.
The creator of words like big brother, wrong think, surveillance state, forever war.
There's almost a surveilling, Residual vapour, his spirit now observed as he spins in his grave.
We've got loads of globalist stories for you.
The WHO are pushing for world surveillance powers, wouldn't you know?
There are other globalist scams, digital wallets, biometrics, stuff like that we'll be discussing.
We've got a great guest on the show today, Stacey Malkin.
She's going to talk to us about the exposure of corporate corruption in food and health.
We've had a few guests around this subject and it's fascinating because fact is, we all need food like the same way that 10% of the United States gets its water from a little river running through Ohio.
Hopefully nothing toxic's been spilled there lately.
If you're joining us on YouTube now, you're going to want to click over onto Rumble because we're going to be talking about this extraordinary thing.
I don't know if you've heard about it, There's been this massive spike, and I use the word spike deliberately, to demonstrate that heart attacks in young people has gone up by 30% since the pandemic.
It's almost like something happened during the pandemic that caused young people to start having heart attacks.
Obviously we won't be discussing that on YouTube, but we'll be discussing it in a moment.
But!
In other news, democracy is functioning fine.
We've got a new presidential candidate, the first one, the first rival to Trump, I suppose she is, Nikki Haley.
Let's have a little look at her speech and see if you spot any veiled digs at any current power players.
Just see, watch this very carefully, see if you can spot who she might be having a dig at.
We'll have term limits for Congress.
And mandatory mental competency tests for politicians over 75 years old.
Why would anyone need a mandated competence test?
I can't think of anybody that would benefit from having their mental state tested.
Can you?
America is a nation that can be defined in a single word.
I think we all enjoy that kind of rhetoric, you know, that in the post-Trump era, populist rhetoric has returned, talking about curbing the amount of time that people are in Congress, making sure that incompetent folk, our legacy and connections can't just rise to the top.
But here's a list of some of the billionaires that are funding Nikki Haley's campaign.
16 of them.
16 billionaires.
And what do you get?
Have a look at a piece of her promotional material.
Pretty good bit of promo.
Check it out.
Some people look at America and see vulnerability.
The socialist left sees an opportunity to rewrite history.
When you call these people like the socialist left I know like in your country you've been really coached to not like socialism and quite rightly after the failure of the Soviet Union Maoism and the concentration of power that traditional conventional socialism awards government which we are totally against we believe in decentralized models and your ability to democratically Well done.
Nicely done.
Very good.
but calling these people socialists, look at that, $140 million between them.
Nancy Pelosi there.
I don't think you can call yourself a socialist if you're $120 million,
much of which may have been accrued from your partner's stock market trading.
And he may have picked up a few tips from, you know, given that she heavily regulates or doesn't heavily
regulate, but he's involved in the regulation of some of the
industries he owns stocks in.
Well done. Nicely done.
Do you see that? I'm a pro, man.
That's what we have to do.
Half of Congress are millionaires.
12 times richer than the typical American.
So those socialists and, you know, obviously when she's talking about term limits, I can see the benefits of that and that's something I can wholly get behind.
But when you hear that she's backed by 16 billionaires and she's not mentioning things like, I will end lobbying in politics.
I will end people owning stocks and shares in the companies that they regulate.
No one's going to say that.
When she says end the professional class of politicians, why not go further and start having government by assembly?
Everyone recognises the world needs to change.
Change means doing things differently.
The idea that you'd have people's assemblies, assemblies of people like you.
Oh no, we couldn't have that.
You need professional people with ties to corporations receiving lobbying money, owning stocks and shares in the corporations that they're supposed to be regulating.
Without that, everything would fall apart.
You're damn right it'd fall apart.
And what you might get are different systems, more just, fair systems.
Because let's face it, what we are living in now is not democracy.
We are living in a globalist, corporatist state where many of the laws and regulations that affect your life are determined by bodies that are unelected.
Gareth, had you even heard of, until very recently, of a thing called, like we've all heard of the IMF, we've all heard of WHO, WEF, but have you heard of the World Government Summit?
I have not, no.
There's a thing now called the World Government In plain sight.
Just out there the world's going, what are, all these sort of, oh what you think they're trying to achieve a new world order?
You think there's an aim to have a world government?
Where do you come up with these crackpot conspiracies?
Next you'll be saying that they cut money and expenditure on trains and that led to a train crash that's polluting American rivers and killing American fish.
Well, this crazy talk of there being a world government seems like little more than the rantings of a conspiracy theorist.
Over now to the World Government Summit with Elon Musk addressing them beautifully.
I should say, I know this is called the World Government Summit, but I think we should be maybe a little bit concerned about actually becoming too much of a single world government.
If I may say that we... Who booked this guy?
It's ruining, this is our first World Government Summit.
You put someone on who says that world governments are not a good idea.
Might as well just have the sound of...
No.
Klaus Schwab's at this Government Summit.
He is.
They all show up at these places.
Yeah, that's it.
I was looking at it.
It's a bunch of 250 ministers, 20 presidents, dozens of CEOs and Klaus Schwab.
But the idea that there's a plan to create a world government at the World Government Summit is a conspiracy theory.
They must love these events.
There's so many of them.
There's so many.
G20, B20, World Economic Forum, you know, whatever this is now, World Government Summit.
It's like a golf tour.
It's like every country's got its own globalist little adventure.
And it's not like it's meaningless.
It's not like it's a simple corporate jamboree.
The WHO now are lobbying for a treaty to be passed that would implement the greater ability for global surveillance biometric data to be captured.
We'll be talking about this in our presentation a little later.
They've released an international pandemic treaty which will give them new sweeping surveillance powers.
The treaty requires the WHO's 194 member states to strengthen the one health surveillance system.
It's only 98% of all countries in the world though, Ross.
That belong to it?
I think you're getting a little overly worried.
Oh, it's only 98% and what about that 2%?
Countries that have not got even proper flags?
Hopefully those guys are going to rally pretty hard.
They obviously are using COVID-19 to legitimise the necessity for global surveillance, but many of us believe that the pandemic shows why you need more democracy, why you need more open discourse, why you need more openness, why you need science to be open and empirical rather than ideologically led.
And I think you'll agree with us that more and more evidence is being revealed and released that suggests that that isn't the template that's being followed.
Later, of course, we're going to be talking about the rise of 30% in death by heart attack in young people, which we cannot talk about on YouTube because by some weird coincidence, by some weird conspiracy theory, Google are regulated by the WHO nominally and electively.
They use the WHO's guidelines to regulate their community.
You can check that for yourself.
So on Rumble, we'll be talking about that in more depth.
There's a link in the description.
Click over.
Here we list Some of the globalist main players and some of their latest crazy little schemes.
Now, you might not have heard of Ursula von der Leyen.
She came to prominence on our show.
I think we brought her to the forefront.
We did, yeah.
Her and Albert Baller, CEO of Pfizer, were texting to do massive orders worth billions of euros without it being passed.
There's a council and a committee that were meant to sanction that.
When the EU was spending a bunch of money on buying more jabs or whatever, it's meant to be Signed off at the level of government, but they were just sorting that stuff out on text.
Ursula von der Leyen with her name that could be in an episode of Seinfeld.
You know they have that.
They use names like that in Seinfeld.
She's refusing to disclose those texts.
Why?
Again, unelected, uncooperative.
What's going on there?
Check out these new DNA smart cards.
Another little globalist adventure that's on the way that you're fascinated by, Gareth.
Because it coagulates a whole bunch of data into one convenient place.
Convenience!
Just to come back to Ursula von der Leyen.
So there was an investigation by Investigate Europe who found deals for doses happened behind closed doors between the EU and pharmaceutical companies.
New variants, international competition and darkness around manufacturing costs have allowed Pfizer, BioNTech and Moderna to increase the bill for European taxpayers.
So this all came about when she was meant to, obviously she's meant to disclose these texts and hasn't done.
Albert Borla, do you remember when Janine Small from Pfizer revealed something that we can't talk about on YouTube until later, but revealed something fairly important?
At that same committee, Albert Borla was meant to testify and pulled out of the appointment himself.
So no one's really saying anything about something which involves 10 billion euros of public money being spent on these vaccines.
Click here on the red button to join us on Locals.
OK, we're going to have to... Oh God, I feel like something's wrong with me.
Sorry.
I don't know why.
Something must have happened.
You're going to be blown away by the reporting on this story.
Young people dying from heart attacks has risen by 30% since the pandemic.
The mainstream media are reporting on this story, but the way they tiptoe around what What the potential causes for this could be is going to blow your mind.
We're only going to be able to talk about this on Rumble.
That's the reason we're on Rumble.
Our commitment to free speech.
Free speech gives us the opportunity to attack establishment interests.
That's simply not possible on platforms that are governed by the WHO, or at least use them to formulate their guidelines.
Join us over there now.
We'll see you there.
Now, it's now understood.
Let's have a look at that headline.
Young people are Dying from heart attacks has risen by 30%.
Let's have a look at that.
Thank you.
Right, and now let's have a look at how that was reported on the mainstream media.
Let's have a look.
Heart attack deaths have become more common across all age groups since the start of the coronavirus pandemic.
But a recent study found that young people are actually most at risk in this case.
According to Cedars-Sinai Hospital, the number of heart attack deaths among... Data that's coming from a hospital.
They're noticing there's been a 30% rise in heart attacks among young people.
Fair enough.
It's a national review though.
It's not just of one hospital.
25 to 44 year olds in the U.S.
over the first two years of the pandemic was 30% higher than predicted.
Okay, fantastic.
A lot.
Let's have a look at the next clip.
And do we know why younger people might be more at risk?
Could the reason be and what could it not be?
Now this is where you see editorializing happening live.
I want you to watch this very carefully because it's fascinating because what they're obviously not saying is could this be caused by the vaccine given that there are now Studies that suggest that it causes myocarditis that the injection doesn't stay in the site in the arm but migrates to cardio material.
This is stuff that people are looking at experimenting with and like the way they grope around for potential causes.
It's like you know like when you go on a game show or something it's like you can't say the word vaccine.
Yeah.
OK, you've got to talk about this story.
You're not allowed to say the word vaccine.
OK, could it be that people aren't exercising enough?
I mean, COVID itself could be causing heart attacks.
Could it be that?
Could it be that?
Maybe there's some sort of heart attack ghost that's getting into people's arms somehow.
We don't know for sure.
And in fact, these death certificates are probably not even capturing the fact that they might have had COVID.
Could have been COVID.
That's one of the many things that it could have been.
Is there anything else that's been happening since the pandemic that could be causing an unprecedented 30% rise in death by heart attacks in young people?
They're really just saying, did you die from a heart attack or not?
Did you die from a heart attack?
Could be difficult to answer that question if the answer is yes.
What we do know, however, is that younger people were less likely to protect themselves against COVID than older people.
Less likely to mask, less likely to take other mitigation measures.
It's because they've not masked.
It's because they've not taken medication.
Look, the thing is, who knows?
It could be.
The problem I have with this is that she starts this by saying, we don't know.
So at this point, this is conjecture.
So on the mainstream media, you're getting a circled expert coming on with conjecture about this and only giving one possible cause for this, one possible reason.
And exactly what you're saying, the reason, the one thing that they don't want to say is anything to do with vaccines.
And I suppose when you start to look at some of the things that people had concerns about at the beginning of the pandemic, For example, vaccine manufacturers were granted legal indemnity.
Many people thought, that ain't good.
When Pfizer booted them files 75 years into the future, when it became impossible to talk about, when all of the campaigns to shame unvaccinated people, look.
This pandemic no longer is intriguing to me in its own merit.
It intrigues me because it is a window into how power functions.
And given that what we are seeing now is a trend to further centralise power, beyond the level of national democracy.
Organizations like the WHO, WEF having the power to suggest, and in the case of the WHO, the power to introduce legislation that will affect you and your whole country that you won't at any point be able to intervene with.
It's funded by like Bill Gates to an extraordinary degree who has invested.
I mean all of these things, sometimes when I'm saying them out loud it sounds like a conspiracy theory because so much information has been simultaneously revealed that it's It's difficult not to start feeling almost scared, I think, by the scope and power of what's happening.
It's not one time, we're not going to show the whole of this interview, the whole of this piece, but there's not one moment in this whole thing where, as was reported in Politico, data has shown an elevated risk of myocarditis and pericarditis, inflammation of the heart muscle and membrane, respectively, after the second mRNA vaccine dose among males aged 12 to 39, which you would think classifies as young people, with those in their late teens and 20s more affected. It's
not mentioned once, it's literally, they don't mention this once. The idea that
omission is a form of propaganda and manipulation is one that we have to consider.
Throughout the pandemic we saw certain stories escalated, elevated, certain ideas, notions, even ideals
escalated and elevated. When it comes to the theories of the of the virus's origin, certain theories
and ideas were pushed and some were excluded from discourse, even though we know that privately
now the experts charged with the pandemic response were...
Seriously discussing the possibility that for example bioengineering and lab leak were viable theories.
And what I think we're going to see over the next couple of years is more and more of these ideas becoming verified and validated and seeing yet more ideas migrate from conspiracy theory to cast iron incontrovertible fact.
At the moment we're in a period of debate and negotiation but all of the voices of people are Robert Malone and Brett Weinstein and Joe Rogan, people that were openly having those conversations that faced extreme censor now seem more legitimate.
One side effect or one adverse event that's a problem, I believe, and you guys let me know what you think in the chat, is that we start to become more open to radical and ludicrous ideas and I think they like that.
I think they like it when we start to Discuss openly and passionately ideas that are a little bit kooky.
There ain't no need for that.
We can remain sanguine, deliberate, factual, and present a pretty powerful case that some extraordinary things have taken place.
We needn't assume malfeasance when ineptitude will do, but it does appear that there is an agenda to, where possible, bypass democratic power.
We had a guest on the show recently, Martin Goury.
He said, democracy is the only game in town.
With all of its flaws, democracy is the best it's going to get when you look at the alternatives.
We don't have democracy.
You don't have a democracy in America.
We don't have one here.
You have parties that are so similar to one another, whose ideals and agenda converge so neatly with the interests of transnational entities and corporations, that you are not given any real choice about any real issues.
So these stories we're talking about now, digital passes, High-ranking officials of corporations and unelected bodies exchanging texts and remaining unaccountable.
This is the fingerprints on the gun of how power operates.
At the old world government summit, I weren't invited.
You weren't invited.
Guess who was there?
Guess who was there with his little baby bum face?
He gets about, doesn't he?
You've got to say.
He's got such good skin.
He looks so soft.
I hope he doesn't take a private jet.
Of course he does.
He's very particular about his travel, Klaus Schwab.
Let's have a look at what he's saying at the World Summit.
I think he's saying something like we're going to be mastered by robots.
Let's have a look at him.
Our life in 10 years from now will be completely different, very much affected, and who masters those technologies in some way will be the master of the world.
I suppose that's the chatbot stuff.
And he's right.
He's right.
But it's just, it's a shame that the people he's addressing are a bunch of CEOs and world leaders, isn't it?
The very people who will take charge of all of that.
You've got Microsoft investing billions into this chatbot stuff.
You know, the chatbots that are now controlling jets and all sorts.
So it's, yeah, he's right.
Let us know in the chat bot how you feel about that.
Or if you are a chat bot, simply tell us what we think and what we should do about that.
Looking at some of your comments now.
Art by Wendy Klein, awaken or die.
Seriously, what's wrong with Klaus Schwab?
Oop, spike proteins, that's from blessed old bird, If you want to be a member of this community, there's a red button there.
You can join us.
Be part of this community.
You'll be the first to learn about stuff.
You'll get my live stand-up special in a few days.
There's all sorts of advantages to being a member of this community.
And by God, if they're all ganging up at World Government Summits, we've certainly got to do everything we can to unite.
We've got a fantastic story now.
The WHO, as I told you earlier, are pushing a treaty that will give them the power to implement legal control in your country in the event of another pandemic.
And let's face it, there's another one coming.
Do you think, let me know this in the chat, are these measures about your health or controlling your future freedom?
Let me know in the chat.
I'll be reading your comments when we come back.
Here's the news.
No, here's the effing news.
Thank you for choosing Fox News.
The news.
No, here's the fucking news.
The WHO, or World Health Organization, What is it you like most about it?
That you fund it out of your taxes?
That Bill Gates is its second biggest funder?
Or that nobody elected it?
They've got a brilliant new draft pandemic treaty that's going to surveil you into so much better health and definitely not negatively impact your freedom.
We've got a fantastic story for you today about the World Health Organization.
A new draft pandemic treaty which they propose will give them more powers to surveil and control you.
Obviously for your benefit.
You don't need to take my word for it.
Here are the WHO explaining how they're going to help you from the terror and horror of your sweet beautiful freedom.
We want to end this emergency in every country.
On the planet, in 2023, and we can do this.
And even if that emergency provides opportunities, you know, a wealth transfer of five trillion, some of the most powerful organizations in the world becoming more powerful, more ability to regulate, even though it's an emergency in your life, if you can't get treatment for your cancer, if you can't see a doctor, if your small business is closing, some of the most powerful interests in the world benefited heavily.
Let's see what the suggestions they've got for us now to advance us on our course towards more freedom.
So what we are asking all member states, all countries around the world to do is to reassess their situation have a fresh look at what you're doing and look at what needs to be adjusted so we need to strengthen the systems in countries around surveillance oh surveillance well that's interesting you're going to help us by watching us we need to strengthen the clinical care pathway so that any individual if they are infected
With whatever they have.
With anything.
Oh, not just COVID now.
Anything at all.
Headache, life itself.
All things can become a disease to the machine.
Flu, RSV, COVID.
All things are a disease and therefore all things should be surveilled.
Flu now.
To help you, to help you.
The problem is that like AI, there's usually an ideology behind it.
When we see globalist measures like this, we're going to track you, basically.
We're going to surveil you.
We're going to observe you.
For you, incidentally, you have to ask, Right at the beginning, right at this point, is this for us or is this for those centralized systems?
We prioritize and focus our vaccination campaigns to ensure that we reach 100% of the at-risk groups.
Notice that in their promotional material, the WHO very deliberately show vaccination
programs being successfully completed in what look like nations where the majority of people
are of colour.
One might assume that that was one of the African nations where that man is being inoculated.
Curiously, the WHO's biggest single funder refused to rescind the patents enabling the
vaccines to be manufactured in those nations.
Which, if what you were doing this for was philanthropy, because the Bill and Melinda
Gates Foundation is a philanthropic organisation, then presumably you would waive those patents
to facilitate those medicines get into as many people as possible.
If though you apply a different metric, like they were doing it for profit, then it would make sense not to give over the patents because you wouldn't profit from it.
So you tell me, what analysis makes more sense to you?
Profit and power, humanitarianism and kindness.
Always the humanitarianism and the kind of dialed out, amped up so you can't hear or think anything.
We've got to help people through war.
We've got to help people through medicine.
Then all of the information and data stacks up.
Hey, hey, this isn't helping people.
This isn't helping people.
Oh, but I noticed that it gave you a great deal of ability to surveil us, profit, impose regulation at a time where people are becoming more awakened and have more ability to communicate and organise.
That's just an inadvertent side effect.
Yeah, there are a lot of inadvertent side effects.
I've seen the yellow card reactions.
100% of individuals need to be boosted who are over 60.
We need new and updated vaccines that focus on preventing infection and transmission.
We need to understand more about the different types of public health and social measures and we really need to build trust.
You certainly do need to build trust after that last fiasco we've all just been through, after we've seen the way that Bill Gates acquired shares, sold shares, the timing of those events, that whole piece of propaganda underscored by beautiful strings, an attempt to present information as philanthropic and altruistic that ultimately might be about power and control.
Let's get into it.
The World Health Organization, WHO, has released the latest Zero Draft of its International Pandemic Treaty, which will give the unelected global health agency new sweeping surveillance powers if passed.
The treaty requires the WHO's 194 member states, which represents 98% of all the countries in the world, to strengthen the WHO's One Health surveillance systems.
That's what people mean by globalism.
It's centrally determined policies implemented without democracy, funded by, yes, your taxes, countries like the United States, my country, the UK, all sorts of countries, Germany, the biggest donor.
But the second biggest donor, as I'm sure you know by now, is the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.
And that's not their only means for getting funding into the WHO.
Do you think, have you seen over the course of your life, that giving money to something gives you some power and influence?
Do you think that if you donate money to an organisation that Passes global regulations around vaccines, for example, and elsewhere you invest in shares for vaccine companies.
Is that a conflict of interest?
No, it's not a conflict of interest.
It's commensurate interest working brilliantly like a missile made of money.
One Health is a WHO system that aims to optimize the health of people, animals and ecosystems.
Bloody hell, they're not even stopping at people now.
They want your pets and your entire ecosystem.
What's next?
Your thoughts?
We want your thoughts to be more healthy.
Do you mind if we stick this chopstick down in your ear and wiggle around in your brain?
It's for your benefit.
It hurts.
Sometimes pain is good.
And uses the close interdependent links among these fields to create new surveillance and disease control methods.
Bloody hell, that sounds like an immersive web of observation, which after the revelations of, say, Edward Snowden, seems like something I don't want to grant to an unelected transnational body.
The WHO's One Health fact sheet points to COVID-19 as one of the main reasons for expanding its One Health approach and states that it puts spotlight on the need for a global framework for improved surveillance.
That's weird, because I'd say that the COVID-19 pandemic shows you exactly why we should improve individual freedom, community democracy, democracy more generally, the right of people to participate in a conversation.
To hear all sides of the conversation around science.
To extract profit from the pharmaceutical and healthcare industry so that they are responsive to their taxpayer funders and that any money that they raise subsequent to an emergency is returned to the nations and people that funded it in the first place.
So, seems like we learned very different lessons.
The draft treaty also orders WHO member states to strengthen surveillance functions for outbreak investigation and control through interoperable early warning and alert systems.
Orders them.
You won't be able to decide and neither will your country be able to decide if you want more or less surveillance.
Additionally, it requires member states to recognise the WHO as the directing and coordinating authority on international health work in pandemic prevention, preparedness, response and recovery of health systems and in convening and generating scientific evidence and more generally fostering multilateral cooperation in global health governance.
They use words like cooperation Directing and coordinating authority.
Essentially what that's saying is that they will become an unelected, all-powerful system of governance when it comes to crises.
The WHO isn't God.
It isn't some unquestionable, mystical entity.
It's the interests of human beings coalescing around a set of ideas, many of which lead to profit, some of which lead to greater ability to assert control.
What I'm suggesting is that you should decide if it's right for you.
You should vote for whether or not you want it to happen in your community, your country.
More democracy, not less.
This is exactly the opposite direction to the direction we should be heading in.
Because the truth is that all this technology that we're being granted affords us the opportunity for more democracy.
The WHO has previously confirmed that it's a big supporter of vaccine passports.
No shit!
This draft treaty has been in the works since December 2021.
A final report on the treaty is expected to be presented to the WHO's decision-making body, the World Health Assembly, WHA, in May 2024.
If passed, this treaty will be adopted under Article 19 of the WHO Constitution, an article that allows the WHO to impose legally binding convention on the WHO's 194 member states if two-thirds of the member states' representatives vote in favour of the conventions.
Unless you believe that Bill Gates' huge donations to the WHO do not amount to influence, then you have to accept that what the WHO means is that Bill Gates has the ability to create international laws that affect everybody.
I mean, notice he was all over your TV set throughout the pandemic.
I think you should do this.
I think you should do that.
Have a corn cob.
Like, that dude is funding organisations that can vote for laws getting into your country.
Now, I don't know if that's what you want.
I don't think it's what I want.
Listen, I'm tired of thinking.
Life's too hard.
Just get Bill Gates to tell me what to do.
Unlike the law-making process in most democratic nations, where elected officials implement national law, this WHO process allows a small number of global representatives, often unelected diplomats, to impose international laws on all of the WHO's member states.
The WHO has the support of many powerful nations, including the United States, United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and the European Council, which represents 27 European member states.
This treaty is just one of the global surveillance proposals with ties to the WHO that is being pushed by influential global figures.
At Business B20 2022, a summit of business leaders from Group of 20, G20 countries, numerous countries agreed on a digital health passport that used WHO standards.
The digital health certificate will track whether people have been vaccinated or tested.
You don't want unelected officials deciding the basic facts of your life.
That's feudalism.
We've been through that.
Centralised systems of control where you're ultimately a serf.
What you are now is a serf with an iPhone.
Oh, I got an iPhone!
You're a peasant.
So let's have a digital health certificate acknowledged by WHO If you have been vaccinated or tested properly, then you can move around.
Fuck off!
So for the next pandemic... What?
Sorry?
Next pandemic?
Instead of stopping the movement of the people 100%, which clogged the economy globally, you know, you can still provide some movement of the people.
So hopefully for the next pandemic, we can still see some movement of the people, some movement of the goods, and movement of the economy.
But it will ultimately be what they decide is what's being suggested.
Do you remember in the early days of the pandemic when it was suggested there should be more surveillance, digital IDs to stop the spread, all that kind of stuff, even though stopping the spread now seems like a dubious goal, particularly in connection with the administration of medicine.
It was suggested that it was up to us and to our benefit to hand over our data and that they would never be misused.
It would never be given to spy agencies.
It would never be used to track us.
It would never be used to immobilize us.
It would never be used to create prejudicial conditions against people who yielded.
Some people were suspicious and said, no, no, no, no, no.
I don't want a digital ID.
I'm not sure about these medicines.
How have they been tested?
Some people were skeptical and doubtful.
Let's see how that all went down.
In the pandemic's bewildering early days, millions worldwide believed government officials who said they needed confidential data for new tech tools that could help stop coronavirus spread.
In return, governments got a firehose of individuals' private health details, photographs that captured their facial measurements and their home addresses.
Now from Beijing to Jerusalem to Hyderabad, India and Perth, Australia, the Associated Press has found that authorities used these technologies and data to halt travel for activists and ordinary people, harass marginalised communities and link people's health information to other surveillance and law enforcement tools.
In some cases, data was shared with spy agencies.
Oh, okay then.
For more than a year, AP journalists interviewed sources and pored over thousands of documents to trace how technologies marketed to flatten the curve were put to other uses.
Just as the balance between privacy and national security shifted after the September 11th terrorist attacks, COVID-19 has given officials justification to embed tracking tools in society that have lasted long after lockdowns.
Just exactly like we said.
During the pandemic, the CDC tracked millions of phones to see if Americans followed COVID lockdown orders.
Just exactly like we said, and they promised they wouldn't.
How many things now have you seen make the pilgrimage from conspiracy theory to incontrovertible fact?
Adverse events!
Excess death!
They're spying on us!
Facts!
Employees of the New York City Department of Education who refused to get vaccinated against COVID-19 had their fingerprints and files sent to the New York Criminal Justice Services and the FBI, illegal filing alleges.
That means that they criminalized not getting the vaccination.
They treated not being vaccinated as a crime.
Think of the information that's come out subsequently that makes that an appalling and untenable position.
It's simply a personal choice.
So what that tells you is the prevailing mentality and the preferred ideology is that your personal freedom is a crime.
That's where it's heading.
This is the taste.
This is the amuse-bouche.
This is the little hors d'oeuvre of the banquet of tyranny that is coming.
Your freedom is a crime.
Your ability to decide where you go, what you do, what medicines you take, what food you eat, what you believe in, what entertainment you watch, what your opinions and views are, is ultimately an inconvenience to these centralizing authorities.
But it's for your health.
It's for your safety.
If you care, as any parent knows, about someone else's safety, it's an ongoing bloody negotiation between, look, I don't think you should do that.
Oh, God.
And that's with actual children.
We're not children.
We're adults.
We literally have as much right as they do.
What claims have they made?
It's follow the science.
Oh, OK.
Is that science conforming to a bunch of corporate incentives?
Turns out it was.
Oh, yeah, well, we're sort of experts.
OK.
Are you the only experts?
And are you definitely right?
Or did you exclude a load of other expert voices?
Are you using this technology in ways that you said you wouldn't?
Their authority is over.
New York City had a vaccine mandate for employees of the Department of Education that required them to be fully vaccinated by September 2, 2022.
By mid-September, about 1,950 employees had been fired for refusing to get the vaccine.
Oh, I'm not sure about taking this vaccine.
Has it been properly tested?
Get out!
And before you go, give us your fingerprints.
Oh, this is weird.
You're not going to misuse those, are you?
No.
Hello, is that the FBI?
We were already listening to the call before you rang us.
Oh, you can put the phone down.
Oh, see, we're still here.
Oh, we've got those fingerprints.
Yeah, we know that.
Those who refused to get vaccinated also had a problem code added to their personnel file.
Ooh, problem code.
That is where we're heading.
If you do not obey, you are a problem.
If you do not conform, you are a problem.
If you do not comply, you are a problem.
But only to them.
Only to the unelected, centralised, bureaucratic bodies that don't want you to have any individual freedom.
To us, you are a solution if you don't comply.
To us, you are a solution if you don't conform.
Plus, you are a solution if you do not obey.
You must ignore their imperatives.
You must bind together.
You must overcome the adversity and conflict you've had with your fellow human beings.
You must demand individual freedom.
You must demand community freedom.
You must listen to the light within yourself and continue to nurture it.
Stay with us on this ride to freedom.
We can only do this together.
But that's just what I think.
Let me know what you think in the comments and the chat.
I'll be reading them in a second.
Hello there you awakening wonders.
Today's show is brought to you by Manscaped, who are the best in men's below the waist and below the snout and within the ear grooming.
Their products are precision engineered tools like our analysis for your family jewels.
Manscaped's performance package is the ultimate men's hygiene bundle.
You get the lawnmower, this trimmer is the future of grooming, and some say the greatest ball trimmer ever.
You get the weed whacker, crop preserver ball deodorant, although if there is an odour, there just shouldn't be an odour on your balls.
But if there is, this will rid you of it.
The crop reviver toner, performance boxer briefs, and a travel bag to hold your goodies.
In this case, the goodies are the products, not your reproductive organs.
Join over 7 million men worldwide, not literally, that would be unhygienic, you'd be ankle deep in pubic hair, who trust MANSCAPED with this exclusive offer for you.
Get 20% off and free shipping with the code BRAND at MANSCAPED.COM.
That's 20% off with free shipping at MANSCAPED.COM and use the code BRAND.
Oh, it's really actually quite satisfying because you can hear it.
Can you hear that?
That's the sound of youth returning.
Bill Gates is simply playing the best game of the Sims he has ever played.
Like we're his simulation.
That's what Wimmsdale is saying.
Ellen Sophia says, if you don't control your mind, someone else will.
Rogue Nation says, I don't understand the mind of these individuals getting off on controlling the world.
And once again, blessed El Bird, I wonder how much these medical experts get paid.
Yeah, and then someone says, Juanita952 says, congratulations on being the seventh most spiritual living person.
Thank you.
Thank you very much.
I am quite proud of that.
We've got a really important and exciting guest coming on now.
Stacey Balkan is the co-founder of US Right to Know, which Gareth will tell you a little more about later.
We have to find reliable sources for our content so that we don't end up using the witterings of hysterical lunatics.
Instead, we find truth-tellers in the case of Right to Know expose corporate corruption and government failures
that threaten our health and in particular, our food systems.
Stacey, thanks for joining us today.
Thank you so much for having me, Russell.
And thank you for taking a stand on these issues and providing a platform for truth.
You know, the things we're going to talk about today really matter to the health of all of us.
So thank you.
Thanks so much, May.
The first thing we wanted to talk about is the power of big agriculture and how technology And in particular, the use of pesticides is creating huge health risks for the planet and disrupting our food systems.
Can you give us an overview of what's happening, please, Stacey?
Sure.
So, our food system is really in the hands of a handful of corporations that have a long history of corruption.
Pesticides and seeds, most of them in the world, the majority are sold by four corporations that have consolidated in recent years.
And it's sort of a consolidation of corruption, a survival of the most brutal business tactics.
So, all of these companies, as I said, have histories of hiding and denying the harm of their products.
And we just came out with a report at U.S. Right to Know called Merchants of Poison
that is based on a years-long investigation into Monsanto's own documents.
And we have a huge trove of documents, and I hope we can talk a little bit later
about how we do our research at U.S. Right to Know.
But we report through these documents to lay out and explain what they show
about how the company runs its science denial and disinformation campaigns.
It likes the tobacco industry, like the fossil fuel industry,
although I think in some ways more effectively because they have the power of.
Mainstream academia on their side with many professors and universities who seem to be independent, but they're not as our research has shown.
Many of them are actually getting paid by Monsanto and working directly with pesticide companies to do their public relations and lobbying for them.
So we lay out the key tactics that they use.
I'm very aggressive.
It's sort of an astonishing array of tactics.
It's really a lot of desperate tactics, in my view, I think is the bottom line finding of our report that it takes to support this business model that the pesticide companies have.
So we can talk about the tactics.
I'd love to.
I mean, Merchants of Poison sounds like a very good paper and a bloody good thrash metal band name.
I know Gareth in particular uses Right to Know a lot.
Gareth, what in particular do you want to follow up on that Stacey was asking you No, I just think it's really interesting the way that your organisation, as Russell says, we use you a lot and you do some fantastic investigations, but you've also been smeared and discredited by some of the mainstream media now, and you were just talking about the ways in which universities are funded by Monsanto and things.
What do you feel about censorship at the moment and the way that you've been kind of discredited yourselves and what direction is that going and is it becoming harder to tell the truth like you are doing?
Well, it's very intense and we were attacked right out of the gate when we started our organization in 2015.
And the reason was because we were looking where Monsanto and the pesticide companies didn't want us looking.
And we first came up against Monsanto about 10 years ago when we tried to label genetically engineered foods in California.
I was part of that effort.
And it was a question put to voters.
And as you can imagine, there was overwhelming public support for Right to Know and labeling,
about 65 to 70 percent.
But then Monsanto led campaign in the span of about 30 days.
They were spending about a million dollars a day on just a blizzard of lies and confusion
that tanked the ballot initiative.
But what was interesting about that was so many seemingly independent, reputable sources
were singing the lyrics of Monsanto.
So we wanted to get under the cover of that and figure out how did that happen?
How did they do it?
So my colleague at that time, Gary Ruskin, and I started U.S.
Right to Know, and he filed many public records requests for the emails of academics
that we suspected were working with Monsanto.
Over the years, we've dug up tens of thousands of pages of documents from agrochemical industry,
now also the ultra processed food industry.
We also investigate the origins of COVID-19.
And we found many news-breaking documents that have led to our own investigations, front-page investigations in the New York Times and many other media outlets.
They have tried to discredit us.
We at one point revealed that Monsanto had an entire PR campaign to try to discredit our group.
There's a 31-page Monsanto document, a PR plan involving 11 Monsanto employees, several PR firms, and we were three people.
So this is how threatened they are by transparency, by their own documents.
And what they show about how they run their business.
So astonishing that they will go to so much trouble to repress the truth rather than behaving ethically.
Clearly what is often pointed to as science, continually this term is used, as if it's a new orthodoxy, a new unequivocal monolith of truth, when in fact it's often been funded, paid for.
Food monopolies preventing information entering the mainstream, Even about recognized, popularly eaten and ordinarily recognized brands like Pepsi, Kellogg's, Coca-Cola.
As I understand, many of these processed food brands spend a lot of money publishing, like on influencing studies and repressing information about the damage that their products do.
Is that true, Stacey?
Yes, absolutely.
And the Monsanto documents, again as an example, show many ways that the company was manipulating the scientific record over decades.
So, like ghostwriting studies, choosing friendly scientists to write particular narratives, strong-arming regulatory agencies, shoddy science.
There was a recent study looking at the corporate science that was provided to regulatory agencies for glyphosate approval.
and many of the studies were based on old outdated scientific methods. They didn't include
research that would identify cancer risk. So it's just really bad science, but they present
themselves as pro-science and their front groups present themselves as pro-science.
The genetic literacy project is an example, scientific literacy.
but those groups are at the forefront of attacking individual scientists
who raise concerns about pesticides.
And we talk a lot in the report about the very aggressive, unprecedented campaign
that they ran to try to discredit the World Health Organization's Cancer Research Agency,
which found in 2015 that glyphosate was a probable human carcinogen.
So they personally and viciously attack scientists, and it's just sort of a playbook 101.
Sense is the very essence of what's meant by systemic corruption,
the inability to tell truthful stories, to...
Convey information that's beneficial to people that gets in the way of profit.
Now, I don't want to give the impression that the man's gotten into my head too much because I did literally dream about Bill Gates recently, which I talked about on our show that's available for our locals community.
Click the red button if you want to join that and get access to our additional content.
Bill Gates is a lead investor in biotech companies that patent food.
Vandana Shiva is a great friend of our show and a great mentor of ours, and she talks continually about the negative impact that Bill Gates has had on her country, India, and on many countries in the continent of Africa.
Is there anything in your research around Monsanto and elsewhere in Big Agra, Big Food, and tech that has brought Bill Gates's name and his funding entities to the forefront?
Very much to the forefront.
I've done a lot of reporting on Bill Gates and the Gates Foundation, particularly focusing on their campaign to expand industrial, chemical-intensive agriculture in Africa.
So they spent about $6 million on that effort under the banner of the Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa.
And this is despite no evidence showing that it's achieved anywhere near the things they, you know, wildly and boldly promise about Feeding the world and helping the poor.
African groups across the continent have protested against the Gates Foundation, have tried to bring their views to the Gates Foundation.
They've been almost entirely ignored as they double down on these efforts to push corporate controlled agriculture, seed laws that actually can criminalize seed saving and seed exchanges.
In some cases, that's a huge fight happening in Africa right now.
And I've also written about, you know, what is Bill Gates' food agenda and plans to transform our food system, which he talks about all the time, under the guise of helping the climate and feeding the poor.
But really what it's about is monocultures, patented foods, and ultra-processed foods, and this push for techno-foods.
You know, basically the pesticide industry scheme is patented seeds, A handful of crops, getting farmers to grow huge monocultures that depend on pesticides and fertilizers that are harming the soil, that are harming people and our health, and these crops don't even feed people.
They're used mostly for cars, for cows, and for ultra-processed food factories.
Oh, Stacey, you're getting a lot of love from our community down here.
People like Feel The M and Susan, Maria Hall, all sending love and very grateful for the work that you're doing.
Gareth, have you got any more inquiries about your fellow journalists there at US Right To Know?
Yeah, I was just, it was so interesting about Bill Gates, you know, obviously the kind of hero-worship that he's had over the last couple of years, and yet at the same time we have discovered that he's the biggest farmland owner in the United States now.
How much of a connection do you see between that ownership of farmland now that he has, and these plans for ultra-processed food and changing the food systems?
Yeah, well, you know, he says he bought the farmland because his investment company told him to.
So that gives you a clue right there.
He's expecting, you know, maximum returns on his investment, which means the profit scheme of corn and soy monocultures.
And what are they going to do with all that corn and soy?
ultra-processed food factories.
You know, they're building more of these factories.
And if you look at what's actually in these food factories and companies like Ginkgo Bioworks,
which Bill Gates is a big investor in, I've written a lot about that company.
You know, it's energy intensive, plastic intensive, ultra, ultra processed foods that consumers
are not even saying they want, fake meats and so forth.
So, you know, is this the food system that we want?
And I think people don't want this food system and that we need to find ways to de-escalate, decentralize, bring food back to local communities and grow it in ways that are based on agroecological principles and that actually help farmers and communities.
He's pretty clear.
Yeah, the farmers in Africa are really mad at Bill Gates and he's not listening to them.
No, what he does, dear Bill Gates, is he claims he's helping people.
He turns up on the internet nibbling on a corncob, claiming that everything he does is for the benefit of mankind.
This week we've been speaking about big food and how diabetes, heart disease, cancer would
be considerably reduced and some have even suggested eliminated altogether were processed
foods to be removed from our diet.
It seems increasingly that we are encouraged not to look at and obviously to financially
support agricultural dietary measures that are bad for the planet, bad for us individually,
bad for our health, bad for our culture, bad for our society and then when someone like
you and your organisation questions it, you become the subject of smearing campaigns.
This is precisely in microcosm, and indeed globally, how we've come to imagine and assume these systems are working.
But it's always so valuable, Stacey, to get an opportunity to access the research that you have done that stops it being the wild conjecture of a madman and brings it into a place of journalistic integrity.
Thank you so much for joining us today, Stacey, for that fantastic interview.
I know that we'll be talking to you more, at least I hope so.
Thank you so much.
I hope so too and everyone you can follow our work at USRTK.org and please also sign up for our weekly free newsletter to find out about our investigations because we have lots more going on in the food industry, COVID-19 origins and lots more on the pesticide companies.
And Bill Gates.
They all love that.
Look, I mean, they're going mad here.
Bill Gates, these conspiracy theorists on the chat, on locals, they're going crazy for this information.
Stacey, thank you so much for your time.
It is wonderful to be in your company.
Thank you.
Thank you so much, Russell.
I really appreciate it.
Thank you so much, mate.
Take care.
Bye-bye.
Gareth, I think that interview went actually rather well.
Good.
Amazing.
She was an interesting person.
I've got so much respect for these people that dedicate their lives to finding out truth.
And when there's so much pushback against them, it's pretty amazing.
Right to know.
Open the books.
It was amazing.
That's right.
In a way, this, for me, helps to demonstrate that it increasingly is not important what your cultural or even political identity is, but that you are interested in freedom.
Freedom, which, by the way, is now subject to a campaign to turn it into a word that is divisive and even bigoted.
You know, when we talk about freedom, we mean your individual freedom to be who you are, obviously, without harming other people, freedom for your community.
We've got a fantastic story coming up about that soon.
And yeah, you're right, like groups like Right To Know are doing diligent, fastidious, necessary work to demonstrate and prove that what many of us feel, that something isn't right, that we're not being told the truth, that they're making decisions that are not for our benefit, claiming that it's for our safety, for our convenience, their kindness, all these Extraordinary tropes that we hear again and again and increasingly becoming suspicious of.
The work of people like Stacey demonstrates that it's true.
And then you get, you know, again, it's not always to paint Bill Gates as the biggest villain.
I mean, it's quite plainly, it's not just the realm of conspiracy that he's up to these things.
Like Stacey, we've just been talked through some of the things that he's up to.
But when he goes on the media and the most that he'll get is someone either talking about Jeffrey Epstein or saying, do you think it's bad that you take those private jets all the time?
And that's it.
That's the end of the question.
He says, oh, I think it's fine.
I think my carbon offsets deal with that.
End of.
What if we had him here?
Like in my dream.
We'd want to go, what's with all that farmland, mate?
What was with buying up those shares and then selling them?
What are you hoping to achieve with your investment in the WHO?
That sort of thing.
Why are you investing in all these media companies?
And then would we just plainly go, look, we think this bill, you're totally loaded and that.
You've gone a bit mad and you want to wind it in a little bit.
I think Bill Gates will just always have an answer of, this is designed for the good of humanity and the good of society.
You know, he'll always have, like with these food systems at the moment and the ultra-processed food, as with the stuff in Africa, it's always, they've got a problem in Africa, we need to go and help them, this is the only way it can be done.
Yeah, yeah.
when you then hear that people in Africa are like we don't want this and it's not
helping you know that's the side that you don't hear you just hear of the
philanthropy that you know even though as we have spoken about recently they
seem to have more money coming in than going out at that foundation.
That's right there's been billions in profit which seems like an extraordinary way to run a charity.
There's some really interesting lines of inquiry coming up on the chat.
You're full of shit, Bill.
Says Curiouser and Curiouser.
Let us know how you want us to approach these subjects.
Not that it's likely that Bill Gates will come on as a guest, but I'll tell you who did come on.
Tim Poole.
I had a fantastic conversation with him, which is the subject of tomorrow's episode of Stay Free.
free. Have a look at a little clip of that. In here. Okay, if I'm still live right now,
then let me tell you that I did speak to Tim Paul. I'm not lying. And possibly this is
one of those SWAT attacks that he's continually subject to.
Is it able to play now?
In the absence of shock, people will invent shock.
And we're seeing stories that make no sense all of a sudden are generating millions of views.
And it seems like this is destabilization.
And I'm wondering if we're at that point where people have no strong morals anymore.
The only thing that's driving the media ecosystem is to be as shocking as possible.
And then when there's literally nothing at the top, people invent things to be shocked by.
And then the system destabilizes.
Yeah that's a good that.
Do you know who, what he kept mentioning?
He kept mentioning this geezer called Yuri.
Hold on a second, let me find him because I've got a clip of him from my mate Tony Robbins sent me this.
Like this guy called, what's he called?
Like he's a Soviet defector.
Hold on when his name comes up.
Yeah, Yuri Bezmenov.
Have you lot heard about Yuri Bezmenov?
He was a Soviet defector who talks about the four stages of deterioration.
I think we're going to do a story on it.
We will.
It's pretty good.
You'll like this.
And he talks a lot in the show about instability, that we're living in a time of instability and how it may have been If you want to learn more and get more deeply involved with our stuff, and if you're interested in meditation, which I strongly suggest you do get involved in because you need to have access to peace.
It's an intense world and it's intense time.
On our Locals Community, I do a weekly meditation with someone from the community.
I did one earlier today with Farrah on the subject of self-love.
She's probably on the chat right now.
We did one last week with another friend of mine.
Meditations that address what you're feeling personally.
Also, you get a look at the show behind the show where I talk about crazy dreams.
And we go deep, don't we sometimes, Gareth?
Absolutely.
It's a moment of relief and respite from the intensity of talking about these data-oriented, challenging stories.
Sometimes there's strikes on YouTube, there's complex things for us to deal with here.
Death threats, lots of fascinating stories when it comes to the show behind the show, so join us on Locals, just click on that red button, you can join us there, and that's the chat I tend to look at when we're up live.
Okay, so hey, tomorrow, Tim Paul, another fantastic conversation, and we've got some wonderful conversations coming up next week, and I'll be letting you know about how you can come and see me live if you're in Florida or Los Angeles in about a week's time, because we're going over there to do Rogan and Bill Maher and Tucker and all of that kind of stuff.
We're going to be over there soon.
Anyway, join us tomorrow, not for more of the same, but for more of the different.
▲
Export Selection