Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

June 21, 2023 - Stay Free - Russel Brand

01:07:17

BLACKROCK CORRUPTION EXPOSED!! Video Sting Goes VIRAL - #151 - Stay Free With Russell Brand

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	In this video, I'm going In this video, you're going to see the future.
	Hey!
	Our Lord and Saviour.
	He don't make no rubbish.
	He makes awakening wonders and it's awakening wonders I'm addressing right now whether you're watching us on Twitter, YouTube or our ultimate home, the home of free speech, Rumble.
	Welcome to today's show.
	What a show we've got.
	We'll be talking to James O'Keefe in a minute about his Black Rock Corruption expose.
	I think he was just on Crowder.
	We've just got him.
	We've wrangled him over from Crowder.
	I think he agreed to come on ours first.
	Did he?
	I think so.
	The very fact that we can share content.
	What an extraordinary world we're living in.
	The bidding war for JFK.
	Not JFK.
	That's going to be expensive.
	RFK.
	Who's funding that debate?
	RFK versus Hortes is skyrocketing.
	It's into the millions and I can exclusively announce we are going to put £10 into that fund.
	£10.
	Let's get that debate happening.
	That should do it.
	That should do it.
	Hotez debating RFK on vaccine efficacy.
	We are still on YouTube.
	Later on, we're going to be talking to Dr. Mark Hyman.
	He's going to help us to expose the medical-industrial complex.
	You name it these days, they've got an industrial complex.
	There's the censorship-industrial complex.
	On tomorrow, I'm going to be talking to Schellenberger and Taibbi, those couple of showboating charlatans.
	I'll be talking to them about censorship, and we'll be broadcasting that soon exclusively on Rumble.
	Our main story that we're focusing on, and you're going to need to click Rumble in the link if you're watching us on YouTube to see us get deep.
	With this particular subject is the Black Rock revelatory video.
	Now, of course, James O'Keefe, he's famous for his performance in Oklahoma.
	He's famous for his expose of a former farmer worker, in particular a Pfizer worker's revelations around, you know, stuff we can't talk about on YouTube.
	Well he's gone and done it again, this time it's with Blackrock.
	Now what we're interested in here is the fact that these kind of stories, in particular a story that appears to suggest that you can purchase political power through donations, Bribery.
	You let me know in the comments and chat what word you think is appropriate.
	If you're watching us on Rumble, by the way, why don't you click the red button.
	Join us over on Locals right now.
	Join all these people.
	Yes, a lot of you are focusing on James O'Keefe's performance in Oklahoma.
	A lot of people really like that.
	It's pretty extraordinary.
	What we know about Black They're the third largest economic entity in the world.
	We bought you a fantastic story about how they've done a deal with Ukraine to rebuild Ukraine after the war, setting up corporate contracts, construction contracts.
	We know that BlackRock is an extraordinarily powerful entity, so these allegations that BlackRock engage in the...
	But, you know, potentially bribery and bias, acquiring biases from, shall we say, participants in the political game is potentially groundbreaking.
	One of the things we wanted to point out that the individual, the individual subject, the guy that's, you know, the recipient of the sting there, the person who's, like, made these revelations, he's not really important.
	Do you agree with me?
	Because haven't you just always known that?
	Isn't it a little bit like the Epstein story?
	Even though you're astonished to learn that all these powerful figures apparently have
	relationships with Epstein and been on his jets and have been on his list and have had
	all these chats and have accepted his money and have lobbied for him to donate to their
	campaign funds, including the woman that was criticising dear Taibbi and Schellenberger.
	It's a confirmation of what we already suspect is true.
	All economic entities bypass democratic process in order to pursue their agenda.
	Let me know if it's simply a confirmation of what you know to be true.
	Nevertheless, let's have a look.
	Me and Gareth Roy here, my on screen assistant, will be breaking down this story and analysing
	the true power of BlackRock and the veracity of these claims.
	Also, will you see this?
	Let me know in the chat if you think you're going to see this story on.
	on CNN. Let me know if you think you're going to see this story on MSNBC. Why don't they
	cover these stories? Do you think BlackRock might own some shares in Comcast maybe? Do
	you think that's a possibility? Let's have a look at the video that's causing all these
	trending contra- the contra-tomps right now. Let's have a look.
	All of these financial institutions, they buy politicians.
	You can take this big f*** ton of money, and then you can start... These whistleblowers are getting younger, aren't they?
	Look at that buddy boy Jack Texera, the Pentagon Papers lad.
	How old was he?
	19?
	20?
	Who's giving them these jobs and access to all of this stuff?
	Well, I don't know.
	I have no idea.
	I mean, I don't know if you can call him a whistleblower.
	Maybe an inadvertent whistleblower.
	Oh, he's not blowing a whistle.
	He's definitely not doing that.
	It's like someone who accidentally whistles when they talk.
	Right.
	He's about the age of Bad Graphics Jack, isn't he?
	Yeah, those people that when they talk go, shh, shh, does that happen?
	Yeah, you know my black tracks, shh.
	They've got a gap in their teeth.
	Black tracks, shh.
	Of course, they're giving a lot of money to me.
	You're inadvertently blowing a whistle today.
	I didn't know he was filming that!
	To find people.
	I work for a company called BlackRock.
	Let me tell you it's not their who's the president is.
	It's who's controlling the wallet.
	Who's the president?
	You can tell he's young because that's the sort of thing you say when you're like
	Hey guess what man?
	Thanksgiving is a celebration of stealing the country from the native people!
	Black Rock!
	They're the bad guys in all of us!
	And you know he's talking to a woman, the lady operating this sting is a woman, so he's blatantly trying to impress her with language like that.
	I talk to Black Rock.
	I pull all the strings back there.
	I actually am establishing some deals right now with Zelensky.
	Oh, he's on the phone now.
	Hold on, I think there's a problem with the line.
	Oh no, that is him!
	Yeah, you get the idea.
	Should we have a look?
	And who's that?
	The hedge funds, minecraft, the banks, these guys.
	Yes, so it's the financial...
	And who's that?
	The hedge funds, the banks, these guys run the bank.
	Campaign financing.
	Yep, you can buy your candidates.
	I don't actually, I don't want to focus on the lad, because he's just some lad.
	He's just working in recruitment, isn't he?
	I'm just gonna buy it, and give you 500k.
	He's a little bragger, didn't he? I don't actually, I don't want to focus on the lad,
	because he's just some lad, he's just working in recruitment, isn't he? He's not actually
	the leader of Blackrock. No, it's not Larry Fink. It's not Larry Fink out there.
	Larry Fink would keep his mouth shut.
	I imagine he knows what he's doing, dear old Larry Fink.
	What will happen, I suppose, and let me know in the comments in the chat, join us on Rumble, press the red button, is that BlackRock will deny the credibility of the story, say that they're not really associated with him, it'll become a tribalised debate and argument, and the mainstream media won't report on it.
	That's primarily what will happen, and those of us that have long suspected that politicians can be acquired through money will continue to believe that, and people that Sort of just want things to basically stay the same, won't bother to interrogate the subject.
	Together, BlackRock and Vanguard own 18% of Fox News, perhaps that's why it's not getting covered, 16% of CBS, 13% of Comcast, which owns MSNBC and CNBC.
	The very fact that those three entities are owned by one conglomeration is interesting, isn't it?
	And the Sky Media Group, that's in our country, 12% of CNN, 12% of Disney.
	That's a considerable amount of media influence.
	Is that too much?
	When we talk about Duopolies in politics and big tech.
	When we talk about monopolies, when we talk about globalism, do you imagine that this is a contributory factor?
	Are you surprised by these revelations?
	And let us know what your questions are for James O'Keefe.
	He'll be turning up here.
	He's probably warming up his voice even now, gargling salt water, getting ready to bang out some show tunes for us.
	Have you got something to say about all of this, Gareth?
	It gets really interesting when he starts talking about the war in Ukraine as well.
	Oh, he's going to talk about the war in Ukraine now?
	Because it's one thing turning a profit from a little bit of corruption and buying domestic politicians.
	I think most of us assume that's the case already.
	We're weary with their corruption.
	But if wars are being created, provoked, prolonged in order to generate profit, is that a big story?
	Should we care?
	Have you lost the ability to care?
	Do you care?
	Right now, the question is asked.
	Identity needs to be done.
	Does, like, everybody do that?
	Does Black Rock do that?
	I'm in charge of the government, actually.
	I'm in control of this.
	See these chopsticks of mine?
	I use that to control governments.
	He's gone a bit carried away.
	You haven't got a pocket!
	Where is that?
	Is that even a pocket?
	Who has got a pocket?
	The journalist you're talking to.
	Everything is being recorded.
	I do feel sorry for that because he's just presumably a normal sort of low-level drone worker recruiting for Blackrock.
	This is not the epicentre of global corruption here.
	It's just one of the many denizens of a habitat of pure corruption that all of us know exists by now.
	Absolutely.
	Yeah, he's reporting on the culture, not about his just singular behaviour.
	Yeah, it's a little bit like Hortense.
	Is that his name?
	The fellow that won't debate RFK even after we've not heard about my 10 quid yet.
	That's not what's important.
	What's important is a culture of censorship, a culture of surveillance, a culture of smearing dissenters.
	That's what's significant.
	Can't target individuals.
	What's the point?
	We're talking about systemic change here.
	It's good for business in general.
	I'll give an example.
	Russia...
	Russia blows up Ukraine's grains.
	The price of wheat is going to go mad up.
	The Ukrainian economy is tied very largely to the wheat market.
	Global wheat market.
	Prices of bread.
	You know, literally everything goes up and down.
	This is fantastic if you're trading.
	Volatility creates opportunity to make profit.
	War is no good for business.
	It's exciting when shit goes wrong.
	People in the chat are disgusted.
	Pride Folks, he says he's talking about the destruction of people here.
	Firegirl2020, this guy's liking kindergarten but I'm glad they're you for catching on.
	Oh, you've known this for ages, haven't you?
	You lot.
	In a way, it's sort of surprising that that's the sort of stuff he chats about on dates.
	But who here is surprised by that?
	Let me know in the chat if this is an astonishing revelation or if these are the kind of things you've long assumed if you've known since God, basically the 1960s, that the state operates on behalf of corporate interests.
	It's a trend that's been getting worse and worse, and you can track it through various administrations, till we reach this point.
	Corporate gigantism, where democracy becomes almost redundant, where there's no trust in any institutions at all.
	Not media, not government, not electoral, democracy itself.
	Are you surprised by these revelations?
	Do you believe these revelations?
	What do you think's the most interesting thing about them?
	I know that what you think is important is the idea that war is being used to mobilise profit.
	Yeah, I mean, when he's talking there about wheat and Ukraine and how the prices fluctuate due to that and how BlackRock can profit from that, I mean, we know that that's happening anyway.
	We know that the kind of food crisis is going on in the US and in the UK or across Europe at the moment.
	It's to do with the price gouging of companies that are using the opportunity for war to charge people more.
	For the daily products that they buy.
	That is something that goes on and that the companies that do it lobby Congress.
	They spend millions lobbying Congress to mean that Biden and the rest of the government don't do anything about it.
	You know, when it comes to another element of the war, weapons, I mean that some of the largest weapons companies in the world, Raytheon and Lockheed Martin, have been since the start of the Ukraine war bragging to investors that tensions between the countries are good for business.
	BIA systems have gone up 32%, Lockheed Martin have gone up 14%.
	These aren't, I guess, you know, it's interesting to see someone actually on camera admitting it, but these things are things that we already know about through just literally what's happening.
	ApologeticPest says in the locals chat, I'm not sure why we're watching some clip of a smug millennial talking, eating Chinese food and talking about wheat shortages.
	We are a hardened and skeptical crew, aren't we?
	Because we are Awakening Wonders.
	And if you're watching us now on YouTube, click the link in the description.
	Join us over on Rumble.
	James O'Keefe, who broke this story, is going to be joining us in just a few minutes.
	And you can post your questions for him here in the chat, and we'll ask him some stuff that I suppose takes him to the very limit of his capabilities.
	Yeah, the other element, obviously, what we're talking about here is that kind of collusion between government and company, massive corporate companies like BlackRock.
	when we come to the Ukraine reconstruction and BlackRock's part in that.
	So it says here, there's an article by Caitlin Johnson, critics have complained that BlackRock's new role in
	Ukraine could draw accusations of corruption
	with some noting that the company's managing director, Eric Van Norstrand, was hired straight
	into a senior advisory position in the Biden administration's treasury department
	just this past August, explicitly to shape US economic policy on Russia and
	Ukraine.
	So there is a literal link between BlackRock and the Biden administration
	in terms of their strategy towards Ukraine, in terms of the reconstruction of Ukraine.
	They all know what's happening and they're all involved.
	So are you astonished by these revelations or is it merely a confirmation
	of what you have long suspected?
	What's next?
	What is it going to take?
	What level, degree of revelation would it require for you to stop participating in this model?
	Yet another story that demonstrates ties between the media, the military-industrial complex, the government.
	It's, I guess, I suppose at this point it's difficult to maintain anything other than Vague disappointment.
	Listen, we're gonna leave you now because James O'Keefe, is James O'Keefe there?
	Let's just have a look at him on YouTube.
	He's the sort of person that gets YouTube strikes, I would imagine.
	Yeah, no, look at him.
	He's there.
	He's got his backdrop.
	His shirt's too undone.
	For God's sake, James.
	Right, listen.
	If you want to see James undo another button, simply press the link in the description and join us over on Rumble.
	We'll be talking to Dr. Mark Hyman a little later.
	Plus, what's our presentation today?
	Peter Hotez.
	Ah, Peter Hotez, we're covering that story in some depth.
	You're keen to talk on YouTube, are you, James?
	Look it, I can see him warming up.
	He's licking his lips with anticipation.
	He's probably going to break another story.
	Now, remember, we're on YouTube, so don't say anything too controversial before we go over on Rumble.
	Do you want to say something, James, or are you going to do a few bars of Oklahoma?
	I mean, I've been saying poor Judd is dead last time I sang the opening, the title sequence.
	Just give us, yeah, do a little bit.
	I think that's what drives people from YouTube to Rumble.
	Let's give it a go.
	Poor Judd is dead, poor Judd Fry is dead.
	Gather round his coffin now and cry.
	There you go.
	That was a way.
	Whoever was backing you on your former channel, their money, I think it was well invested.
	Absolutely.
	I wouldn't call that corruption.
	No.
	If singing like that is a crime, you can lock me up and throw away the key.
	You can call me Hunter Biden, baby.
	Allegedly.
	Because I'm as criminal as they come.
	Join us over on... I think he's pleaded guilty.
	It's a plea bargain, right?
	I don't think we've said anything wrong there.
	I think that's okay.
	That's fine.
	Okay, all right, listen.
	As you can see, things are hotting up.
	O'Keefe's singing show tunes.
	Let's go over here and expose some deep corruption and bring about a spiritual revolution.
	We're also going to be talking about...
	The newest Rumble participant, RFK.
	Why won't this debate happen?
	And if it does happen, you know where it will.
	Click the link, join us over on Rumble.
	James, thank you so much for joining us.
	Now, I noticed that you went on a Crowder show.
	Would you just do that interview again, but be slightly more salacious and undo a couple of buttons?
	I thought I was on YouTube.
	I gotta be careful, right?
	Oh, you're on Rumble now, baby.
	This is it.
	Rumble, baby.
	You're at the home of free speech.
	Well, we started with poor Judd is dead.
	So I don't know how to how to top that.
	But uh, I mean, you say it doesn't shock people.
	It's confirmed suspicions.
	But most people this guy says they're asleep.
	He says that normal people don't give a shit.
	That's what he says.
	So I mean, I think we're waking people up with this expose because then you say, well, it's just one guy or one individual, but the organization is made up of individuals.
	So in order to expose the collective, you have to expose the individual bit by bit and we have more coming.
	So that's what I would say in response to that.
	What do you say to when people offer the assessment that Blackrock and Vanguard are such vast financial entities that comprise so many disparate investments that to regard them as a sort of solid conglomerate in the same way you might something like Facebook or Alphabet or whatever is a sort of a misdiagnosis.
	What is the significance of Blackrock's power and what is the significance of the revelations this young man has made?
	Well, BlackRock is so significant that when you actually search this video, which this video has hundreds of thousands of likes, tens of millions of views, it's trending on Twitter, you can't actually find the video on Google.
	And maybe you say, well, Google, BlackRock owns 6.5% of Google, that's $45 billion, of a $1.5 trillion market cap.
	I didn't even realize how powerful they were when I did that Pfizer story.
	I didn't realize that if you look at the equity owners of Fox News, And the equity owners of Pfizer, BlackRock owns a significant share of that.
	With Fox Corporation, it's 18.4%.
	Disney, 12%.
	You point out Comcast, 13%.
	I mean, and this guy says it.
	He says, you take this quote, big fuck ton of money and you buy people and you buy senators for relatively little money, $10,000.
	That surprised me.
	That's not a lot of money to buy a senator.
	But he says all the things that we suspect to be true.
	And I think it is waking people up.
	I think little by little it is.
	I hope so.
	Now my sense is that people that are watching us right now on Rumble are already awakening.
	Press the red button, join us over on Locals, get the neat gear.
	It is pretty astonishing to learn that Google are able to censor and contain such a revelation.
	So do you imagine then that there are direct conversations such as were revealed in the Twitter files where the representatives of BlackRock simply contact people at Google and say we'd rather that that search didn't show up.
	And I suppose that legislation and regulation is always introduced to say protect us from harmful or sexually explicit materials and then they just use that kind of administration to censor essentially.
	Almost certainly, but they don't get revealed until years later.
	Like the story we did in 2020.
	We got some Department of Homeland Security guy emailing the Twitter people, this is before Elon bought the company, saying we need to suppress this James O'Keefe.
	This stuff comes out years later.
	But obviously it's happening behind the scenes.
	I wish I had those conversations on camera.
	Maybe I will, hint hint.
	And one of the remarkable things about these videos that we do is we break these stories and it inspires other people Inside BlackRock, even today they're reaching out to me.
	Some of them are probably trying to sting me, but others actually are giving me information.
	So it kind of generates a momentum of other people that want to blow the whistle, like this guy did unwittingly.
	Wow, so you think it creates a culture where people feel more empowered and entitled to speak out?
	I suppose when the moral veracity of an entire military endeavor is up for question, we already pontificated at length and provided some interesting demonstrations of the way that Post-war, presumed in a much-required post-war climate, Black Rock have done deals with Zelensky to participate in the construction, that they want to make it a digital nation.
	I wonder sometimes, James, what kind of revelations it's going to take for people to stop participating.
	I recognize that you use a degree of sensationalism.
	That's because I believe at heart you are a showman.
	Do you think that people need sensationalism in order to be Well, you need a little bit of sensationalism and you need to be a little bit of a thespian to expose them in the first place.
	Like, to get in there and go get the information and present yourself as something that you're not, to ingratiate yourself with the subject.
	I think individually, taking one video at a time, none of this perhaps alone can change things, but collectively they can change things.
	So this is one of a series of exposés.
	I mean, even me talking to this guy.
	You'll see this video later today.
	This is this BlackRock recruiter.
	I sat down with him.
	Like a thespian that I am, he got up and he walked down the street, this is New York City, into the police station and he invited me into the police station with him.
	Now I wasn't certain whether he's trying to turn himself into the police, usually criminals run away from the police not towards them, or it was a weird moment in time, highly entertaining, quite bizarre, but the cognitive dissonance when these people are exposed I think it's, this is a movement where you release one video, that inspires the next video, which inspires the next, and it just sort of creates this momentum.
	At O'KeefeMediaGroup.com, we got whistleblowers coming to us, DMing us right now, live, in my office, people come in saying there's things happening, I can't tell you what's happening, but more videos are coming out this week from within BlackRock.
	I suppose one of the things this indicates is that crime has become a subjective and shifting concept, i.e.
	as Nixon famously said, it's not crime when the president does it.
	And now what we have is a state where it's not criminal when BlackRock do it.
	Bribery, corruption, Hypocrisy.
	It seems there's a certain strata of society that are exempted from ordinary taxation laws, ordinary ethics and morality.
	And I suppose, James, you are going to have to keep providing these exposés to stop us becoming inured to corruption.
	Overly inoculated, to use a term of our time.
	Now, James, is this true that you've been felt up at the airport?
	Was this part of a security measure or is this yet another of your That's quite a transition here.
	We talk about the morality of investigative journalism creating a morality to me being harassed and molested and groped.
	but I'll go there.
	Tie them together.
	Tie them together? Man.
	What we do has the power to create morality because we patrol the boundaries of what is moral and immoral
	by testing what shocks people's conscience.
	You say it doesn't shock your conscience, but you're a few standard deviations away from the average, Russell.
	Most people, some people, are literally a slumber.
	But most of those people are also afraid.
	So, speaking of being groped, I was in Nashville, this is last week, most people recognize me, and when they don't like me, they say nothing.
	And if they like me, they say something.
	So, you know, you probably experienced something similar, I suppose.
	So, I'm in Nashville at the TSA line, and this guy, this TSA agent, definitely recognizes me.
	Rather than just ignore me, he says, come here.
	He says, you want it in the private room, or do you want... I said, I want to do it in front of everybody.
	I want everyone to see this.
	Everyone and then I make sure I get a camera person to record it and he takes his hand and he really touches me all over all over the place.
	I usually I say I almost said what you got to take me to dinner first, right if you're going to behave that way, but we got it on video.
	And, um, it was crazy.
	I've never seen anything like it.
	Right.
	Okay, guys, hold on to your hats.
	Now, if James doesn't bring enough eroticism merely by virtue of his conversation, here he is being patted down at Homeland Security.
	I can see already from the still at the front of the frame that the gloves are on, but in many ways the gloves are off.
	Let's see James getting stripped down and touched up.
	What are you looking for?
	Making sure there's not anything there.
	Okay.
	That was good.
	Thank you.
	I tell you what, he was very abrasive with the backhand there, wasn't he?
	That was a very aggressive stroke across there.
	I can see that people are excited about Dr Mark Hyman.
	He's flashing up on Zoom even now.
	I take that to mean that we've lost James O'Keefe, possibly because he fears another fondling at the hands of overzealous Homeland Security.
	So there we go, that's James O'Keefe.
	We'll see if we can get James back a little later, but until then, I want to get into some freedom of speech.
	Do you believe in freedom of speech?
	Because in a minute, we're going to be speaking to Dr. Mark Hyman, who's going to bust apart some of your preconceptions about big food and big pharma.
	And he's bought his receipts.
	But before that, let's enjoy a little bit of freedom, a little bit of speech.
	And where freedom of speech meet, you get free speech.
	and where free speech meets you get...
	...
	We didn't make that ourselves.
	I have to admit that was made too professional for us.
	Much too professional.
	We can't do things like that.
	We had Ross Coulthard on.
	Ross Coulthard you'll be familiar with because he conducted the now infamous, legendary David Grush interview.
	Many of you are almost seeming to be suggesting that Ross Coulthard himself could be an asset of the States.
	So many of you were divided by these new revelations around UFOs.
	Many people thinking it's just a distraction.
	Other people thinking it's the seismic shift we've been waiting for.
	Apologetic Girl said on locals there, Please abduct me, aliens.
	I cannot face either Biden or Trump as president.
	Sometimes an extraterrestrial experience does seem favourable.
	Imagination, are we all agreed that aliens are humans from the future travelling back in time in their advanced flying machines?
	Are we all agreed?
	Can we all agree to that?
	Can we simply agree that there's advanced humans?
	I don't know.
	I mean, I think the debate goes on, mate.
	Maximatitis444, love all the UFO conversations on the show recently, but looking at the state of the US, I can see why ET has decided not to make contact.
	Here's some stuff on censorship, RFK and Rogan and Hortense.
	We're going to be looking at that in depth in just a few minutes.
	And I think we actually bring some real weight to the conversation.
	Of course we do.
	Also, I've topped it up with a £10 to get that.
	That's right.
	Let's get that debate happening, for God's sake.
	Yeah, this has been pointed out by Afreej.
	This is at Buttercup Lovely, saying simply, every time James O'Keefe comes on here, he's cut off.
	Is it the state?
	Is it the system?
	Is it the machine itself?
	How come James O'Keefe keeps getting cut off?
	He looks like he was about to get cut off by that overzealous fella down the airport with them blue gloves on.
	Does he need to improve his Wi-Fi?
	That's another explanation.
	It could be that.
	Yeah, don't see conspiracy everywhere, guys.
	We've got to be responsible.
	Dr. Mark Hyman is a responsible contributor to this show.
	He won't be coming on here with crackpot theories.
	Zen underscore Hillbilly says, in the Jordan Peterson interview, RFK Jr.
	literally says, I'm surprised YouTube isn't trying to censor you more.
	Jordan says, yeah, they've left me alone.
	They've left me alone for some reason.
	That's what he said.
	That's how he would have said it as well, wouldn't he?
	Was that Kermit from the Muppets?
	You start at Kermit and you move towards JP.
	Hey Kermit the Frog!
	And then you go, hey well listen, you know, it's not entirely clear to me.
	There's a atypical people at a, no, there's an agreeable type.
	Okay, Russell.
	Well, like that.
	That's how he talks.
	I like Jordan Peterson though, don't I?
	Oh yeah, you do.
	I love him.
	Get on ever so well.
	He's very, yeah, he's a dear, I love him, he's brilliant.
	Alright, come on, listen, hold on, there's some more stuff here.
	Yeah.
	Are we giving it to Dr. Yeah, we can do.
	Dr. Hyman?
	Oh no, Trump's boxes?
	Sure.
	Do you want to know about them?
	Of course I do.
	This is Maximum Titus again.
	It's the White House Pawn Stash.
	Aww.
	He's got weird stuff in there.
	He's got golf equipment in those secret boxes.
	I think it's time now to take a look into the stinking, seething, nipple-strewn underbelly of big food And Big Pharma with Dr. Mark Hyman.
	He's a family physician, international leader in the field of functional medicine, and best-selling author, whose book, Young Forever, is out now.
	We'll post a link to that in the chat.
	Thanks for joining us, Dr. Mark.
	I've seen some pictures of you looking very fit.
	You're a fit and healthy fella, ain't ya?
	In here, guys.
	I can't hear him.
	It's audio.
	Oh, that might be you, darling.
	You might be muted.
	Come on, Grandad, press the mute button.
	Be young forever.
	You can't even bloody operate Zoom.
	All right, I got it.
	I got it.
	I'm good.
	I'm good.
	I'm 64.
	I'm old, but I'm a very good vintage.
	Let's have another look at this.
	Get closer on that picture of him with his top off.
	Wait a second, because I can't make out fully because it's too little on the monitor.
	I'll tell you what, mate, you are the age of, you know, that's been immortalized by the Beatles.
	You are 64.
	And you're looking absolutely fantastic.
	We care about health.
	We want to live forever.
	I'm willing to... You want to look that good right now, even at your tender time of life.
	How are you doing this?
	Are you doing this with supplements?
	Are you doing this by working out?
	Are you doing this by avoiding the toxins in our food?
	How are we to literally, Doctor, cheat Sweet Lady Death?
	Well, I basically don't listen to the advice of the medical system or the recommendations of our government or food industry, which are all promulgating theories about Health, I have nothing to do with health.
	In fact, they're promoting disease.
	We have a sick care system, a disease creation system from field to fork, and it's driving a global epidemic of chronic disease.
	It's the number one killer globally.
	11 million people die every year from eating bad food, and it doesn't have to be that way.
	So it's pretty simple.
	I basically eat real food.
	I move my body.
	I lift some weights.
	I actually do bands.
	I get sleep.
	I have fun.
	I hang out with my friends.
	It's not that complicated.
	Every morning, up I get, I drink the lemon water.
	Then it's celery juice.
	Now I'm taking these supplements, NMN, MNM, something like that.
	Something that sounds a bit like testosterone and Turkmenistan.
	I can't remember exactly what it is.
	But I'm loading myself up on all sorts of things, Doc.
	I hope I'm doing the right thing.
	I'm eating well, I'm vegan, I'm exercising, I'm doing yoga, I'm doing Brazilian jiu-jitsu.
	Am I doing the right thing?
	But perhaps more importantly, are you suggesting that the medical industry and the food industry are conspiring to keep us in a cycle of sickness, seeing us as sort of consuming blobs that remain forever ill?
	But deal with me first and then move on to everyone else in the world.
	I think, Russell, you're doing good.
	You look beautiful.
	You look fit, healthy.
	I've seen you in person.
	You're good.
	I keep doing what you're doing.
	As far as the food industry, the ag industry, the farm industry, the medical industry, it's really a big one medical industrial complex and we are in a situation that is You know, unlike anything we've ever seen before.
	We've seen a global increase in obesity from when I was born about 3 to 5% and now we're 42% in America.
	We're seeing 93% of Americans poor metabolic health and it's really driven by our food system that keep people going into the health care system and it's a perfect kind of virtuous or vicious cycle, if you will, of bad food creating chronic disease that's then taken care by the medical system that's paid for by tax dollars and that's driven by lobbying and research and the co-opting of professional groups,
	the co-opting of social groups, the creating of front groups to confuse the public.
	It's really a very well orchestrated strategy to keep it from the truth of what creates health
	and what creates disease.
	Which foods do we know are bad for us?
	for us. I'm...
	Are we continuing to eat precisely because they are being lobbied for, because that information is not being conveyed?
	What should we stop eating immediately?
	And what do we do about, is it a fallacy that it's just expensive to eat well and eat healthy,
	that it's expensive to eat healthy food, and that it's just easier to glug down salt and syrup
	and sugar all day long, nihilistically, waiting away like some lilo on a couch?
	Well, it's true that we are all promoted these foods, but they're not necessarily cheaper.
	They're subsidized in part by government and industry, and they're made, these processed foods are really cheap,
	but that's not actually expensive to eat well if you know what you're doing.
	And in terms of the overall strategy of the food industry, it's to produce large amounts of ultra-processed food
	from three main ingredients, corn, wheat, and soy.
	that are turning all kinds of shapes, colors, sizes of chemically excreted food-like substances that have nothing to do with health or food, and that we consume at an enormous volume.
	60% of our diet in America is ultra-processed food, 67% of kids diet, and for every 10% of your diet that's ultra-processed food, your risk of death goes up by 14%.
	This is the number one killer period in the planet. And on top of that, you know, we,
	the rest of our diet is pretty low in good stuff. So we have lots of bad stuff and very low good
	stuff like fruits and vegetables, nuts and seeds, whole foods. And so we're ending up driving our
	bodies into this catastrophic state where six out of 10 Americans have a chronic disease,
	four out of 10 have two or more.
	One in four teenagers now has pre-diabetes or type 2 diabetes.
	This didn't even exist when I was a kid.
	It used to be called adult-onset diabetes and juvenile diabetes.
	Now it's type 1 and type 2 because they had to change the name because little kids were getting it.
	And 15-year-olds need liver transplants and gastric bypass because of the sugar they're eating from the soda.
	So we're in a big problem.
	Throughout the pandemic period we talked about the problem of comorbidities and how vulnerable people with comorbidities were, but now it seems that there's an epidemic of comorbidities.
	Plainly awareness and education are part of this, but this feels like a much bigger political problem.
	Do you offer, Dr Mark, that what's required is nothing less than a revolution in agriculture that leads to the localisation of the food supply chain?
	A revolution in The big food industry to regulate against it, to prevent them from lobbying, from shutting down the self-funded regulatory bodies that permit this kind of behaviour, and a revolution in pharma.
	Is that what's required?
	We need to change our food system from field to fork.
	We need to change all our food policies to support the right thing rather than the wrong thing.
	You know, right now, Russell, we have, for example, a food system where we're not paying the true cost of food.
	For every dollar we spend on food, according to the Rockefeller Foundation, there's three extra dollars spent on the downstream costs, whether it's the damage to our soils, loss of biodiversity, the depletion of our water resources, the destruction of the soil, which leads to Carbon in the atmosphere, I mean one third of all the carbon in the atmosphere today for climate change comes from the destruction of our soil through our modern farming practices.
	And then our food is more nutritionally depleted.
	So we're driving huge amounts of production of the wrong foods, not enough of the right foods, and it's creating this epidemic.
	And I think You know, when you look at the food industry, it's the largest industry on the planet.
	When I say food, I mean food and ag.
	And you add farm on top of that, it's even more.
	So we've got a $17 trillion industry, which is about $16 trillion, which is about 70% of the world's GDP.
	It's enormous.
	And it's a huge amount of money at stake.
	That's propagating farming in ways that use heavy doses of fertilizer, which uses about 1 to 2% of all global energy, about 10% of greenhouse gas emissions.
	It pollutes our waterways, rivers, and lakes, causing eutrophication, which kills all the wildlife and fish in the water.
	And we deplete our soils as well by chemical spraying.
	We deplete the microbiome of the soil.
	So our food now is 50% less nutritious than it was 50 years ago, less vitamins and minerals and nutrients.
	And we're actually seeing land being degraded at such a rate that we're creating a new desert the size of Nicaragua every year.
	And we're in trouble.
	We may only have 60 years of soil left to grow food in, according to the UN.
	So we're in a bit of a crisis.
	And unless we revolutionize the way we grow food, the food we produce, the food we market, the food we eat, we're in trouble.
	I don't think we can get there, but we're in trouble right now.
	I wonder if you feel, Mark, that the desacralization of food, the desacralization of our relationship with the land, with the soil, with the plants and animals that we eat, is in part responsible.
	The fact that this insidious, invasive ideology of commodity has so detached us from the Conscious component that eating in all healthy cultures contains is partly to blame.
	Whether it's the Mediterranean or the Indian subcontinent, so-called, people sacralise, and even Christian Northern European cultures say in grace, recognising that our relationship with food is part of our symbiotic connection to nature.
	The loss of this awareness, is it part of the problem?
	And perhaps somewhat less Esoterically, Katie in the chat says, do you think all this is causing my thyroid condition?
	Could you do both of those for us, Mark?
	I don't know about the thyroid condition, but actually chemical spraying and pesticides are a big source of thyroid issues.
	And so is gluten, which has changed in our food supply because of the hybridization of wheat.
	It's created dwarf wheat, which has far more gluten proteins that are far more inflammatory.
	So in part, yes, because of that, you might be increasing your thyroid risk.
	But I think the reality is that we have become disconnected from the land.
	We have been disconnected from our food source.
	In America, about 2% of the people were not farmers at the turn of the 1900s.
	Now about 2% are farmers.
	We've completely unsettled America from being a rural agrarian society,
	as most countries around the world, and become a more urban society.
	And we've moved people off the farms and disconnected them from the land,
	their food sources, and the connection to nature.
	And I think that plays a big role.
	Most people don't have an idea where their food comes from, how it was grown,
	what's going on with it.
	And if they did, they'd be really appalled.
	So I think people need to get back, like in America, for example, during World War II,
	40% of the food was grown by Victory Gardens.
	We need to get back into actually being connected more to our source of nutrition and food
	through either growing or being involved with farms.
	I was at a farm today, and I visited this regenerative farm
	where they were growing incredible intercropping of animals and plants and fruit trees and vegetables
	in this beautiful way that was restoring the organic matter in the soil,
	that was storing water in the soil, that was increasing biodiversity in the land,
	it was doing all the right things, it was adding value to the nature rather than stealing
	and making nature a commodity to use up.
	Become awakened.
	Grow your own food!
	Regain control of your own life and gastric system!
	Awaken!
	Immediately!
	Cause for optimism, cause for hope, Dr. Mark, but also the precipice of despair.
	It's time for... Hmm.
	It's my question.
	Hello, Dr. Mark.
	That didn't need to be answered.
	That wasn't a question, actually.
	Uh, I was just wondering, so one element... It's not Gareth!
	Small talk.
	We don't have a jingle for Gareth flirts with Dr Mark Hyman.
	Although, oh god, I can only imagine what Jack, Bad Graphics Jack, would conjure up with that brief.
	I was just wondering, you talked a lot about the way in which we're being poisoned by the foods that we're eating that are making us sick.
	I guess the other element to this is the drugs that we're being told to take to make us better.
	And when we have a situation where drug studies are sponsored by drug companies and the FDA is funded by the pharmaceutical companies that it's meant to regulate, are we at a point where the drugs, I guess, you know, obviously this has been raised a lot during the pandemic, but the drugs that we're being told to take to lessen the issues of the things that are making us sick, Aren't the things that we should be taking.
	There are drugs that we shouldn't be taking at all and different drugs that we could be taking that would be more effective.
	Yeah, listen, pharmaceutical drugs have a role, and they can benefit many people for many things.
	But they're now being prescribed in ways that actually don't, for the most part, help people create health.
	They're treating symptoms and diseases, and they often come with significant side effects.
	And the problem with research is that it's primarily funded by industry.
	Whether it's nutrition research, 12 times as much money is flowing into nutrition research as the government funding of research.
	And the findings of those food industry sponsored studies are 8 to 50 times more
	likely to show a positive benefit for their product. Like if dairy is seen to be a sports drink, well
	guess what, it's going to work if it's funded by the Dairy Council. And same thing with
	pharmaceutical industry. You know, the frightening thing is that, you know, a pharmaceutical
	industry has to submit all their data to the FDA for review and then the FDA will approve the drug or will
	not approve the drug. But they don't have to publish all the data.
	So they just publish the positive data that they kind of twist and contort and adjust and make statistical manipulations to make it seem good.
	Well, they don't actually publish the negative data.
	And this is quite concerning to me because we don't actually have true transparency about what we're taking and its impact, its benefit, and its risks.
	And most drugs are marginally effective, you know, and they don't reverse the disease.
	And you can't reverse diabetes with a drug.
	You can manage it, but the only place diabetes is cured is on the farm, in the grocery store, in the restaurants, in the kitchen.
	I can't cure it in my office with a medication.
	And I see it all the time when you actually Treat people by creating health using functional medicine, which is really the science of creating health.
	Treats the body as an ecosystem.
	It's much like regenerative agriculture.
	It's like regenerative human health.
	It works to actually reverse disease, whether it's autoimmune diseases, cardiovascular diseases, metabolic disease like diabetes, digestive problems, mood disorders.
	And where, you know, medication is important, but it's not the solution for most of the problems people have.
	And I think we need to move away from our reductionist model, which is you treat a single disease with a single drug, which is really predominantly how research is done, and look at how do we start to understand the science of what is health?
	How do we define health?
	How do we create it through an intervention, set of interventions that actually work, like lifestyle, what you eat, how you move, your sleep, stress, you know, the right practices in your life, community, meaning, belonging, purpose.
	Those are all the ingredients for health.
	Dr Mark Hyman, thank you for outlining that with such clarity and expertise.
	I'm watching the chat on Locals, you can press the red button if you want to join it and people value your contribution and content.
	And a lot of people think you look like Jon Stewart.
	I haven't heard that before.
	In fact, his wife told me that.
	And she said, you look like my husband, but you're better looking.
	So I said, I wouldn't tell him that.
	Would you mind extrapolating on what the circumstances were, Doctor?
	Context, Doc!
	What's the context?
	I hope you weren't looming over Mrs Stewart!
	The pair of you in a passionate clinch!
	You!
	Of other people!
	Brandishing some celery!
	This will make you better!
	You can't trust big medicine!
	You can't trust Jon Stewart!
	I'm bigger!
	I'm better!
	I'm the real Jon Stewart!
	I'm Jon Stewart, but with a degree!
	Dr Mark Hyman, thank you!
	So much for puncturing so many of our preconceptions.
	Thank you for breaching many of our ideas about Big Food and Big Pharma and taking our cherry when it came to the simple naivety around our preconceptions around Big Food and Big Pharma.
	I'm just doing some hymen.
	Actually, I'm passing the time.
	Listen, Mark, thanks very much, man.
	Thanks for joining us.
	Mark's book, Young Forever, is available at drhyman.com.
	Thanks very much, Mark.
	That was a fantastic contribution.
	Thank you, mate.
	Oh, great to see you.
	Thanks, mate.
	Take it easy.
	See you soon.
	Fantastic contribution.
	I thought your flirting was pretty outrageous.
	Yeah, I do regret that moment.
	But if you want to see professionalism, you'll see it tomorrow, because Yoga with Adrian Starr, Adrian Mischler will be on the show, helping us to spiritually awaken through yoga.
	And if you've ever wanted to see me do yoga, you bloody well will.
	And if you haven't wanted to, I suppose you just don't have to watch it, it's not mandatory.
	Listen, if you want to join our locals community, press the red button.
	You'll get early access to interviews.
	You better join us live for these conversations when we have people on like RFK, Jordan Peterson, Eckhart Tolle, all sorts of people gather around the digital campfire that is happening.
	Why did I say that?
	I'm so tired.
	I'm exhausted.
	Also, if you want to watch my special, Brandemic is premiering on the 25th of June on Moment.
	There's a link in the description.
	It's completely uncensored.
	It's completely self-funded.
	It's completely brilliant.
	You can get it.
	Now, do you... Listen, when are we going to see a debate?
	I want to see a debate between that fella in the dickie bow tie, Peter Hotez, And RFK, Rumble's latest star, newest acquisition, our colleague.
	Shall we call him our colleague?
	He's our colleague over here at Rumble.
	It's good, isn't it?
	Because, like, you know, when people say, oh, right-wing conspiracy theorist.
	With him, they just have to go, left-wing conspiracy theorist.
	I mean, they'll find some way of smearing him, poor sod.
	But for now, at least he's got free speech.
	But will we see him debate Dr. Peter Hotez?
	Why is it That science is more and more resembling dogma, and that we are unable to have a discourse around important issues that is inclusive, respectful, and loving.
	Join us tomorrow, not for more of the same, but for more of the different.
	Until then, here's the news.
	No, here's the epic news.
	Stay free.
	Seconds out!
	Joe Rogan challenges Dr. Peter Hotez to debate RFK on the subject of vaccines.
	Is this thirst for combative discourse due to science being treated as dogma during the pandemic?
	Is there about to be an explosion of conflict around science?
	What is science for anyway?
	The world is changing fast.
	During the pandemic period, there plainly was censorship.
	It's now been admitted that true information was censored, shut down, taken off social media sites, asked for a bunch of things to be censored that in retrospect ended up being debatable or true.
	In order, in fact, to ensure that a prevailing mentality went unchallenged.
	Because of powerful media figures like Joe Rogan being able to bypass the attempts of the mainstream to censor them, we now live in a different space.
	Elon Musk owns Twitter now.
	He's got a different attitude towards centralised power and authoritarianism.
	And what about the fact that the BBC was put under pressure by the British government to change the editorial policy?
	Are you aware of that?
	Whether you love Elon Musk or loathe him, you have to acknowledge that he is facilitating a different type of debate.
	Enter into this conversation RFK, a politician with a powerful surname and very strong views on certain medications.
	The establishment now cannot avoid conversation, discourse and debate without censorship, without smearing, without shutting down conversations on the basis of it being misinformation or malinformation.
	Why has it become so contentious?
	Why has it become so combative?
	Let me know in the comments what exactly you feel about the ongoing debate around medications and restrictions and regulations that were implemented during the pandemic period.
	Let's have a look at this Twitter spat, this Twitter brawl, this Twitter rumble and see can we have grown-up adult conversations in good faith that are directed towards finding mutually beneficial solutions that take into account that science is often a subset of capitalism and commercial
	incentives, that the state has been negligent in certain areas,
	but we have to be able to enter into good faith conversations
	where all sides are listened to appropriately.
	Let's have a look at Dr. Peter Hotez now on MSNBC's show with Mehdi Hussain
	to see what claims he's made that have caused this ferrari to escalate
	to the point where it's become a global social media phenomena.
	So the point is anti-vaccine disinformation.
	As soon as I see the spectacles and the bow tie, I think this is not someone who can go toe-to-toe with Joe
	Rogan.
	Now I know Joe Rogan is facilitating a potential debate that Dr Peter Hotez is, it seems, potentially avoiding.
	What we want to be wary of on this channel is this conversation falling into tribalism
	and becoming overly energised.
	Because actually what we're trying to deal with is information.
	You know we've had RFK on our show, you know I've been on Joe Rogan's show a bunch of times,
	we're still organising our Elon Musk conversation, and I'm friendly with Mehdi Hussain.
	So many of the people involved in this I'm familiar with, friendly with.
	What we're keen to support is the possibility of a conversation about the efficacy of medication,
	the mainstream media's appetite for censorship, the possibility that the pharmaceutical industry
	needs to be radically regulated in a new way, and that the mainstream media needs to responsibly
	report on all sides of the conversation.
	He, Dr. Peter Hotez, he's just another human being.
	He's not the living totem pole of the system's desire to vaccinate.
	I'm sure he's got very particular perspectives.
	I understand that maybe he's got an autistic kid, has he?
	I mean, you've got to be kind of sympathetic towards him on that basis.
	Doesn't he advocate for vaccines being available without patent in territories where they aren't being overly commercialized and they're not unduly profitable?
	We don't need to get into a situation where we victimise any individual, although culturally I guess it's pretty obvious that I have more in common with RFK than Elon Musk when it comes to this particular issue.
	But what's more important than those kind of affiliations and that kind of natural affinity is good faith conversations.
	Where we have to get to is the point where you sort of calmly, patiently listen to people that you disagree with and then present your perspective on the situation.
	What is assumed at the moment is we live in a system where both sides want to seize control and annihilate the other side, whether that's the Democrats and Republicans in American politics, even though both sides are owned by the same corporate interests.
	And even around this vaccine debate, I think a lot of people feel they were shut down during the pandemic period, like those of us that were like, whoa, are we?
	Getting a bit carried away here.
	Isn't this like an opportunity to profit and an opportunity to regulate?
	There was all sorts of conversations that weren't talked about.
	What about natural immunity?
	What about vitamin D?
	Shouldn't we be eating well and doing exercise?
	And Joe Rogan was carrying a lot of those messages as a result of conversations with experts.
	So I imagine he feels somewhat frustrated.
	Then someone like RFK, him being dismissed as a sort of a wackadoodle, I guess he's going to be pretty antagonistic.
	So both sides have at different points engaged in the conversation in rhetorical ways that are not advantageous to a beneficiary.
	Unofficial, agreeable consensus being achieved.
	We can't be flag-waving and snarling and teeth-bearing with something as important as this.
	This isn't about victory for a side, this is about victory for humanity.
	I offered to come and talk to Joe Rogan again, I've been on a couple of times, and have that discussion with him, but not to turn it into the Jerry Springer show with having RFK Jr.
	on.
	It's sad because I said I'm so fed up with the debate me debate me.
	You've already spoken and written about Covid vaccines.
	I think you've been on MSNBC and other channels hundreds of times since the start of the pandemic.
	That somewhat glosses over the plain observable fact That during the period between the end of 2019 to where we are now, there have been a good many revelations about the nature of the vaccines, their efficacy and regulations that were taken during lockdown that have been disproven, challenged, debated, among the most notably that the mainstream media and social media participated with the state and state agencies in censoring and controlling the narrative.
	If you want to take that in the most optimistic way, In order that we all are protected and kept safe?
	But you know if you're a person that doubts the motives of the state and corporations the whole thing becomes a little more complex.
	Wouldn't it be nice to see Mehdi Hussein say look let's be honest since the beginning of the pandemic it's become pretty clear that many things that were said on this very channel were not true and that people like Joe Rogan were vilified.
	An RFK who's a valid voice who's done a lot of research into this subject and written a best-selling book ought be included in the conversation and it's plain that people are trying to shut Everyone just doubles down on their own side the whole time.
	You never hear these types of media outlets go, we shouldn't have said Ivermectin is a horse paste.
	That discredited us.
	We look foolish because of that.
	We shouldn't have done that.
	We shouldn't have made claims about the vaccine that were not proven and have subsequently been disproven.
	We shouldn't have done that.
	We should have acknowledged that it wasn't true.
	We should be open about looking at the negative impact of lockdown.
	We shouldn't have had Don Lemon say, yes, we should shame the unvaccinated.
	Until you get a clear, mere culprit.
	That's what tribalism and oppositionism leads to.
	A kind of aggressive, testosterone-fuelled judgement when what might be better is a little yielding, open-mindedness and observation of what the actual target and what the actual intentions are.
	And I would say, I don't know if you've agreed to debate or not.
	My advice is not to.
	And people might find that surprising because I wrote a book about debate.
	But I just think there's a time and a place for a debate.
	The time and the place for debate is situations where we get to propagate one particular view and we don't have to acknowledge mistakes and errors that have been made.
	But I would say a conversation between someone like RFK, who, to use the British phrase, knows his onions, someone like Peter Hotez, who's clearly scientifically grounded, would be valuable if it was done in the right spirit.
	In my personal opinion, Joe Rogan's exactly the person to curate such a debate because he's shown that he's for real.
	The thing that he does, he's done when there was no money in it.
	He's kept doing it.
	He's listened to voices from both sides.
	He's remained consistent.
	I think he's a reliable person.
	He's not doubling down and advocating for a particular point of view.
	That's my opinion, but I've got my own biases, obviously.
	Let me know in the comments if you agree.
	We can't keep making this fantastic content without reliable sponsors.
	Look at this commercial for one of them now.
	Look how funny I've made it, for God's sake.
	Is it me or does the future feel more insecure and uncertain?
	Wars, pandemics, lies, trickery, my cats keep having kittens, the last one's personal.
	For those who are in the United States there is a way to secure your hard-earned nest egg.
	American Heart for Gold make it easy to protect your savings and retirement accounts with physical gold and silver.
	With one phone call they can have physical gold and silver delivered right to your door Or inside a qualifying retirement account like your IRA or 401k.
	American Hartford Gold is the highest-rated firm in the US with an A-plus rating from the BBB and thousands of satisfied clients.
	Right now, they will give you up to $5,000 of free silver on your first qualifying order.
	This offer is only for US customers.
	866-505-8315.
	That's 866-505-8315.
	Or simply text BRAND to 99-88-99.
	8315. That's 866 505 8315 or simply text brand to 99 88 99. Get up to $5,000 of
	silver and protect your future in this crazy crazy world with some solid
	precious metals literally made in stars.
	I don't think a historian of World War Two should debate a Holocaust denier.
	I just, you know, that's just...
	That's my analogy here.
	I don't think these debates between experts and cranks do anything other than elevate the cranks.
	Creating the category of expert and crank is part of the problem.
	People do not like, above all else, this I have learned, elitism.
	The idea that your opinion doesn't matter.
	Shut up.
	Because guess what?
	The people that were saying that, We're wrong about so many vital issues that they've discredited almost the concept of being an expert.
	Because an expert that is funded by certain financial interests, that operates to support and lobby for certain financial interests, isn't really an expert at all.
	It's just an object of the new orthodoxy that promulgates a particular message.
	Science has to be an ongoing discourse that incorporates information from both sides.
	This, perhaps above all else, is a subject that does need to be debated because here's what I believe.
	The pandemic was exploited and utilized in order to create opportunities to regulate and profit.
	Not saying that the pandemic wasn't a real thing, it was exploited the same way that every crisis is exploited.
	That's a piece of long-standing left-wing analysis.
	Crisis response solution.
	But in science, we don't typically do debates.
	What we do is we write scientific papers, we present our findings in front of a critical audience of our peers to solicit their input and suggestions, but one doesn't typically debate science.
	What type of science are we talking about when Pfizer lobbied to have the information concealed and not revealed for 75 years?
	What kind of science do you have when increasingly people think that this virus emerged from a scientific laboratory in Wuhan that was funded by scientific interests in the United States of America?
	Science itself!
	of course means the analysis of data through experimentation and verification. It's not
	the meaning of the word science that's being debated, it's the authenticity of the type
	of science that's been deployed in the last few years to legitimise authoritarianism and
	profiteering. Let me know in the comments if you agree.
	Maybe the one-off discussion of evolution versus creationism and that sort of thing,
	but that's not what we do in science.
	Even there, what's being doubled down on is a kind of materialistic world view that has
	As in the exact elitism that people are getting sick of.
	That's why debate and conversation is important.
	Only the studies that are funded are getting done.
	The way that the information is presented is often dubious.
	Sometimes trials are carried out numerous times and the FDA, for example, the regulatory body of the pharmaceutical industries in the United States is funded to the tune of 75% at least by those pharmaceutical companies.
	So to suggest that science is a catch-all way of denying corruption or potential opposition is exactly the same way that the church 500 years ago would have said, yeah, but God says it's wrong.
	It's just the use of an authoritarian symbol to shut down debate.
	And that is literally the problem.
	Dr. Peter Hotez, the Dean of the National School of Tropical Medicine at Baylor College of Medicine, told MSNBC's Mehdi Hassan that he'd been the target of an overwhelming harassment campaign since the tres hombres of RFK Junior Joe Rogan and Elon Musk ganged up to pressure him into a live debate over the safety and efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines.
	Dr. Hotez said the attacks from the anti-vaccine lobby included physical stalking and incessant threatening Emails.
	If you want to talk about an anti-vaccine lobby, do you also want to talk about a vaccine lobby?
	If you want to talk about bullying, do you want to talk about Don Lemon's rhetoric around shaming or the ivermectin horse-paced debacle on CNN?
	It's okay to say stuff like that, to make those kind of accusations.
	There's no doubt that Joe Rogan is a powerful individual personally and now culturally, and the same can be said of Elon Musk and RFK in various ways also.
	But To delegitimize their request for a debate on the basis of bullying and lobbying without acknowledging that bullying and lobbying was one of the key problems that defined the pandemic period is disingenuous.
	My main point is, imagine yourself on the other side of the argument.
	Think about the thing you believe, like it's pretty clear what side I'm on, culturally and ideologically and just through affinity, affiliation and personal history.
	But what I'm trying to think is Dr. Peter Hotez is a human being.
	I'm trying to think everyone is just like me, trying to do their best in the world.
	These like nitpicky contentious issues have to be approached openheartedly.
	How are we going to get somewhere?
	And I don't believe that the mainstream media, the pharmaceutical industry, big tech and the state, particularly with its globalist tendencies, has behaved in a good faith way in the last few years.
	I think the intention has been opportunistic regulation and opportunistic profiteering.
	And that has to be confronted, and having a conversation about that is a perfectly good way to air those issues.
	The stuff online is just total wackadoodle.
	And let's face it, when you have RFK Jr and Joe Rogan and Elon Musk all tag-teaming those Tres Hombres at the same time, he told MSNBC, that probably includes just about every follower on Twitter, so it's pretty overwhelming.
	But it was also pretty overwhelming when the FBI were censoring information that was true.
	It was pretty overwhelming when Joe Rogan was subject to just an all-pervading media attack because he said I got better in three days.
	It was literally an immersive experience.
	Information was censored, discredited, called conspiracy theories.
	So it's extraordinary actually.
	To see these type of arguments advanced at this time.
	What they're advancing now is what they should have considered then.
	Are we being bullying?
	Are we just responding to lobbying?
	Are we shutting down conversation?
	Are we victimizing individuals?
	Shaming them even when we should be listening?
	Let me know in the comments.
	The saga began after Dr. Hotez shared a vice article that debunked the orgy of unchecked vaccine misinformation by RFK Jr.
	and Rogan during a three-hour interview last week.
	So in a sense, Dr. Hotez invited this.
	It's not like it was an unsolicited attack.
	He went, this is bunk and hokum and nonsense.
	Here's a rebuttal.
	On Saturday, Rogan challenged the world-renowned vaccine expert to debate COVID vaccines with RFK Jr.
	Peter, if you claim what RFK Jr.
	is saying is misinformation, I'm offering you $100,000 to the charity of your choice if you're willing to debate him on my show with no time limit, he tweeted.
	Hotez replied he was prepared to come on Rogan's podcast to have a meaningful discussion.
	Some people say there was another tweet that was deleted before eventually saying he would join.
	So, like, even this piece of text that we're using is biased.
	Look, Mr. Musk then joined in on the pylon, right?
	So this is framing the information in a particular way.
	He's afraid of public debate because he knows he's wrong.
	I don't know, man.
	You can say that's joining a pylon.
	Have there been pylons during the pandemic period?
	Have there been people that have been condemned and criticized?
	There has to be principle and values.
	There have to be.
	Otherwise, none of this stuff's going to work.
	Either you believe it's wrong to have a pylon, Or you don't like pylons when you're being piled on, but you like piling on others.
	You've got to have values.
	If you have no values, you're in trouble.
	In an interview on Sunday night, Dr. Hotez said the claim that he was a shill for big pharma was exasperating.
	I make low-cost, patent-free vaccines for lower-middle-income countries that led to
	100 million doses being administered in India and Indonesia.
	No patents, minimal strings attached, so we actually found a way to bypass the pharma companies,
	and yet RFK Jr. incessantly calls me a pharma shill. If you believe that vaccines are part of
	the solution, and of course a lot of people do, then ensuring that they're
	We covered that.
	have access to them, you'd say is a good thing and a righteous thing. So again, it's interesting
	to approach information like this in an unbiased and open-hearted way and not to rely on simplistic
	tropes about good and bad, because I think life's a bit more complicated than that.
	In January, the World Health Organization released a video in which it's claimed anti-vaccine
	activism is more dangerous than terrorism, nuclear proliferation and gun violence. Yeah,
	the WHO did do that. We covered that. That's up on our channel. We have to recognize that
	anti-vaccine activism, which I actually call anti-science aggression, has now become a major
	our killing force globally," said Hotis.
	Well that's the kind of thing that does shut down debate and conversation and I would strongly disagree with that.
	Anti-science aggression is worse than terrorism.
	So that's an interesting set of ideas to conflate.
	Let me know in the comments if you think that's helpful to a necessary global conversation where there are scars that need to be healed.
	Even in the most contentious issues, I believe conversation can't hurt.
	That's how we advance.
	Otherwise, we're just going to ossify our oppositionist positions.
	No?
	Meanwhile, YouTube's war against RFK Jr.
	continues as the big tech platform has now deleted a 90-minute podcast starring Kennedy in conversation with Canadian psychologist Dr. Jordan Peterson, which encompassed topics from climate change to COVID-19 measures.
	So what we have here is a social media furore around a vital, significant and defining issue of the last three years which encompasses Big Pharma, censorship, state power, who has the right to control and censor information.
	You know the kind of stories we cover here on this platform and you know where we stand on globalism, the power and influence of Big Pharma that they're able to exert through donations.
	Imagine if Big Pharma was independently regulated and they were unable to make donations to the political class and they were unable to sponsor media.
	Do you imagine then you might get a less biased conversation on these subjects?
	Would they be interesting regulations to introduce?
	Then perhaps what you would have is an environment where people could talk about science appropriately, in the right way.
	What does your experimentation reveal?
	What doesn't it reveal?
	Where is there still room for conjecture?
	Where is there still room for individual freedom?
	I would argue that unless you're genuinely and legitimately building a society where it's acknowledged and understood by all that we're all participating together in a global organism and we all love one another, that would include Radical changes economically to be able to say, well look, we've all got to undertake these measures because as you know, our society is based on fairness and unity.
	You can see that in our political systems.
	You can see it in our financial systems.
	You can see it in the way that conflicts are resolved.
	You can see that in the way that democracy and elections are conducted.
	Unless you've got that kind of society, you have to recognise that this is a quite tribalised society, where people are entitled to have different views, where communities should have decentralised, democratic, localised institutions by which they run themselves.
	And in such an environment, debate and conversation should be encouraged.
	The only people that benefit from closing down debate and conversation are those that seek to control the narrative.
	And usually they're not seeking to control the narrative in order to protect you, but in order to control you.
	Protection and control are starting to intersect.
	I think that's one of the main things we learned during the pandemic.
	People that are saying they're going to protect you, want to control you.
	That doesn't mean that science isn't legitimate.
	That doesn't mean that great work isn't being done.
	That doesn't mean that there aren't perfectly reasonable, brilliant people on both sides of almost any conversation.
	It just means we've forgotten that.
	We've forgotten that in order to have a debate, you have to approach people with an open hand and an open heart and good faith and be willing to listen to views that you don't like.
	You have to be willing to afford other people their freedom.
	But that's just what I think.
	Let me know what you think in the comments and chat.
	Join us later this week, not for more of the same, but for more of the different.
	Until then, stay free.

▲