Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

Oct. 11, 2023 - Stay Free - Russel Brand

01:22:40

RFK’s 2024 Election Announcement - This Changes Everything - Stay Free #221

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	So, we're going to go ahead and start with the first one. So, this is the first one. So,
	this is the first one. So, this is the first one. So, this is the first one. So, this is
	the first one. So, this is the first one. So, this is the first one. So, this is the
	first one. So, this is the first one. So, this is the first one. So, this is the first
	one. So, this is the first one. So, this is the first one.
	So, this is the first one. So, this is the first one. So, this is the first one. So,
	So, this is the first one.
	this is the first one. So, this is the first one. So, this is the first one. So, this is
	the first one. So, this is the first one. So, this is the first one. So, this is the
	first one. So, this is the first one. So, this is the first one. So, this is the first
	one. So, this is the first one. So, this is the first one.
	So, this is the first one.
	So, this is the first one. So, this is the first one. So, this is the first one. So,
	this is the first one. So, this is the first one. So, this is the first one. So, this is
	the first one. So, this is the first one. So, this is the first one. So, this is the
	first one. So, this is the first one. So, this is the first one. So, this is the first
	one. So, this is the first one. So, this is the first one.
	So, this is the first one.
	So, this is the first one. So, this is the first one. So, this is the first one. So,
	this is the first one. So, this is the first one. So, this is the first one. So, this is
	the first one. So, this is the first one. So, this is the first one. So, this is the
	first one. So, this is the first one. So, this is the first one. So, this is the first
	one. So, this is the first one. So, this is the first one.
	So, this is the first one.
	So, this is the first one. So, this is the first one. So, this is the first one. So,
	this is the first one. So, this is the first one. So, this is the first one. So, this is
	the first one. So, this is the first one. So, this is the first one. So, this is the
	first one. So, this is the first one. So, this is the first one. So, this is the first
	In this video, you're going to see the future.
	Hello there you awakening wonder.
	Thank you for joining us for Stay Free with Russell Brand wherever you are watching us at a time of incredible conflict around the world.
	I pray that I may speak freely from the desire to impress, speak freely from the desire to be thought of well And only to have good intentions for those that are suffering across the world right now.
	How can we contribute together to making the world a better place for all of us?
	Let me know in the chat.
	Let us know in the comments.
	We're going to be looking at RFK's announcement.
	It's going to run independently.
	We're going to be talking to Kim Iverson, who's our friend from Rumble.
	She'll be talking with us about the ongoing tragic conflict in Israel.
	And we'll talk about RFK there as well. We'll be on YouTube initially, then we'll be
	on Rumble. Remember, it really helps us if you follow us there. You might have to download
	the app because then you'll get notifications. It's not like on YouTube where you might not
	get a notification when you ask for it.
	You'll get one. If you download the Rumble app, follow us, ask for notifications, you'll get an app.
	And if it's within your means, press the red awaken button and you can be part of our movement at a time when the world really plainly needs new solutions to extraordinary historic problems.
	You're aware of the extensive attack that's being launched against terror targets in Gaza Strip.
	Joe Biden pledges support for Israel following the attacks.
	Let's have a look at that.
	President Biden has condemned the Hamas attacks and says the U.S.
	will now ensure that Israel has exactly what it needs to defend itself.
	My administration's support for Israel's security is rock solid and unwavering.
	Let me say this as clearly as I can.
	Support amounts to weapons and Joe Biden's going to say something as clearly as he can, which that's a lower ceiling than most people, let's be honest.
	This is not a moment This issue is one that we're going to take our time to formulate a perspective on because it seems that people are in so much pain and so much suffering that all you can really do is make it more incendiary and worse.
	I'd love to be part of a conversation that might...
	offer some healing and some improvement.
	I know many of you have very strong views and are personally impacted by these events and I can only really offer you love and let's spend a little time together working out how we can contribute something of value to this horrific situation.
	Caitlin Johnson tweeted, whenever something like this happens, warmongers always seize on the emotional frenzy of the moment to shove through insane acts of warmongering and scream vitriol at anyone who questions them.
	I wonder if there's anything that we can do that is somehow beneficial to everybody involved in this conflict.
	Let me know in the chat and the comments how you feel about current legacy media reporting, whether you are in a place where you can handle nuance if you think it's appropriate, even if you think it's appropriate for people that aren't directly involved in this conflict to even express strong opinions.
	I'm interested in hearing whatever you've got to say, because I believe the world is evolving fast, changing fast.
	It seems to me that we're in a kind of immersive, polycataclysmic state.
	There is geopolitical strife, there is cultural strife, there is a lack of trust in all of our institutions,
	and it's very difficult to find things to feel optimistic about at the moment.
	But perhaps here is one thing.
	Robert F. Kennedy Jr. spent the last six months running as a Democrat candidate, as you know,
	has announced he'll continue his pursuit to become president,
	but as an independent.
	Let's have a look.
	This country is ready for a history-making change.
	Ready.
	They are ready to reclaim their freedom, their independence.
	Some people think that's the announcement and are already cheering, but that's actually not quite the announcement.
	And that's why I'm here today.
	I'm here to declare myself an independent candidate.
	That was the announcement.
	We're going to talk about that in more depth in Here's the News a little later.
	And whilst the world is beset by horror and strife, and many of us look for ways to alter our perspective so that we can be of benefit to all of the people suffering in the world, Klaus Schwab is announcing that he has a pretty clear vision of how the world's going to be in 2030.
	And as you might imagine, you're going to be shuffled about in a vehicle that hasn't even got a job for a driver in it.
	We meet for the 20th.
	I hope I will have the pleasure still to be invited for the meeting when we meet for the 20th Governance Summit.
	You will use an app like Uber.
	But not anymore to call some driver.
	But...
	Automatically guided car, a self-driven car, will come to your hotel or wherever you are and will bring you to the airport.
	Or, if you've become an enemy of the system, directly to prison.
	AI and automated technology advances And it's not only being used to fulfil Klaus Schwab's vision of a sanitised reality where elites can continue to advance their agenda without recourse to democracy, discourse, discussion or debate.
	Also, AI can be used to give us chilling visions of how celebrities who died tragically might look had they not died tragically.
	The reporting on this is really weird and it's sort of part of the chaotic psychedelic nightmare clown world that we all now just ...ordinarily inhabit.
	Listen to how they have to explain on this quite light news item how all these people that died as a result of the sort of pressure of being famous, direct assassinations, drug addiction, all of those kind of things, generally what killed them, in some cases there might be even more nefarious reasons behind their death, I'll leave you to guess which ones.
	Listen to how they sort of convey that as a sort of jaunty news item.
	Take a look at this woman.
	She is Hollywood's greatest sex symbol.
	Well, where are we going with this?
	Now with AI technology, we are seeing what she and many others would look like in their golden years.
	We all know the king of rock and roll died in 1977 at age 42.
	Even something like this which is scintillating and spurious and ultimately vacuous demonstrates to you the way that information is conveyed.
	What's not said is that god it's pretty awful isn't it that sort of Marilyn Monroe died of a drug overdose and that Elvis ultimately died because of drug misuse and many of the other people here died in tragic circumstances which are indicators and symptoms of a culture that was already going horribly awry and is now playing me at almost every level geopolitical, militaristic, Health, political, cultural just exploded into something akin to nihilism or even evil in some cases.
	It just sort of uses what would they look like and would you still consider kissing them?
	But if history had taken another turn this is how he'd look today at age 90.
	At least according to artificial intelligence.
	John Lennon literally outlining a vision for a world where we examine our requirement to have sovereign nations, religions that are divisive, currencies, the possibility for humanity to reach beyond the parameters that we're given by materialistic systems that ultimately do not want any of us to be free.
	They use constant tools of divisiveness, incendiary media rhetoric, horror to keep us all just spellbound in a perpetual state of delirium.
	John Lennon tried to address that in song and did a pretty good job of it and obviously he was murdered.
	But what I've always wondered is what would he look like if he was all nice and old?
	How about this other music legend, John Lennon, who was assassinated in 1980?
	Just imagine he lives in this image at age 82.
	What about another legend, blonde bombshell Marilyn Monroe?
	She was just 36 years old when she died of a drug overdose in 1962.
	Because she was chewed up by the system?
	Yeah!
	Well, she lives in these images.
	Grey, but still gorgeous.
	Weird.
	Three years short of what would have been her 100th birthday.
	Well, that's a shame she never made it to... She died when she was 36.
	Oh no, not Diana.
	And who could forget the legendary beauty of Princess Diana?
	Not us, because you keep making films about her all the time, brushing over details around her sad demise and then creating pictures of her as an old lady.
	Still the epitome of class and grace at age 62.
	It's weird because you're attributing abstract ideas like grace to her but that's not her anymore, that's just a depiction of what someone might look like when they're older.
	It's weird isn't it that on one side we have the most severe and serious consequences and conflicts imaginable that lead to ideological war, death and murder and horror and potential apocalyptic events from so many perspectives over that sort of Theological or military at the moment to cite just two possible outcomes.
	And also we're like just fooling around with what people would have looked like had they not died.
	Everyone's dead.
	Here's what everyone would look like if they hadn't died in Armageddon.
	Oh yeah.
	Even Diana's grandchildren who were not yet born when she lost her life in a car crash are getting the AI aging treatment.
	What are we doing to them?
	They're still alive.
	We can just wait for that.
	The future King of England, Prince George, is 10 now, but here he is imagined in his early 20s.
	Tell it like it's a soap opera.
	Look at these guys.
	And this one, he's the cute one.
	Five-year-old rambunctious Prince Louis is seen here as a handsome teen.
	And here is the world's most adorable princess, Charlotte, now eight, seen here as a charming young lady, every inch a princess.
	Fast forwarding children into adulthood.
	Fast forwarding the dead into old age.
	Extraordinary story.
	Over in our country we're being primed for a new government.
	Admittedly the one we have is like ridiculous but the one that we're going to get instead of it is Similarly corrupted and owned by the same interests, I would argue.
	Let me know if you agree with that in the chat.
	Here they are doing this conference where they sort of convey ideas, do propaganda and stuff like that.
	And I feel like a protester maybe got on the stage with the new prime minister to be, Keir Starmer.
	Have a look at how he handles.
	A little bit of glitter.
	True democracy is citizen-led.
	Politics needs an update.
	We demand a people's house!
	We demand a people's house!
	We are in crisis!
	We are in crisis!
	His first reaction was sort of like mild disappointment.
	It was sprinkled there with a bit of glitter.
	It's always mad, isn't it, when something like that happens, because you never know if the consequences are going to be horrific violence.
	But in this instance, it was glitter.
	And I feel like Keir Starmer sort of thought, oh.
	And everything that guy said was sort of reasonable.
	We need a people's house!
	Democracy's in crisis!
	The most rational thing that you'll hear all the way through that entire conference is someone who is nutty enough to run on the stage and sprinkle someone with glitter.
	That is not the person you think.
	Right, who do we agree with?
	Anyone in this room?
	Well, perhaps one of these career politicians that have formerly been lawyers.
	No, no, they're just gonna do propaganda.
	What about you, sir, with a bag of glitter?
	Well, I think that true democracy would grant a voice to ordinary people.
	What you need is to decentralise power.
	How can a party that's funded in the same way as its apparent opposition make any real difference?
	It's pretty clear they do deals with the legacy media to garner support prior to the election, and that there are kingmakers behind the scenes, notably and specifically Rupert Murdoch in this instance in UK democracy.
	I mean, why should we... Boo!
	Boo!
	Get off!
	You're mad!
	You are mad!
	I haven't even done the glitter yet!
	Still shouting as he goes, still doing his talk.
	People sort of cheering.
	Cheering their authoritarianism.
	Following the incident, Starmer told the audience, if he thinks that bothers me, he doesn't know me.
	Did look a little bit bothered.
	Protest or power?
	Did he say that?
	Protest or power?
	It's just, it's interesting to note that the person that said the thing that has most veracity is someone that's Already a little eccentric.
	People demand democracy campaigns to replace the House of Lords with what the group calls a permanent citizens assembly that would effectively mean the Lords would be selected at random like a jury or what the group refers to as a democratic lottery.
	Pretty good idea actually, so there you go, it's drawing attention to an interesting idea and without sort of throwing paint all over a precious artwork or something like that.
	Now, democracy plainly needs to change, whether that will be as a result of glittery protest by an apparently rational young person, or perhaps because an previously institutional politician, not necessarily institutional but certainly someone who comes from within the establishment, bears the name Kennedy, has declared that he's running as an independent candidate.
	And America seems like it's ready, I think nearly half, according to some polls, Americans would consider voting for an independent politician.
	Certainly we know the duopoly is over.
	Certainly we know that both the institutions of the Democratic and Republican parties are pretty corrupt.
	We've told you time and time again how they're funded, how many members of Congress own stocks and shares.
	It's just, broadly speaking, equally bad.
	So an independent candidate Could be the answer and with Cornel West and RFK now entering the fray is this in spite of all the immersive terrifying evidence around us Potentially a moment where American politics could change forever.
	Here's the news.
	No, here's the effing news.
	RFK has launched his bid to become the president of the United States
	outside of the two-party system and America is ready for change.
	With the world on the precipice of multiple apocalyptic events, is this the time to consider real radicalism?
	And does RFK represent that?
	Let's talk today about one of the positive stories we can discuss.
	RFK announcing his candidacy to run as an independent.
	Is it true that for the first time in history Americans would consider voting outside of the Republican-Democrat Duopoly system?
	Is it possible that we could get real change?
	Is the fact that we have an independent candidate with a surname Kennedy a kind of mythic return to an American golden age?
	Is it possible something good could happen during this time beset by multiple crises, censorship, surveillance, war, terror, dread, breakdown and despair, mainstream media deception?
	Is it It's possible that something beautiful could come from this.
	And God, just on a personal level, let us reach inside ourselves and find something beautiful in this time of absolute desperation.
	If you can afford to support us, click the red button and support us so that we can go on this journey together beyond media reporting and into a movement that advocates for spiritual principles that can, I pray to God, bring us all together.
	If you don't have the Rumble app, could you get it, please?
	Because when we release content on Rumble, you get a notification and you'll always get it.
	It's not like on YouTube where you might get it and you might not.
	Every bit of content we release you'll be informed about so you can stay with us continually.
	Alright, let's get into today's story.
	RFK announces his candidature for the presidency of the United States.
	And that's why I'm here today.
	I'm here to declare myself an independent candidate.
	United States history.
	He says that his supporters in this crowd, and I can affirm that having talked to a number of them, that includes both pro-choice and pro-life people.
	It includes both environmentalists and climate deniers.
	He says it's important that we bring people together.
	When you look at the evident fractures that beset our planet and our lives, and sometimes our personal lives, as well as the international, political and religious stage, the idea that pro-choice and pro-life people could get behind a candidate, I would argue is encouraging.
	The idea that people that are, as he says, climate deniers and people that are environmental activists can stand together, I would say is encouraging.
	And if you can think of a solution That doesn't include people with previously opposing views coming together.
	I can't see that.
	The only thing I can see at the moment is a willingness for us to move together in good faith.
	Plainly, we're at a point with many of the geopolitical conflicts in the world at the moment Where the people that are invested either personally, religiously, ideologically are obviously entitled to their perspective.
	A perspective that is brought about by pain, deep belief and trauma.
	I suppose those of us that are not affected by geopolitical crises have an obligation to try to maintain some kind of spirit that is inclusive of all humanity and humanity's shared goals.
	Maybe a candidate like Bobby Kennedy, who is from the establishment by virtue of his surname.
	He's been on our show a number of times and I actually love Bobby Kennedy as a human being.
	He knows what it's like to be a member of the elites, there's no question about that.
	Who could argue that, given his position on vaccines, he isn't willing to fly in the face of convention?
	Now, the truth is, the world the way it is, particularly right now, there'll be, I know, loads of you in the comments that go, but he believes this about this, or he believes that about that, and maybe the time where you're going to find even another individual that That's just one example.
	be over. I mean one of the things that I think is successful, I pray is successful, our channel,
	is we don't agree with each other on some of the issues that have defined our channel's ascent.
	There are people that I work with creatively, very closely, that have a completely different
	view to me on, for example, the subject of vaccines. That's just one example. And obviously
	I'm not comparing that subject to some of the geopolitical conflicts in the world at the moment
	that involve national and religious identity and horror and death and historic trauma.
	All of those things are frankly beyond my imagination.
	But even if you look, and I suppose in this story we must, just at corruption within American politics.
	America is the most powerful nation in the world.
	The American military-industrial complex sets the global agenda when it comes to foreign policy and the outcome in many, many conflicts.
	It's difficult to contest that.
	The corporations that primarily are housed in America, Big Pharma, Big Tech, they dominate our social and medical spaces and fund apparently independent bodies.
	I feel that whilst I do not know the answers to the questions that the world is asking of itself right now, it plainly is a time where something new needs to emerge.
	It's not carry on doing what we've been doing, is it?
	Because that's the one thing we know doesn't work.
	He says it's important that we bring people together and it's not possible for one side or the other, the left or the right, to have all of what they want.
	And that the answer, perhaps, is in an independent candidacy, someone who can listen to both sides.
	He used the example, Neil, of himself.
	He said six months ago he thought anybody who wanted to close the border was a xenophobe and a racist.
	Then he went to the border himself and he's changed his opinion.
	And he says that is the kind of presidency a Robert F.
	Kennedy Jr. would bring.
	OK, so Bobby Kennedy, for me at least, and tell me what you think,
	seems like an optimistic move in the right direction.
	I know loads of you are just devoted to Donald Trump and absolutely love him
	and see him as the anti-establishment figure that the world needs.
	I honestly don't think very many of you into Joe Biden are, yeah,
	or probably any candidate that the Democrat Party could put forward.
	But if what you like about Donald Trump is his anti-establishment willingness,
	his appetite for confrontation with a lot of what appear to be hypocritical
	and corrupt ideological stances, unwillingness to confront true deep state and establishment power, then I would say
	that Bobby Kennedy appears to be in that vein.
	And you should read some of the things he's written if you query that.
	And can any candidate really succeed from within the Republican and Democrat party institutions, given the nature of their funding, the historic relationships, the revolving door between both those parties, and financial and globalist interests?
	Can anyone from within that system make a difference?
	If you believe they can, let me know in the chat.
	And more importantly, is America ready for a change?
	Is America ready to step beyond the two-party system?
	Almost half of US voters, 47%, say they would consider voting for a third party candidate for president next year, signalling a dissatisfaction with a potential rematch between President Joe Biden and former President Donald Trump.
	Odd that it's sort of regarded as a rematch.
	Perhaps politics becoming entertainment is part of the problem, but perhaps the sort of hysteria and lack of good faith in the political space at the moment is part of the problem, and I certainly don't blame us.
	The people for that.
	I blame hollowed out empty institutions.
	I blame politicians for exacerbating our differences.
	I blame the media for reporting hysterically and deceptively on a whole raft of issues.
	Real change is required and a willingness to look at politics as not entertainment but the establishment of a vision that we can work towards together and the acceptance that within that vision there's gonna have to be a good deal of independence, a good deal of autonomy and a much more decentralization than we've ever been prepared to consider before.
	Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
	launched an independent presidential bid on Monday.
	Cornel West made the same choice last week.
	The fresh frenzy of outsider candidates threatens to weaken both major parties as Democrat President Joe Biden and Republican former President Donald Trump tighten their grips on their parties' presidential nominations.
	Would you consider voting for an independent candidate?
	Are you ready for real change, politically?
	What about personally?
	If you are, consider Field of Greens.
	The Mayo Clinic says, if you want to help prevent heart disease, yes please, lower blood pressure and cholesterol, eat five servings of fruit and vegetables every day.
	We all know that, don't we?
	Have you had your five a day?
	Have you had your five a day?
	No, I haven't got time.
	Unlike the others, each fruit and vegetable in Field of Greens was medically selected by a doctor.
	Not just a person off the street like you, a doctor to support your vital organs like the heart, that's one of them, lungs, kidneys and immune system.
	Flu season's here, right, so you know what some people are going to want?
	Well, I'm going to trust Fielder Greens to help me stay healthy and strong and powerful.
	Fielder Greens works fast.
	Don't just sluggishly go through your system.
	In there!
	You'll feel better.
	You'll have more energy.
	You'll notice your skin, hair, and nails will look healthier too.
	If you don't always eat right and exercise, try Feel the Greens.
	Feel the Greens.
	That's what I'm recommending.
	Let me get you started with 15% off your first order.
	Visit BrickHouseRussell.com and use the promo code brand.
	That's promo code brand at BrickHouseRussell.com.
	Now, are you ready for some real independence?
	A heightened sense of concern is spreading, especially among democratic officials who see the outsiders as a dangerous wild card.
	I suppose because they've regarded opposition and discourse as heresy, take for example the 30 or so congress folk, or was it senators, that said, can we at least talk about peace between Russia?
	Like that was just shut down.
	They've opened the door to alternative political movements.
	I think we need them.
	The rise of outsider candidates is an acute reminder of the intense volatility and uncertainty that hangs over the 2024 presidential election.
	Yeah, whoever wins is going to be contested after the event, isn't it?
	Both of the major party's most likely nominees, Biden and Trump, are running as the nation grapples with dangerous political divisions, economic anxiety, and a deep desire for a new generation of leadership in Washington.
	Jim Messina, who managed President Barack Obama's 2012 re-election campaign and is now a prominent Biden ally,
	didn't downplay the possibility that the new candidates could weaken Biden's coalition.
	I'm a campaign manager, so I'm wired to plan for everything and panic about nothing,
	and the threat of a third party needs to be planned for seriously, Messina said.
	The assumption is most Americans won't be willing to step outside of the tribal lines that have long defined their
	lives.
	But this is no longer a normal time.
	Media has changed.
	Politics has changed.
	The public conversation has changed.
	The state of constant crisis that we've been in, it could be argued, since 9-11 has All of the way people see their institutions and their leaders.
	Who now trusts the government?
	Who now trusts the media?
	Who trusts anybody anymore other than your own emotions and alliances that are transcendent of secularism?
	Possibly religious or maybe secular if you think of your national patriotic identity is important to you.
	But this is a time I feel where our institutions have failed us to such a degree that people are really looking for alternative visions.
	No independent or third party candidate has won an electoral vote in more than half a century, never mind the 270 needed to claim the presidency.
	But Messina said Biden and his team still need to be aggressive in warning voters about the threat that long-shot outsider candidates present.
	You need to tell people that a vote for a candidate without a path to 270 means they're lighting their ballot on fire, Messina said.
	What a messed up system.
	And that is how you maintain a two-party duopoly.
	If you vote for anyone else, you're wasting your vote.
	If you vote for them, you'll vote for a madman and a lunatic or a senile old dude.
	How can it be that the best thing isn't to vote for someone you believe in?
	How can it be that we're not discussing, well, whoever you vote for, as I said some years ago, you're going to end up with someone who ultimately operates under the auspices of a deeper power.
	You're not going to see real change.
	You're not going to see the kind of change that you were talking about, that I'm talking about.
	It's not going to meaningfully impact your life.
	An independent candidate is at least an opportunity to start breaking down some of the institutions that have for the last 50 years, maybe longer, just gilded a dumb, hollow political space and serve the interests of the powerful and deceived ordinary people.
	It's a condition that's gotten worse and worse.
	As I say, 2001, 9-11, nightmare, Patriot Act, 2008, economic crash, Barack Obama betrays the population.
	And since then, just the heaping of the forever crisis and the culture war has meant, I think, almost a permanent state of bewilderment.
	I mean, how are you coping?
	So, saying something like, you need to tell people that a vote for a candidate without a path to 270 means they're lighting their ballot on fire.
	That's how they maintain these systems.
	It's very interesting how it works.
	How, in a sense, They've more in common with one another than they do with you and your interests.
	That's something we've long known, isn't it?
	Gallup released new polling last week showing that 63% of US adults currently agree with a statement that the Republican and Democratic parties do such a poor job of representing the American people that a third major party is needed.
	Okay, so people are ready.
	So watch the legacy media now go to work on attacking that information.
	Bobby Kennedy is not a man who hasn't experienced being a pariah.
	Being ridiculed, being slaughtered, being attacked, having his past used against him, having dishonest stories, having his books sort of blacklisted and banned.
	But I imagine it's going to get a lot worse based on what we can glean from this.
	The system does not want an external threat.
	Even an internal threat like Bernie Sanders in the Dems and Trump within the Republican Party has created just total mayhem.
	Makes me think these systems are quite fragile anyway.
	It was among the highest figures since Gallup first asked the question in 2003.
	On paper, Kennedy may be most likely to draw support from Trump's coalition.
	Right.
	Radical outsider.
	So isn't that extraordinary?
	It shows you that the parameters have shifted so radically that even someone who's associated with the Democrat Party movement as Bobby Kennedy is closer in the minds of the American public imagination to Donald Trump than Joe Biden.
	I mean, what the hell is going on?
	Aware of the risk, Republican National Committee chair, Ronna McDaniel, released a statement on Monday calling Kennedy a typical elitist liberal.
	Everyone just moves straight towards what their propaganda is going to be.
	How are we going to dismiss him?
	Elite liberal?
	How are we going to dismiss him?
	Crackpot?
	Everyone's just coming up with ways to not deal with the actual problem.
	America isn't working.
	Democracy as it currently stands isn't working.
	And they're just going to maintain that not working rather than even countenance the possibility of some kind of advance or change.
	Make no mistake, a Democrat in independence clothing is still a Democrat, she said, highlighting Kennedy's past support for Hillary Clinton and his support for progressive environmental protections known as the Green Deal.
	So that's the way they think they can make him seem as unappealing as possible.
	And of course, the Democrats have their own version of making him as unappealing as possible.
	At the same time, Trump allies have been uncirculating opposition research against Kennedy designed to damage his standing among would-be conservative supporters, including a pre-pandemic video clip of Kennedy declaring himself fiercely pro-vaccine.
	Kennedy campaign spokesperson Stephanie Speier said the clip has obviously been removed from its content.
	What I would say is that Bobby Kennedy has been quite outspoken against vaccines.
	I don't think you can attack him there.
	You know this guy, he loves vaccines.
	He's at home right now vaccinating the hell out of himself.
	Like he's released that book about it.
	He's jeopardized everything he owns.
	He's started that movement, that children's defense count.
	I mean like everything he does he's devoted to, I'm not sure about these vaccines.
	So if you found him once saying, well actually on our show he goes, no in the right conditions you should Take a vaccine if you're going to an area where you're at risk.
	He's like that.
	I think that's probably the most pro-vaccine thing he said.
	And actually, by the way, bloody hell, don't recent events remind you that forming a kind of tribalism around whether or not you take a medicine is bloody mental anyway.
	Shouldn't matter.
	Like, maybe people have got different lives and different priorities and different conditions.
	They need to kill each other over that or...
	Even anything really.
	I think Bobby Kennedy's position on vaccines is clear.
	against mandates for any and all medical interventions, she said.
	Mr Kennedy's position is that he's in favour of vaccines that have undergone
	unbiased scientific testing for safety and efficacy.
	Such testing has been impossible because of the corrupt influence of the pharmaceutical industry.
	I think Bobby Kennedy's position on vaccines is clear.
	I think Bobby Kennedy is an optimistic candidate for most people.
	I know some of you will have concerns, because I know you, because you are a truly diverse audience, aren't you?
	You're spiritually diverse, you're mentally diverse, you believe in a lot of stuff, and I'll offer you this.
	Surely, at some point, we have to consider decentralization and democracy, and a third party candidate is a step in the right direction, if you ask me.
	Cornel West of course is another independent candidate who is credible, a brilliant communicator, also been a guest on our show.
	His criticism of Barack Obama is a helpful way of understanding exactly why we're in this mess.
	Someone that's presented as a genuine hero, Barack Obama, hope, change, president of colour, time of radical optimism, a unifying moment for the nation of the United States, leading really to droning as usual, financial meltdown, bailing out elites.
	Barack Obama was not a hero.
	Let's see though what Cornel West has to say because, you know, let him take that heat.
	One of the sadder things during the Obama years, one of the reasons why so many of us who were critical of brother Barack understood it was not just about policy.
	There was a time in which the black community was the most anti-war I like his oratory style.
	Aren't you ready for people that talk like this in Poland?
	Here come Barack Obama dropping bombs!
	When he came on our show he was like that.
	He uses like sort of terms of endearment like brother which I like.
	I think it's lovely to use language that recognises, in spite of our obvious plain differences, we are of a common species.
	We do have to find a way of moving forward together.
	So don't buy into whatever people are telling you about, oh you're burning your vote.
	You might as well burn your bloody vote if you're not going to vote for someone you believe in.
	Here come Barack Obama dropping 71 bombs every day, 26,117 in one year, in seven countries
	walking around with the Nobel Peace Prize.
	That's a key sweat moment.
	Something just ain't right.
	So there is room for change in the nature of political discourse.
	Cornel West, Bobby Kennedy, for me, are both cause for optimism.
	Now, you can bet that the establishment are going to move very powerfully to shut down their voices.
	Bobby Kennedy, in particular, I think, represents a meaningful threat to the duopoly of the Republican-Democrat two-party tyrannical system that is in radical need of re-evaluation.
	And if you look at the world right now, and I know you've got no choice because the world is flooding in at you through your windows, through your phone, through your heart, It's clear that we have to start considering things that we would never have considered before.
	Doing what we've always done is going to yield the results that we've always gotten.
	We have to be willing to change individually.
	We have to be willing to change collectively.
	We maybe have to put aside some of our most cherished beliefs and be open-hearted to the possibility that reality is not what we believed it to be anyway.
	I know that you are the audience that we can trust.
	I know we can build something.
	I know that you are willing to look at the world differently.
	I'm so grateful to you for staying with our channel, for moving beyond the fear, moving beyond the hysteria.
	Whether it's a localised issue about an individual or a global issue, we have to be willing to consider things we wouldn't previously have considered.
	And it seems like America, for the first time in history, are.
	So are we about to see an independent candidate?
	Well, the elites and the institutions are going to work very, very hard to prevent it.
	So you will have to work very, very hard to make it happen.
	But that's just what I think.
	Let me know what you think in the chat.
	See you in a second.
	Thanks for refusing Fox News' videos.
	No, he's the fucking news!
	Perhaps it's more significant now that we have alternative political movements,
	that we have alternative and independent media.
	Let me know in the chat what you think about RFK's candidacy, who will be most negatively affected, and most importantly of all, is it possible that an independent political candidate could become the President of the United States?
	If you're watching this anywhere other than Rumble, please click the link in the description.
	It's more important now than ever, as you know, that you support independent media, that you become part of this movement.
	And if you're on Rumble with us already, if you've already downloaded that Rumble app so that you receive notifications every time we release content, then press the red button.
	Become an Awakened Wonder.
	I am honoured to introduce our friend Kim Iverson from Rumble, the journalist, the host of the Kim Iverson Show.
	That's on Monday to Friday, 6pm Pacific, 9pm Eastern.
	It's early in the morning for you.
	Right now, you're denying yourself caffeine.
	Thanks for joining us, Kim.
	Thanks for having me.
	It's great to be here.
	It's wonderful to have the opportunity to speak to someone who's so confident and adept when discussing complex issues such as we are going to discuss over the course of the next half hour or so.
	But firstly, I wanted to start with your perspective on RFK.
	Polling suggests that people are ready for an alternative approach to politics, that they're willing to break out of the duopoly.
	Is Robert Kennedy, with his anti-establishment position on so many subjects, with his magnificent surname, with his personal warmth?
	I've met him several times, I'm sure you have, and I find him a great joy to be around.
	Do you think that this could be a significant moment for American politics, or do you think that he'll be devoured by the machine?
	I think that he's going to be devoured by the machine, to be honest with you.
	But I do think that this is a significant moment, and I think it paves the way for potentially future significant moments where people break free from the duopoly.
	But I do think that ultimately, he's going to end up on one of the other... I think he's possibly going to be offered a vice president.
	position from either the Republican or the Democrat ticket when they realize that he's
	going to be siphoning votes away from them.
	And this could be very significant.
	He is, I think, the second best person to lodge an independent run for president right
	now.
	The best person, if somebody really wanted to break the duopoly, if we really wanted
	to get out a Republican and Democrat, two sides of the same ass, to be honest with you.
	Then Donald Trump would actually be the one to throw his hat in the ring as an independent.
	He would be the one to break it.
	But he's not.
	He's got the Republican ticket on lock, so he doesn't need to do that.
	He's pretty much run as an independent, but on the Republican ticket.
	So Kennedy doing it is a pretty good, I would say, You know, I mean, it leads us in the right direction, but I don't know if it'll end up any different than, like, Ross Perot in the end, unless he joins forces with one of the others, which I think he'll have to.
	I think they'll want him to.
	I mean, he doesn't have to.
	Obviously, he can do what he wants.
	But I think that they will definitely be recruiting him.
	Well that's extraordinary because someone who's been so outspoken on so many divisive issues being in a position of comparative authority is even that is extraordinary although I know that Bobby Kennedy's goal is to become obviously the President of the United States and I suppose The reason that we're talking about it in the way that we are is because independent media means that he has a platform in a way that he previously wouldn't have done.
	He's the kind of political figure that would previously have been silenced.
	Certainly, you know, if you just take his book on Anthony Fauci that was a bestseller, sold millions of copies, never was featured in the New York Times, has never been discussed.
	Again, his perspectives, many of which have proven to be more valid than they were assumed to be at the beginning, have not been included, broadly speaking, in mainstream discourse.
	He remains, to a degree, a pariah.
	And for me, it's an indication that there is so much anti-establishment sentiment in your country, but around the world.
	Broadly speaking, do not trust and often detest their government.
	Do not trust and often detest the legacy media.
	Many institutions that are supposed to be the pillars of a civilization, certainly of a nation, are no longer trusted.
	For the first time in conversation, people talk about disbanding the CIA or the FBI if they were to get into office, or Antony Fauci being prosecuted, closing down the FDA.
	Things that would have been unthinkable.
	In a sense, do you think that the candidacy of Robert Kennedy is merely an observable symptom of a deep mistrust?
	In fact, even the Trump phenomena is just an earlier indicator of that anti-establishment sentiment.
	Yeah, and even Bernie Sanders was.
	I mean, until he sort of flipped and now he's way more in line with the establishment narratives.
	But for sure, the people are fed up with the government institutions.
	We don't trust the government institutions.
	They've shown that they're not worth trusting.
	So it's rightfully earned.
	And yeah, I think Kennedy really does showcase more of that sentiment coming from people that cannot be viewed as MAGA, right-wing, you know, cult members.
	So he's showcasing that there's a different faction of the U.S.
	population that really also feels the same way as many of the people who are voting for Donald Trump.
	Many of them, there's a lot of crossover there.
	And of course the media still smears Kennedy and they smear his supporters as conspiracy theorists, anti-vaxxers or whatever they want to label them.
	But they can't label them MAGA cultists.
	You know, there's QAnon followers.
	There's a different group of people there.
	And I think as more and more people open their eyes and say, wow, everybody who's not voting for the person they want, anybody who supports an alternative candidate, be it Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
	or Donald Trump, gets smeared as some sort of conspiracy theorist or cultist.
	Or extremist in some way.
	You know, I think that opens the eyes of more and more people who then say, you know, maybe it's not those people.
	Maybe they actually have legitimate grievances.
	Maybe it's actually the government in the establishment.
	I think more and more people are starting to feel that way.
	But.
	I do think that Kennedy, you know, he was up against a battle with trying to run as a Democrat.
	I never thought he should have done it.
	I told him, point blank, don't run.
	Why are you running as a Democrat?
	Luckily, he has changed his mind.
	He's changed his mind at the right time.
	He has to gain, I believe it's about in total, 800,000 signatures in order across the country in all the states.
	So he has to go state by state.
	And he asked to get enough signatures, depending on the rules of that individual state, and every state is different, in order for him to be on the ballot as an independent in the general election.
	Otherwise, his name wouldn't be on the ballot and he would have to be a write-in candidate, and that is a real long, long, long shot.
	He's announcing this early enough to where he has the time to gain the resources.
	You have to get staff.
	You've got to get organized.
	You've got to get people out there knocking on doors in all 50 states.
	He now has the time to hit those deadlines, which, depending on the state, again, every state has a different deadline.
	So some of them, I think, are as early as maybe February or March, and then they roll all the way until about June or July.
	So, I mean, he's doing, I think, the right thing, getting himself on that, declaring independence, breaking free from the Democratic Party that was not giving him a fair shot at all.
	They weren't going to let him have any debates.
	They decided who their candidate is.
	It's Joe Biden.
	And they're not having any process or any challenge.
	It kind of makes me wonder, why do we even have elections every four years then?
	I mean, if it's just going to be You're the anointed one.
	Then why even pretend and have an election at all and pretend like there's some sort of democratic process like a primary when there clearly isn't?
	I mean, it's just a farce.
	So it's good that he separated himself.
	And I think more and more Americans are opening their eyes to the farce of the fake democracy that Democrats present in their primaries, which has been fake for a very long time.
	And, you know, we'll see where this goes.
	But I do think that what we're going to see is the Republican candidate, Donald Trump, and Joe Biden are going to both feel the pressure of Kennedy siphoning votes.
	And I think Trump, who doesn't have a VP option right now, could very well reach out and say, hey, why don't you join me and become my VP?
	Trump can only do one more term.
	He can't run again after that.
	So Kennedy could be president in four years after that, if he's vice president for Donald Trump.
	That's certainly, that baton pass has happened many times before.
	So it could happen again.
	Democrats are going to be scrambling and it's going to be really interesting to see how they react to it.
	He is a Kennedy.
	He did try running as a Democrat.
	So they might say, well, they might try to swallow their pride and say, join us and be our VP.
	That's harder to imagine, but I don't know.
	Anything's possible.
	It's crazy.
	This is going to be a crazy election cycle.
	Yes, it seems that it will be and I suppose personally the candidacy of Bobby Kennedy has been one of the few things that I can regard with any optimism because I see him as a sincere, open-hearted, spiritually awakened, good man who's in recovery, I understand.
	I know he's had addiction issues certainly in the past and I imagine they're over.
	So for me it feels like someone that I can have a little bit of faith in.
	And entering an environment where it seems there's little scope for anything but cynicism.
	The simple example that Biden is continuing to build Trump's wall a policy that was regarded really as the symbol of the difference between them.
	That we know that whoever wins in 2024, we have to assume that whoever loses is going to say that it was somehow stolen by faulty voting machines or Russian intervention.
	It appears that what's being repressed is a deep Emotional understanding that our systems are in many cases beyond repair, certainly in need of radical review.
	That we have to consider, I believe, further federalism, decentralization, more democracy, demonopolization of significant spaces in media and particularly social media and big tech.
	It seems that there needs to be the opportunity to acknowledge that there are many, many ways of being human, many ways of being American, and unless we're going to spend all of our time entrenched in an unwinnable culture war, the polarity will in the end, I think, radiate us all into a kind of madness.
	In fact, I feel that it's sort of already upon us in many ways.
	And it's into this environment of polarization, of heated discourse, of bad faith conversations
	that tensions have escalated, of course, in the Middle East in the most vivid, violent
	and broadly distressing way, even if you're not directly involved, even as a, like, just
	as a spectator, as an observer, as a human, it's become difficult to talk about.
	How do you navigate this space, Kim?
	How do you talk about a conflict that people don't want to even, it seems to me, engage in a nuanced conversation, a solution-based conversation?
	Even with the Russia-Ukraine conflict, people seem to not want to talk about peace.
	It becomes an anathema to talk about peace, which used to be the sensible position of most people.
	And now we have a much more hotly contested and historically complex situation to discuss.
	How are you navigating that territory?
	Well, it's tricky.
	It's very, very tricky because it is, I would say, the most emotional conflict that we have to discuss, actually.
	I mean, this is the hornet's nest when it comes to political talk, political conversation, and this is why there does seem to be just complete consensus.
	In the political class, it doesn't matter if they're on the left, right, or even independent like Bobby Kennedy.
	There's just a full-fledged support for Israel.
	No questions asked.
	There cannot be any debate.
	And what's really odd about that actually is if you read Israeli newspapers, You actually see debate.
	If you read, if you actually watch Israeli news, go on to Israeli Twitter and actually translate the tweets that are being tweeted out and read Haaretz, the newspaper, or any of the other newspapers in Israel, you'll actually find robust discussion and debate.
	And this is not debate that we're seeing in the United States.
	I don't know what it's like there in the UK, if you're allowed to have any sort of debate, but certainly here in the United States, it is.
	You're either with Israel, and if you're not with Israel, you're somehow not American.
	It's like anti-American to not stand with this foreign country.
	Um, so it's, it's a really, really tricky, it's, it's a tricky, uh, conversation to have.
	I do think that the conversation has shifted, perspectives have shifted, and that is with the advent of the internet.
	Um, the, now people can see more with their own eyes the conflict rather than hearing about it from their parents or from the news or from their local pastor that they must support Israel at all costs.
	Now people are actually seeing videos that are coming from, you know, over the last maybe 10 years or maybe fewer years.
	I'm not sure.
	They just barely got 3G internet in Palestine in the West Bank.
	Gaza, I don't think has anything much at all.
	They have very, very little.
	But when I was over in the West Bank, and it was four years ago, actually, I was there probably four years ago today.
	Um, they just barely got 3G.
	So there was really no way to upload video.
	I mean, you could upload videos.
	This is very slow, very, very slow.
	So, but people are now getting them.
	They're seeing what's going on.
	They're seeing the occupation.
	And that definitely has, I think, shifted the sentiment where people are thinking, wait a minute, what exactly are we supporting?
	What exactly is our money going towards?
	What exactly is happening there?
	And now we are seeing a little bit more open debate here in the United States in this conflict.
	But it's a tough one.
	I mean, these are two cousins fighting to the death.
	And it's almost an impossible situation to discuss.
	You know, because we really almost need to put it in that perspective of just understanding this is a family fight.
	And they are literally, these are their literal cousins.
	And they are literally fighting over grandpa's land.
	They're deciding who gets to live on grandpa's land, and who's inheriting it, who has the rightful title to grandpa's land.
	And they're battling each other to the death.
	And I, you know, from my perspective, it's not wise to really take Aside on this, to say it's, oh, this is who belongs here and this is who doesn't belong here.
	The one thing that we can see is that there are atrocities that are happening.
	What happened in Israel over the weekend with Hamas attacking civilians is atrocious.
	That is terrorism.
	It is a war crime.
	That should not be happening.
	Guerrilla warfare is a normal part of war tactics that happen from Vietnam to a variety of places around the world when there is a very lopsided, lopsided, you know, arming, right?
	You've got Israel, which is a massive, well-formed, trained military.
	And then you have the Palestinians, which really they don't have anything but homemade bombs.
	And yeah, they've been able to secure some weapons clearly from someplace, probably Iran or wherever Hezbollah But it's very much one-sided, lopsided.
	And so guerrilla warfare is a typical tactic in a situation like that.
	But even with guerrilla warfare, there's rules.
	You know, there's rules.
	You don't go after civilians that are at a music festival.
	You target military sites, you target police sites, you target infrastructure.
	That's what guerrilla warfare is about.
	You know, there's definitely the atrocities that happened towards the Israelis that are just terrible and we should all condemn it.
	But then there's also the long-standing atrocities that have been going on against the Palestinians that have kept these people in essentially their own.
	I mean, they're incarcerated in prison.
	There's really no other way to describe it.
	They're living in hell and they clearly have a collective anger That has grown and grown and grown and grown.
	And the worst part about it is I don't see any sort of actual plan for a resolution to halt that rising anger from a group of people who have nothing left to live for.
	They're already living in the worst possible situation they could live in.
	You cannot make it worse.
	Carpet bombing Gaza is no different for them than what they've been dealing with.
	Their children being killed is not anything new to them.
	So you can't really make their lives any worse.
	So there doesn't seem to be a plan towards figuring out how to break this cycle.
	And I think that's what we should focus on in discussions.
	But when we try to focus on that, how do we break this never-ending 75-year cycle of violence, We get this, you know, how dare you?
	You're, you know, you're anti-Semite or you're not an American or, you know, you are a Hamas apologist or a terrorist apologist.
	And so it's difficult to have true, genuine discourse on this subject without it getting really inflamed.
	Yeah because the world has become more censorious anyway.
	Emotions are high on a variety of subjects anyway.
	War appears to once again be an option and it felt like for I don't know since at least the Iraq war I guess I mean Afghanistan I mean there's always war isn't there but I must say this appears to be a global blow that the world is not in a very good condition to sustain or it doesn't seem there's a kind of collective access or even local appetite to think about how the
	cycle might alter and it's even as you've described Kim difficult for people that are not directly involved and
	therefore clearly allied to one particular outcome to even commentate
	on it and I feel like I'm gonna have to spend some time working out how to even engage with this issue because
	The vastness of it I mean it seems like in some ways that it's a conflict that
	will be beneficial to the military-industrial complex It seems to have affected share prices. It seems like it's
	sort of plainly beneficial for certain financial interests but even compared to a horrific war like the ongoing
	conflict between Russia and Ukraine, which I've spoken about and feel like I've
	Spoken about as honestly as I can while acknowledging my own naivety flaws and limitations of my own understanding
	It's at least culturally possible to talk about and then you start to wonder what is even the value of talking about
	it What's the you know, like it's almost I don't know of an
	issue that sort of brings you to a point of despair as quickly as this one and it's precisely because of what you
	sort of said that it's familiar and emotional and seemingly intransigent and
	unwinnable and hopelessly sad and just desperate suffering defining the entire situation
	Thank you.
	you Yeah, it's a really, it's a really, really tragic situation for everybody involved.
	It's tragic for the Israelis who are, you know, mostly on both sides.
	They just want to live peacefully.
	People just want to live peacefully where they were born and raised.
	That is their home and that is what they want.
	And there are just extreme factions on both sides who want to eradicate the other side because it is just cousins that hate each other.
	Some cousins want to live together harmoniously and they say, why can't we share grandpa's land?
	And others say, no way.
	We were clearly the ones that were left with this land.
	It's written down.
	We've got the deed.
	And others saying, well, we still have the keys.
	I mean, it is just, it's a really, really, really tragic and hopeless situation.
	And that is why I personally, you know, I'm very much anti-war.
	I do think that we have to come to a peaceful resolution on this.
	You know, I mean, it's been attempted for a long time and it does feel really hopeless that this is the one conflict that may never resolve.
	But I do think that we should have a stance as Americans of let's just stay out of it.
	This is a family fight and we just should not be involved and let them work it out amongst themselves because there is no winning this thing and we have been giving endless support to Israel for a very very long time and it clearly Didn't help them.
	I mean, what happened with all of that money that we've been giving them and all the defense we've been giving them?
	And there still ended up being a massive failure.
	And they still end up having the situation, you know, they're in the situation that they're in.
	And now they're carpet bombing Gaza.
	And that's not that only that's not teaching the Palestinians a lesson.
	There's no lesson to teach them.
	And that's, I think what people have to really sort of wrap their minds around first is that You know, when you remove yourself emotionally from the situation, try, it's really difficult to do.
	But when we, those of us like I'm not Jewish, nor am I Muslim, I don't have any, I don't have a, you know, a dog in this fight, really.
	So for me, I'm just an American, I'm seeing a lot of American dollars going over to these various conflicts around the world.
	And I think that when we look at it, we could just say, look, You know, the logic on this is this is a family fight.
	We should stay out of it.
	We can't be continuing to fund these types of wars or this type of security.
	The Israelis are very competent.
	They're able to take care of themselves as well.
	You know, we had an attack on our soil as well.
	You know, and we're not asking for anybody else for aid.
	You know, we can manage it.
	I think any sovereign nation does.
	But yeah, this is just, it's a really, really, really tough conflict to deal with.
	And the solution, I don't know where the solution lies, except for the first step is to make a group, a hopeless group of people more hopeless.
	isn't going to work. They're already hopeless. They're at the end of hopelessness. So saying
	we're going to bomb them and teach them a lesson. We're going to terrorize, you know,
	make their lives a living hell to where they never think about doing something like this again.
	It's already been done and it didn't work. So can we come up with a different solution?
	And I wish that was really sort of the sentiment going forward is can we come up with a new
	solution because that one clearly failed. Tim, why did you go to Gaza? I didn't go to Gaza.
	I went to West Bank. And I went to see the conflict for myself to to learn about it, to understand it,
	to...
	Bye.
	you To really, you know, I mean, here in America, we're told one thing and one thing only.
	And we're told that one side is terrorizing the other, that there's a group of people just trying to live peacefully in their home and in their land that they've been promised, and that the other group of people's terrorizing them.
	And I wanted to go over there to see for myself what the facts were and went and saw a very, very, very different situation than that.
	I saw a group of people being terrorized.
	But it wasn't the group of people who there's no doubt it's terrifying to live in a city or a society where you know that in any minute a rocket could come towards you.
	There's no doubt that that's terrifying.
	So I'm not minimizing the fact that many Israelis do live in fear and terror.
	Palestinians live with that same exact fear.
	They don't know when a rocket's going to come bombing them either.
	They're in that same boat.
	But they're in an additional level of stress where there is a massive occupation and guns and in their faces all the time, checkpoints nonstop, lack of running water.
	They don't have, like I said, they just get 3G cell phone service and you travel into Israel and they get 5G.
	Um, you know, they're under, they're under duress.
	And when you, I, I came back, I have to be honest with you, I was there for about a week and I came back with a slight form of PTSD.
	Not kidding you.
	A real slight form of PTSD that I felt, I just did not expect to see what I did.
	And it was traumatizing to me to be there for one week.
	And living amongst the Palestinians and traveling alongside them.
	I couldn't imagine living in that situation for weeks on end, months on end, years on end, decades on end.
	It's bound to breed some serious, serious, serious animosity.
	And it has.
	Thank you for speaking so bravely and for advocating for peace.
	It makes me consider the complexity even of the free speech issues that we often discuss on our platform Rumble and the assumption that free speech is going to contribute to resolving many of the cultural conflicts that we experience and even political and even perhaps military conflicts.
	It makes me recognize there are Limitations to that kind of idealism.
	Nevertheless, many countries around the world, mine, the UK, Canada, Ireland, are introducing legislation and the anglophonic countries that haven't introduced sensorial legislation yet to control online spaces usually under the auspices of safety are discussing that type of control.
	With fear at the pitch that it currently is globally, with division, with hatred of institutions on the rise and new measures being introduced to control conversation, to shut down communication, what do you think is the type of vision that we're being guided towards?
	And why do you think there's such similar legislation that's being passed, or near simultaneously, in so many distinct countries?
	Why is this happening?
	What is happening with online streaming and the UK Online Safety Act?
	What do you think's behind it, Kim?
	Yeah, all of this censorship is really obviously trying to control the people.
	They're losing power, losing control.
	A lot of different groups are losing power and control, and so they're coming together collectively to try to battle that loss of power.
	You've got the legacy media, they're losing viewership.
	Their viewership is 65 years old and older.
	They're not able to gain younger viewership.
	Any younger viewership that maybe came around started to say, wait a minute, you guys, I don't trust you.
	You aren't telling us the full story.
	So legacy media is losing its viewership.
	It's a very powerful entity, billions and billions of dollars in legacy media.
	So they do not want to give up their power and they want to silence and censor
	and halt independent media as much as possible.
	And they're part of the impetus behind these bills to try to limit us and censor us
	and control us and regulate us.
	And then on top, so you've got that one group that has an agenda, the agenda to just hold on to all the money that they've been making.
	I mean, you look at like CNN, for example, and they had a massive failure with their attempt at going digital and going into this new media realm with CNN plus, right?
	I mean, it failed within 10 days.
	So They thought, okay, this is going to be the future.
	This is how people make money now.
	People don't tune in with legacy media anymore.
	So now we've got to pivot.
	They tried pivoting and it did not work.
	That is a giant slap in the face.
	So of course, these legacy media companies get together and they think, oh my gosh, existential crises.
	What are we going to do to save ourselves?
	And this is one of the things that they're attempting to do is just shut down the competition.
	But then there's another group of people that have another agenda, and that would be the political space.
	The political space, obviously, they're wanting to control because they want to keep themselves in power.
	They want to remain elected.
	They want their party in power.
	And so they want to censor alternative ideas or viewpoints or dissent in order to ensure that their narrative is the only narrative that people hear.
	And that people are properly propagandized the way that they want them propagandized.
	And so they've joined forces with the legacy dying media, the dinosaur, and they're trying to, you know, they're all just trying to hold on to power.
	And then of course, you've got the military industrial complex factions that also want to control the narratives because they want to keep people thirsty for war and continuing to sign off on massive amounts of weapon sales all around the world.
	The problem with it is that there's just too many players and they all have their own agenda.
	So we have to break them down one by one.
	What's Big Pharma's agenda?
	What's Legacy Media's agenda?
	What's Military Industrial Complex's agenda?
	What is the ruling party power?
	What's their agenda?
	And they're all together.
	And the one agenda they have together is that they can censor and silence any sort of uprising amongst the people.
	And I'm not even talking like a physical revolution uprising, but I mean just like an enlightenment.
	They're just trying to silence that to ensure that the people stay in the dark ages and just doing what they want us to do.
	And behaving the way they want us to behave.
	But it's a behemoth to battle because there's too many fronts.
	There's so many fronts.
	Yeah, you're right.
	When you just listed the number of interests that converge around that big pharma-military-industrial complex, old media, centralist and authoritarian political ideology, it makes you recognize that this is a significant challenge.
	That it's not nothing.
	That there is an agenda.
	Legacy media cannot report on independent media from a non-biased perspective.
	It's from a militant perspective that they report on it.
	And I sense this kind of repression and resistance of evolution.
	That's what it feels like to me, is that increasingly the opportunity for more freedom, more communication, more connection, more ability to organize, Things that have been very successfully deployed, for example, in trade and commerce, if you think of the emergence of the giant, unprecedentedly large corporations that have risen out of the online space, the Alphabet and Facebook, that are all essentially utilising people's ability to instantaneously communicate and potentially organise.
	As usual, the ideology that sort of is mapped onto it is one that's based in commodity, commerce and sales, and the kind of consensus that's achieved between corporate interests and state interests which is a form of fascism it's like when those interests align when as is the case with these new raft of online safety measures that the very powerful corporate interests and state interests come to an agreement we will allow you to continue as long as we are given access to your information and as long as we're able to limit and control the type of information that's communicated on your platforms
	That's an unprecedented and terrifying step and it's very interesting that the way that it's always augured and lubricated and presented is this is about safety and I suppose control and safety any parent or anyone has to care for a vulnerable person recognizes that their control and safety has a crossover but this is Clearly, control rather than safety.
	We have massive amplifier, hate speech is a problem, these dangers, these risks have to be countered.
	The invisible sleight of hand is now the ability to openly communicate is massively truncated.
	Yeah, the guise of safety.
	It's always for, because we're idiots, right?
	We can't make our, we can't decide as adults what's dangerous to us and what isn't.
	We need, of course, the government to come in and tell us how to keep us safe.
	I mean, it's just really ridiculous, but that is, they're always using it because they can't come out and say, we're doing this to control you.
	Could you imagine if they just were upfront about it?
	But instead they have to say, no, we're doing this to keep you safe.
	This is for your own safety.
	safety, because they can't just be honest about what they're really doing.
	And I suppose a component of that pose of being the kind of guardians of our safety is to continually present the world
	as a volatile, dangerous, divided place where you have
	opponents with whom you can never come to terms.
	And I feel that that is a sort of that happens domestically, happens internationally, happens geopolitically, the
	rhetoric around Russia, the historic and emotional conflict that we've
	been discussing.
	It's, in a way, it ultimately is advantageous to establishment
	power to have terrified, divided people.
	Isn't that interesting, though, that that is actually the most dangerous thing?
	The single most dangerous thing, when we look back in history, is the demonizing of a group of people to where people then want to get together and eradicate that group of people.
	That is the single most dangerous thing that has been in existence, the single most dangerous thought in existence since the beginning of humankind, and yet the very thing they claim they're protecting us from is the very thing they're creating.
	Yeah.
	These kind of paradoxes and inversions of meaning, Kim, I've noted again and again, whether it's safety and control in judicious justice, the number of things that have become flipped, that it's wrong to talk about peace, it's only right to talk about war.
	So many values have been up.
	Free speech is hate speech.
	All sorts of false equivalencies have been made to the point that we live in an emotionally disorienting and spiritually, I think, and psychologically disorienting environment.
	And perhaps it's disorienting because we do live in a truly global culture now.
	Instantaneous news cycles, continual communication.
	There is at odds with our evolution and perhaps At odds with our capacity.
	This is, I suppose, what undergirds my belief in individual freedom and collective freedom and democracy.
	Actually, actual democracy.
	Human beings can't live like that.
	You can't have centralized institutions, particularly undemocratic ones, that determine the outcomes of the lives of millions of people.
	Whether that's WHO treaties around snatching 5% of each country's domestic budget or New coordinated responses or rafts of censorship legislation is tyranny.
	That's what tyranny looks like now.
	It's not so visually militant, but it's sort of more coherent, more cogent, more powerful and persuasive.
	And it doesn't ever last.
	So it's going to be interesting to see at what point people have had enough and exactly what people do in response to having had enough.
	Now, it could last our entire lifetime.
	That is what's really frightening, is it could.
	Because it does often when you look through history, authoritarian regimes and this type of tyranny can last Hundreds of years with, you know, monarchs we've seen in the past and other types of regimes.
	But I mean, I hope it doesn't last our entire lifetime.
	I hope that we break out of this sooner than later.
	It's possible that it lasts a really long time.
	But the big question is, at what point will there be a breaking point where the people say, we will not live like this?
	And what will they do in response?
	You know then and that's the big question is is what type of response where they'll be most governments I don't think there's well There's been no government in the history of any government that's ever lasted ever in the history of the world They all thought they all eventually fail whether they fail on their own or they fail because the people force them to fail so They right now what they're doing is they're trying to give us this kind of illusion of freedom when they're actually
	controlling us quite a bit.
	And so the question is at what point will people realise that and then what will people do?
	Also the illusion of permanence when it feels like impermanence is of course just
	sort of an immutable law of the cosmos and also maybe immutable law of the cosmos and also that
	the rate of change seems to be speeding up. The things that there is a sort of giddying velocity
	Like, you know, maybe it was 9-11 when this began, maybe it was some point that I didn't register or notice, but just ongoing, spiralling, fractal crises, that there's just sort of a bilious fever dream of global events, like the spin of the world on its axis has hastened.
	I don't know, Kim.
	We're gonna have to do something.
	I hope you're working on your show!
	That's what I will say.
	I mean, well, all we can do, right?
	I mean, this is all we could do is continue talking, continue to be out there, continue to change minds.
	But then they try to silence us, right?
	They try to shut you down.
	They try everything they can.
	And that is also what's really frightening is the fact that when somebody gets too powerful, then they say, well, time to shut this one down.
	You know, we can't allow these people to continue following this voice here because They're just like, we're fine when we don't have that big of a following.
	We're fine.
	And then suddenly it's Oh, you're a conspiracy theory or whatever label they want to slap on you.
	So it's but I do think that with new media, I do think that You know, Rumble, what an awesome platform and leadership at Rumble to just say, you know what, this is what we're about.
	We're about free speech and we're going to continue on with that.
	I mean, so if we just have more people that stand up like that, if we have more entities, maybe we'll actually get somewhere with this.
	I don't know.
	It's frightening.
	Every time, you know, and I knock on wood, every time I think that Oh, it just can't get any worse.
	You know, it just can't.
	This is the turning point.
	This must be it, finally.
	Something happens.
	The pandemic happens or something.
	I mean, in my mind right now, I'm thinking, OK, if Trump just wins, I mean, a lot of me, look, I just want the guy to win.
	I just want him to do his four years.
	Because then they can never talk about him again.
	I'm just hoping, you know, just whether I like him or not, it doesn't matter.
	Just for this year, get him in office so that the people and then his four years are up.
	He can't go again.
	And then they have to stop.
	They have to stop with this.
	It's Trump.
	We have to stop him.
	We have to do everything that we can.
	And then maybe that would go away.
	But then I fear, well, then it'll be something else.
	It'll be someone else.
	And they'll make that person or that thing worse.
	Then what Donald Trump was in their minds just like they converted that energy from Trump to vaccines.
	And we saw that during the pandemic and now we're seeing that and then it shifted towards Ukraine war and now maybe the Israel war.
	I don't know.
	I just, I mean, again, knock on wood.
	I don't want something else to pop up and be worse, but I don't know.
	I just keep thinking, this is it.
	This is as bad as it gets.
	Then they have to wake up.
	They have to come to their senses at some point.
	People can't be this insane.
	Oh yes, they can.
	Yeah, well it seems that we can.
	Thank you for participating in The Ongoing Awakening, and I suppose what I feel is that we have to somehow pray to wherever this phenomena emerges, for all culture, all conflict, all cultural phenomena, for good or bad, other than ecology, seems to be passing through the consciousness and culture of human beings.
	And if we can have an experience of awakening at depth, en masse, then this is where the potential for change must come from.
	If indeed all reality ultimately has as its premium material consciousness itself.
	If the clay of our reality is consciousness, and there's no evidence really that it isn't, that consciousness is ultimately where all this stuff takes place.
	If we can alter that, if we can summons a higher self, what better goal can there be?
	What different goal can there be?
	And perhaps more importantly, what alternative do we have when we look at the Maddening fracas, the insurmountable conflicts that devour the planet.
	Kim, thank you for providing your bravery, your optimism and your eloquence all in the endeavor of advancing this debate.
	Thank you.
	Thank you for having me.
	The conversation with Kim Iverson is yet another demonstration of the significance of free speech, even when it seems that we are beset on all sides by insurmountable helplessness and hopelessness with very little to reach towards in optimism.
	Even in prayer, perhaps we feel sceptical and cynical.
	I would ask you to remain hopeful and optimistic within yourself, to try in your own life to be loving, to look for opportunities to regard any potential situation, whether it's global or personal, from the perspective of those with whom you most vehemently disagree.
	What else do we have other than love, other than a willingness for change?
	We're going to be here again tomorrow.
	It's so important that if you... Yeah, we are going to be here again tomorrow, aren't we?
	We're going to be here.
	It's so important for you to support us if you can.
	Press the red button and support our independent channel, this independent media.
	I'm so close every single day to basically going... We're getting some land!
	We're going to start a community!
	But, you know, there are a few things to surmount before we get to that point.
	But do support us.
	Click the red button to join the Locals Community.
	Press Awaken and become awakened to get extended interviews, meditations, readings.
	I do live conversations every day.
	Hey, tomorrow David Zweig's on the show.
	We're going to be talking about pandemic madness.
	He's a brilliant contributor.
	You'll really enjoy him.
	He's one of the Twitter Files journalists and he's brilliant at observing patterns in media.
	Consistencies and inconsistencies in reporting.
	It's going to be an education for all of us.
	I know that.
	I want to thank those of you that have become awakened wonders, that have pressed that red button, that have participated in our live conversation and live connections.
	You know what we're doing?
	We're working on the spiritual by looking at foundational texts like the Bible.
	We're having conversations and connections with one another.
	We're talking about the five ideas that could save the world, whether that's cryptocurrencies, whether that's new ways of organizing communities, new ways of challenging democracy.
	We are looking at how do we break out of this system, baby, because let's face it, we got a wish I knew you're on board.
	Ricky Bobby Texas, thank God you are part of the revolution.
	And Russ Thanks for joining us.
	You can do the same by pressing that red button.
	You must surrender in order to support free speech.
	Surrender to the highest powers available.
	Join us tomorrow then with David Swig.
	You're gonna love that conversation.
	Not for more of the same, but for more of the different.
	Until then, if you can, stay free.
	Many switchings, switch on, switch off. Many switchings, switch on, switch off. Many switchings, switch on, switch
	off.
	Switch on.
	Switch on.
	Man, he's switching.
	Switch on.

▲