Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

Jan. 19, 2024 - Stay Free - Russel Brand

01:18:05

They’re HIDING THIS About Epstein! | Whitney Webb EXPLOSIVE Interview - Stay Free #288

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	I'm going to go ahead and get the rest of the food.
	Oh In this video, you're going to see the future.
	Alright you Awakening Wonders, thanks for joining me today for Stay Free with Russell Brand and what a day it is!
	If you're watching us on YouTube right now, we appreciate you and we love you, you Awakened Wonder, but there's no way we can use this platform to bring you a conversation from Whitney Webb, that savantish portal to truth, that early adapter of the Epstein Theory.
	Why, back when Bill Gates was still thinking he was little more than a travel agent with Panache, Whitney Webb was going, I want to watch this Epstein dude!
	We are talking to Whitney Webb later on the show.
	It's like going to the university where conspiracy theories become conspiracy facts.
	She takes some of the most extreme information.
	The kind of information that shows you that the outliers, the people that have been reported on for years as being nutjobs, crackpots and lunatics, are actually a lot closer to giving us the truth than the likes of the legacy media, the trusted news initiative groups, those supporters of the pharmaceutical industry, those monsters and propagandists are demonstrably lying and Whitney Webb has bought receipts.
	It's like getting a fantastic education and on that note, The BBC have been reporting on Disease X and we've got a wonderful dive into that.
	Also we'll be talking about Davos because it's globalist Christmas up there in the Alps.
	Klaus Schwab is generating more saliva than usual.
	His cheeks are bloated.
	I think the only people that enjoy Davos more than Klaus Schwab are potentially Rebel News, they love it!
	And we've got a fantastic bit of content of Tony Blair, one of the globalist kings, being pursued through the streets, actually by a legacy media reporter, because there's a sort of scandal in this country to do with their post office, which is one of those kind of scandals that people can sort of handle.
	20 years ago rather than the stuff that's going on right now that's frankly much, much worse that we're reporting on today.
	So if you're watching this on YouTube, download the Rumble app if your phone will allow you to do such a thing.
	And if you're over on Rumble, consider becoming AwakendWonder, a member of our community.
	We've just finished doing a meditation and we make one exclusive video a week.
	This week's video on the sudden and extraordinary 8% increase in child deaths In the UK certainly and potentially across the world.
	We've got a video on that that's just available for our locals members and you can get it on a new monthly plan that's about six bucks a month.
	We'll post a link in the description for you guys both on YouTube and on Rumble now so you can join us if you want to.
	But hey, the world is in safe hands.
	Another war in a country you've only just heard of.
	Although I do believe that Matthew Perry went there once in his role as Chandler. I'm going to Yemen!
	It's Yemen! Biden carefully and brilliantly explains how this war against Yemen will be
	won.
	Are the airstrikes in Yemen working?
	Oh when you say working are they stopping the Houthis?
	No.
	Are they going to continue?
	Yes.
	They're not stopping the Houthis, but we're going to carry on doing it anyway.
	Astonishing stuff.
	Do you remember, yeah, here's a poll we done earlier.
	What's the point of the Yemen airstrikes?
	He says they're going to continue despite them not working.
	Is the true aim to stop wars, 8% of you think it's that, or continue forever wars?
	92% of you said that.
	And to give you further evidence that we are on the precipice of the forever war, a kind of literal Orwellian nightmare where we're told that The continuation of war is the aim.
	Here's NATO's Jens Stoltenberg.
	Remember, he's the dude that admitted we've been provoking Putin.
	He told us all we had to do is not yet let Zelensky in Ukraine join NATO and we'd back off.
	But we said no, we're gonna bug that dude till he totally freaks out.
	I'm paraphrasing!
	Here's Nato Jens Stoltenberg speaking for himself, and this won't give you much hope that there will not be endless war.
	Yeah, war is a racket, as second ch says in the Rumble chat.
	Pedal2Metal, how's it going?
	A-Einstein Universe, I'm sending you love.
	In the Awakened Wonder chat, on locals, I'm talking to Motya28 and Kazo and KC40H.
	Let's look at the head of Nato, who for some reason seems to think his opinion matters more than yours.
	Here he is offering it.
	...is that if we want that to happen, a peaceful, just end to this war, the way to get there are more or is more weapons to Ukraine.
	So the more credible we are in our military support, the more likely it is that the diplomats will succeed.
	So you see, because you probably aren't clever enough, you don't understand how giving more and more weapons to Ukraine to perpetuate a war with a country with a nuclear armory, in this instance Russia, That leads to peace.
	Do you see?
	Do you not get it?
	You're stupid!
	Did you not go to university?
	Are you not part of a professional media class?
	Perhaps you're a working person.
	Perhaps you just went to a normal school.
	Maybe you don't trust the legacy media.
	Let me explain again.
	What are you?
	A trucker?
	And therefore probably a racist?
	What are you, a key worker for a hospital?
	Hero one minute, hated the next minute, when you're not fodder for the system no more?
	Let me explain again.
	Continuing war leads to peace.
	Do you see?
	Continuing war leads- war is peace.
	Do you see?
	Do you see now?
	No, you don't see, do you?
	Because you're an awakening wonder, and if you want to support our work, consider joining us on locals, because like you, we've had enough.
	Like you, we're ready for a new system.
	Like you, we're just about at the point where we're ready to die for this stuff.
	I'm not!
	Oh yeah, well yeah, there is one who's not ready to die for the cause, but other than that we're solid.
	If you can name that film, we will send you a mug, if you can guess what that reference was.
	First person to get that reference, we'll send you a delightful Stay Free Crow mug.
	And if that wasn't enough good news for one day, remember if you're watching this on YouTube, we've got Whitney Webb coming up, who will take you through Conspiracy Theory University, help you to understand the true nature of Epstein's crimes it's kind of sort of worse than you think it is in some ways because it's so sort of financial and deep and there's no way that if you you know you'd sort of have to know man if you were involved with that stuff oh buddhist christianity life of brian yeah send us your details we'll send you a mug if you stay free team if you can catch that holy grail plinky plonk no no mug for you the good news is
	That, thankfully, you know how it's highly likely that the Wuhan virus, and I'm being careful what I say here on YouTube because the WHO, remember, provide the community guidelines over on YouTube, and of course YouTube respond when the government say demonetized, YouTube say how high or how low I suppose, because demonetized is a low thing I suppose.
	Anyway, the good news is this, China have been experimenting with a mutant coronavirus strain that has, don't worry, it has got a 100% fatality rate in mouses.
	Chinese scientists are experimenting with a mutant... When I hear Chinese scientists, I don't think... Hooray!
	That'd be a good name for a band, actually.
	Chinese scientists.
	We're the Chinese scientists.
	Don't be racist against it.
	Russell was not the messiah.
	He's a very naughty boy.
	Hey, why can't I be both?
	Um, this lady, I think, before you all get into it, I think she's got maybe alopecia or something, so be compassionate and kind.
	Also, why not look unusual and beautiful and striking in a variety of ways?
	What's important is this is going to be a report about, like, I mean, when you listen to the symptoms these mouses have got, Tell me, which precedent does it remind you of?
	COVID-19 strain that reportedly has a 100% kill streak in mice.
	The new strain is called GXP2V and it attacks the brains of mice engineered to reflect similar genetic makeup to humans.
	With most mice living just eight days after being infected with this virus, researchers report the mice lost weight, became sluggish, adopted a hunched Sluggish, hunched, posture with their eyes turning completely white the day before they died.
	And this experiment, of course, brings back haunting memories from the 2020 pandemic.
	Haunting memories.
	It's Biden.
	Yeah.
	Yeah, that's not good news.
	That's not...
	Chinese?
	That's enough of that. We can't keep going for that. We've got Whitney Webb coming up on the show.
	She's gonna be talking about Epstein. She's gonna be talking about CBDC. She's gonna be talking about
	globalism. It's an extraordinary conversation. Erica sees all. Mouses? Does he mean mice? No,
	you know like one mouse and then mouses, numerous mouses.
	Hey!
	If you've been following globalism and the ascent of globalist elites for some time now, for example, from the Iraq war period where things started to go dreadfully wrong for everybody, particularly when it came to invading Middle Eastern companies for nefarious reasons and normally motivated by deception, Tony Blair will be a name you're familiar with.
	Similarly, he was elected on a tidal wave of optimism.
	Hey, he can play guitar!
	I've seen him heading a football!
	Optimism, everyone!
	We found out eventually what Tony Blair was was a kind of globalist, a new kind of politician whose alliances and affiliations were to an establishment that's difficult to discern if you follow politics at the level of nations and oh the water board and who's paying for electricity but when you start to Look at geopolitics from an entirely different lens.
	You see that Tony Blair seems to have a hell of a lot of influence.
	He's being pursued through Davos by a news reporter and it's really amazing, particularly for British viewers, because eventually he runs into Gordon Brown who, like in sort of UK politics, it was kind of funny because the two of them had a pact who was going to be the leader of the Labour Party when they turned the Labour Party from a kind of party that was interested In supporting people to a corporatist party.
	They had a kind of deal together.
	Which one was going to go first?
	And Tony Blair turned this dude over by... He just blagged him.
	You know Tony Blair.
	He's the person that makes pledges and then don't deliver.
	Here he is being pursued.
	Rebel News style through the streets of Davos.
	Although I think it is by a legacy media journalist.
	They're not all bad.
	Remember that.
	They're all human beings and therefore children of the Lord.
	And just check out Tony Blair.
	He's got some serious muscle on his team.
	Your government was considering ditching the Horizon IT project back in 1998.
	Do you regret not doing so?
	What that report is talking about is a scandal where a bit of software went wrong and it meant that a bunch of people that worked at the mail service in the UK, the post office, were thought to have acted corruptly, incorrectly.
	Many of them were, like, sort of sued.
	I think some people went to prison.
	Some people might have even taken their own lives.
	And the whole thing was a total software error that it seems like maybe they hushed up.
	Then the television made a drama about it and everyone started to pretend to care.
	I care about this!
	Now it's been on the television.
	I saw an actor playing one of those postmen.
	Now I care about it.
	But of course the scandal happened ages ago.
	I think the head of the Post Office got an MBE, which is something you get off the King or the Queen or whichever one's nominally in charge now.
	So the whole thing is a sort of a big storm of publicity and nonsense and balderdash but how can anyone trust Tony Blair ever again after he said there are weapons of mass destruction in Iraq after we found out they were sexying up a dossier.
	There used to be anti-establishment attacks on figures like this and now everyone's just falling into lineman and heroes of companies like Pfizer.
	The world's gone weird.
	Mr Blair?
	You had the opportunity to kill the Fujitsu project.
	You chose not to.
	Why not?
	Do you regret that?
	The main thing I like about Davos is this sort of stuff.
	People in positions of power being pursued through snowy streets, clip-clopping around in what I imagine are relatively slippery brogues, really anxious that they're going to slip over either verbally or literally.
	And you've got to give a shout out to Rebel News for pioneering this sort of technique of the long doorstep, just like Ezra Levant, just for ages, standing next to the head of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation going, hey, were you friends with Bill?
	What's going on?
	What do you think?
	What's it?
	Hey, Why did Melinda leave the foundation?
	Did you ever go to Epstein's Island and discuss or something?
	Oh, oh no!
	Oh no!
	No, it's Tony Blair though, a person that actually ran, you know, a country.
	Tony Blair is still a person who has considerable political influence.
	I remember once when I... I said this once publicly.
	I went, there's no point voting for either party because they're both fundamentally the same.
	And Tony Blair went, I literally don't know what he means.
	I don't know what Russell Brand means.
	I don't know what he means.
	He kept saying it again and again.
	It was really weird.
	Decision, Mr Blair.
	Do you feel in any way responsible for what has happened since?
	You know why Tony Blair's at Davos?
	He's talking about digital ID.
	How you and me need digital ID.
	You know, the kind of things that were talked about when they were trying to push the vaccine passport idea before it stopped making sense because there was no evidence, because there was no trialing that the vaccines prevented transmission.
	Then it sort of didn't make sense to track who had vaccines and who didn't and it sort of fell apart for a moment but they'll be back.
	In your country, the United States of America, they had a program and project to create, and this was an Obama, Barack Obama idea, a kind of driver's license for the internet.
	Whitney Webb, our guest, we'll be talking about that later.
	Get ready to get educated on globalism from an academic perspective by our journalist who's legit and has bought receipts.
	After you've watched Whitney Webb, you are going to feel more intelligent, particularly if, like me, you take NMNs from Excuse me.
	Black Forest. Are we still given a 25% discount on these things? How many have I had today? Am I
	taking too many of these? You know I've got addiction issues, I have to be careful. But
	I've got to have my M&Ms baby! They're like a head trip to listen to because they're only giving you
	things you joke about with your friends inside your living room. Not M&Ms. I don't want to get
	into Vivek territory here. Excuse me. Let's look at Tony Blair around the streets of Davos.
	Peter Mendelsohn, Mr Blair, was worried about upsetting Fujitsu.
	Was that a concern that you had?
	Mr Blair?
	Why won't you speak to us?
	This is an important issue, isn't it?
	Mr. Brett?
	Oh my god!
	I mean that's so sort of awkward and weird.
	I always got a sense that Gordon Brown had a bit more integrity.
	Do you know what that's based on?
	He was sort of boring.
	And like Tony Blair was one of them kind of like, you know how you had Bill Clinton?
	With a saxophone, Tony Blair, he was always, you know, jerking around on the guitar and stuff, whereas Gordon Brown was sort of like, just groaning on about numbers and stuff, and sometimes I think those are the kind of politicians you want.
	They're all these charismatic lunatics we've yielded to, appear to have odd ends.
	Gordon Brown spoke to us about this yesterday, Mr Blair, will you?
	Mr Blair, hello?
	Mr Blair, hello?
	We have to talk to more rich people.
	Ha ha ha!
	Did you see that?
	If you're a lip reader, our producer Gareth just said that Blair went, the media!
	And Brown went, oh God!
	Oh, let's clip that up.
	Nice.
	Nice.
	The real C Mike 21.
	Probably grabbed his dick and twisted it.
	Amazingly childish thing to say, you lunatics.
	Richie Doop, Gordon Brown sold all gold reserves off, lol.
	Yeah.
	Yeah, yeah.
	Get your hand off of my ear.
	Funny.
	There's some good stuff going on in the Rumble chat.
	If you're watching us on YouTube, we'll be here for a couple more minutes before we migrate to that stream of freedom that is Rumble.
	And you could consider becoming an Awakened Wonder and supporting our work there.
	You get an Extra video every week, and by God, it's worth it.
	We've just been meditating together.
	We're doing everything we can to awaken together and change the world.
	Remember, unified but decentralized.
	True, true, true.
	Democracy, baby.
	Oh, someone who's been doing very well at Davos.
	Who had a good Davos this year?
	It's Javier Millet of Argentina who'd done a Ricky Gervais at Davos.
	Elon's certainly well into it.
	There you go.
	Although, should we be showing that?
	Does that seem right?
	Is that right?
	You know, we're a free speech platform, I suppose.
	So, yeah, listen to this.
	Here's the head of... Here's the president of the World Economic Forum openly discussing the new world order.
	Don't you think they should stop saying stuff like new world order isn't it aren't these sort of tainted brands now they're going to literally do the eat the bugs thing again we are on the way to a new order so we are between orders
	Do you agree with that or are there ways of what are we able to keep on the positive side from the old order to bring into a new world order?
	Stop saying new world order!
	People don't like it!
	That brand has been very poorly tainted and for those of you, because I know loads of you like to look for signs and stuff, You'll be looking at the World Economic Foreign Sign.
	You'll see it's bifurcated by a semicircle, meaning that there's a literal 666.
	Given that they're like sort of a globalist organization, don't they need to check their branding and their messaging?
	I mean, they're meant to be sort of a communication propagandist machine where the most powerful interests in the world come together to push a globalist agenda.
	That's literally what they're doing.
	And they keep saying things like New World Order, and their logo demonstrates actual Satan.
	How can we avoid that that new world order becomes like jungle growing back and we rather have order based on international... The guy he's talking to is your President Joe Biden's national security advisor, so no worries there then.
	The President of the United States national security advisor is talking to someone who's openly saying we need a new world order, which takes the best things!
	Out of the old world order, like the centralised authoritarianism, the impecunious, impoverishing modalities, the militarism, the forever wars.
	But we're going to need to introduce more tech and motion control.
	How's it a satanic symbol says, actually Utah.
	Oh, you're going to love this.
	Once you see it, you can't unsee it.
	Look at World Economic Forum.
	Look at it.
	Then look at the O's in the words WORLD, ECONOMIC and FORUM.
	Each of them's got an O in it.
	They line up.
	Then see how that semicircle goes for them and it makes 666 through the O's.
	It's fun, isn't it?
	You can't unsee it once you see it.
	Someone in the chat pointed it out to us and I love that kind of stuff.
	Although, you know, when you start going, it's got 33 on it!
	I do think this 33 vertebrae in the spine.
	33 the age of our Lord Jesus Christ when he died.
	That's why I'm into it.
	Not in the Illuminati or the Masons, mind you.
	I suppose probably people that are in it keep it quiet.
	I guess that's how it works.
	But what you probably would notice is they wouldn't say things like this.
	Never trust globalism.
	Never trust the establishment.
	Never trust the legacy media.
	Never trust anybody.
	Demand on individual sovereignty and community democracy.
	Do not trust the establishment.
	Is that enough?
	I don't know.
	Law and the principles that have brought us prosperity and freedom for decades.
	We are, you know, the post-Cold War era.
	Kyle Reiner.
	I'm a Mason.
	Yeah, maybe it's alright.
	I don't know.
	Go on in there.
	Has come to a close.
	We're at the start of something new.
	We have the capacity to shape what that looks like and at the heart of it will be many of the core principles and core institutions of the existing order.
	Adapted for the challenges that we face today, and that's a lot of what I tried to lay out in my remarks.
	Some of that goes to geopolitics and how we build or update the international economic order in ways that address the needs of working people, address the climate crisis.
	Ah, the old climate crisis!
	Because the new world order has to do that peculiar balancing act of appearing to be reverential to ethnic cultures and minority cultures, but without ever engaging in cultural re-appropriation.
	They have to do a difficult job because fundamentally what's behind it is generate profit, Ensure that ordinary people are punished and controlled when it comes to subjects like climate change.
	Ensure that there's no ability to challenge establishment and dominator culture narratives.
	Shut down independent media.
	All of that kind of stuff.
	And then they've sort of got to soft sell it as being like, we care about the people.
	And the way they do that is by getting sort of like native folk and indigenous people to perform their ceremonies.
	And that's the sort of thing that I'm sort of down with as a matter of fact.
	I'm really into Shamanism, I'm into like, you know, though I've never take drugs, I'm in recovery, but like ayahuasca ceremonies sound pretty interesting and exciting.
	I have to do it the hard way myself as a meditator and a lover of the Lord and the light and all that kind of stuff.
	I can't get into, you know, drugs, frankly, but, and I'm not suggesting that this is about drugs, but this is an interesting bit of appropriation of indigenous culture and proper just like they don't care about it what i think is they don't really care about this stuff and we're not in like central or latin america they're in switzerland i mean what is this thing that they're doing right here
	You better wash your hands after that.
	Covid could be everywhere.
	You better wash your hands after that.
	Covid could be everywhere.
	Or disease X.
	No more water, no more air.
	Why should I?
	Oof, oof.
	Oof.
	Thank you for that.
	That was a lovely ceremony.
	Now we're going to be taking your rainforest for Black Rock.
	One of the stories that Whitney Webb will be describing to you is how Black Rock are creating a new category called Natural Assets, where literally everything on the planet, like a Bill Hicks joke, can be monetized.
	Lakes, forests, fish, trees.
	Vandana Shiva tells you about stuff like that when she's on the show.
	is a literal Larry Fink, Black Rock geek to own everything.
	Trees, well that tree, that should be monetizable.
	That's creating oxygen.
	We should be charging for that.
	So like, they have someone come on and perform a shamanic ceremony,
	which is sort of, you know, well why not?
	Cool, let's revere the kind of cultures that are still thriving and are connected to nature
	and sacredness and stuff.
	Glorious, glorious.
	But when they are actually a soft sell power grab for globalists that literally have a plan,
	an explicit plan, Whitney Webb's talking about it in our interview, to monetize, in the words of Bill Hicks,
	every god damn thing on this planet seems just a touch hypocritical.
	Not to mention the fact that last year they're all saying everyone's got to put a mask on and breathe inside of it
	and now they've got a ceremony where you literally blow down people's snout holes.
	You need a jab.
	You need a jab!
	You know, you need a jab!
	That's amazing, that's amazing.
	Apparently the thing they're most scared of at Davos, the two individuals they fear most are Elon Musk and Donald Trump.
	Figures that are outspoken, whether you are into those figures or not, that's up to you.
	I'm into myself and establishment figures that believe in decentralization, respecting the sovereignty of the individual and respecting the rights of all communities for self-determination through democratic and representative Do we have any answer on what's on Donald Trump's... Donald Trump has... his hands are bleeding.
	They don't like Donald Trump there.
	And in fact the propaganda of the legacy media against Trump is reaching new proportions.
	Now they're sort of worried that he's got red on his hands and trying to use that in
	some weird way.
	Check this.
	Do we have any answer on what's on Donald Trump's, like Donald Trump has, his hands
	are bleeding.
	Looks like he's...
	They pretend to be the rational grown-ups.
	You know, that's when you see, like, Donald Trump is a hysterical lunatic.
	He's not an adult.
	He lies.
	Plus, his hands are red.
	He's got red stuff on his hands.
	I mean, isn't it a bit sort of puerile and ridiculous?
	And they're pretending to be the adults.
	They're pretending to be the adults.
	Is that Magic Marker?
	Is it Magic Marker?
	Is it Magic Marker?
	What is that exactly?
	It looks like he has a sore on his index finger there.
	I don't know.
	Maybe it's magic marker?
	They've got nothing to offer.
	They've got literally nothing to offer.
	They've got no ideas.
	They've got no values.
	Oh man, it's over.
	Hey, listen, put the countdown on.
	We're going to leave YouTube right now because we have got some fantastic content for you.
	Whitney Webb, who is way ahead of the curve on the Epstein stories with us, but that's just one of her greatest hits.
	Whitney Webb is an educator.
	She is what journalism should be.
	The world should be built around information conveyed by brilliant journalists like Whitney Webb.
	She's coming up on the show in a minute.
	Plus, our analysis on some legacy media, state-funded propaganda on Disease X gon' give it to ya!
	Disease X gon' give it to ya!
	Join us over on Rumble.
	There's a link in your description.
	Come now!
	Okay guys, if you're watching this on Rumble, if you're enjoying the chat, like Trinity0316 or ABBS or Oli Loving.
	Yeah, give us a theory.
	What are you lot saying?
	Some people are saying Cheetos, breaking news, mark on finger.
	Who cares?
	Says somebody else.
	Blue Man Group.
	Aha, they finally caught him, like red-handed.
	Nice, nice.
	Very good.
	We've got Whitney Webb coming up in a second.
	You guys get involved in that chat.
	Remember to put in, yeah, Webb, Webb, Webb, Webb, Webb, Webb, Webb.
	Remember to put some, uh, grabbing too much.
	Yeah, that's not bad, Bobby Mirror.
	That's a good little joke.
	A few of you are doing that.
	That's not bad.
	That's not bad.
	Hey, you might want to consider becoming an Awakened Wonder.
	Join our community where we create more content every single week exclusively for you, as well as doing meditations, as well as doing, like, so I spontaneously come on and stream in the middle of the day.
	It's a good little operation, plus you'll be supporting our work As we galvanise, organise and get ready to oppose because 2024 is going to be a big year.
	Are we going to be coming to your country to report on the election?
	Are you going to be coming to our country to report on what we call an election?
	Or are we looking for ways to get beyond these ludicrous elections and towards something resembling democracy right now?
	Something Represent it, something more akin to representation.
	Hey listen, so we're going to, before Whitney Webb, which is going to be pretty exciting, we've got a wonderful story for you where we just break down a piece of state media publicly funded propaganda on the subject of disease X. Now you'll be familiar that at the WEF they're talking about Disease X. The WHO are talking about Disease X. Of course they are, because they've just proposed a treaty that has to be signed up to by May, which will give the WHO the ability to take 5% of your nation's health budget and impose legislation including lockdowns and mandated vaccines.
	Read it for yourself!
	Read it for yourself.
	And they need a disease to back that up.
	One might contest.
	So disease X is gone.
	Give it to you.
	Here's the BBC propaganda unit reporting on that very thing.
	And straight after that, it's Whitney Webb with a class in how to handle elite establishment globalism.
	She is a revealing and brilliant journalist.
	You're going to love this conversation.
	If you're not familiar with her, it's very, very exciting.
	But before that, Disease X, it's gone give it to you.
	Here's the news.
	No, here's the F in news.
	Thank you for choosing Fox News.
	Good news.
	No, here's the F in news.
	Disease X may be on its way, but we've got great news.
	Porton Down, a secret facility that works on bioweapons, has got a solution on its way.
	Hopefully they don't leave any windows open, especially not those biochemical weapons in there.
	What's the future gonna look like when a state broadcaster just casually tells you that at Porton Down they're working on new vaccines for disease X?
	They also make chemical weapons there.
	Have we learned nothing about mRNA technology?
	The risks of clinical trials in these areas?
	The problems of dual research?
	And indeed, is it even appropriate that chemical warfare and vaccines are somehow alloyed?
	Is there a reason for this?
	What's going on?
	Let me know in the chat and the comments.
	Let's have a look at how the legacy media propaganda machine is supporting on this subject and telling you there's nothing to worry about and everything to be grateful for.
	Luckily, you're funding it!
	The British government has unveiled a new vaccine research facility where scientists are working to prevent future pandemics.
	That is potentially exactly how the last pandemic started.
	Scientists are working on a solution to future pandemics.
	That's what they were doing at the Wuhan Institute of Virology.
	There hasn't been a proper debate about whether or not that's what we want.
	Do you want it?
	Do you want gain-of-function research?
	Do you want humanised mice tested on?
	Do you want new potential lab leaks?
	Shouldn't we wait to the end of the COVID inquiry to see how this problem began, whether the response was appropriate, how effective the medicines were?
	Are you not concerned that the COVID inquiry has been indefinitely delayed, even though it's cost £145 million already?
	Are you not concerned that these inquiries are not being correctly undertaken and this sort of research is still happening?
	Let me know in the chat.
	It's located at Porton Down, a high-security research facility best known for its work on chemical warfare.
	We're best known for our work on chemical warfare, but don't you dare try and tie us down.
	We're also making crazy new vaccines for diseases that haven't happened yet.
	Experts are preparing for what is known as Disease X, or the next pandemic virus.
	Our health correspondent, Domina Cuse, was given rare access to the facility.
	I hope nobody coughed on him.
	Probably he was keeping his social distance.
	Although actually that was arbitrary as well, wasn't it?
	The delicate task of protecting the nation's health.
	This is one of the laboratories at Porton Down where scientists are analysing current threats, new variants of Covid for example, and trying to identify new ones.
	We've been built for a purpose.
	We don't just fling these things up.
	Have you ever looked into the measures of safety that are deployed?
	That there's BSL 2 and BSL 3 and BSL 4.
	And sometimes in BSL 3, that's the penultimate level of safety, there are frequent lab leaks.
	Do you not think that given the potential origin of the last pandemic, it's possible that this type of research should be regulated a lot more stringently, that it should be extracted entirely from the possibility of profit, particularly if it's at any point publicly funded?
	Do you think it's a possible problem that it's somehow become allied and connected to chemical warfare?
	All of these things present you with a bunch of questions and do you think that you should be involved in that conversation or are you just too stupid and potentially misinformation might baffle you?
	Where is misinformation coming from?
	Is it from independent media or state-funded media?
	More than 200 scientists working for the UK Health Security Agency are helping to develop and test vaccines against a range of diseases.
	It's vital work to keep us all safe.
	Yes, that's right.
	Now, isn't it extraordinary that underneath us now is a warning?
	COVID-19.
	And potentially, when you watch this video, a pop-up.
	Be careful, there's misinformation in this video.
	Whereas on the BBC that you pay for, a journalist can just soberly say, they're doing this to keep us safe.
	Don't you think it should be mandatory at that point to say, although the COVID-19 pandemic could have begun in a laboratory, in fact that seems the most likely point of origin for this virus, how can they possibly claim to be the protectors of pure information when conveying propaganda continually?
	And of course, I know how we're reported on and how we're talked about.
	We're not morons.
	I don't think that science is, like, ridiculous or absurd or oughtn't be undertaken.
	I'm saying that science, when connected to a profit motive, when regulations continually support the interests of the powerful, we, the public, ought be continually inquiring.
	I think that these people are probably fantastic and brilliant and capable of doing wonderful work, but humanised mice being infected with MERS, which is currently happening, I believe, in China, is the The kind of research that oughtn't be undertaken.
	You want absolute transparency, absolute clarity of communication, and if you're funding it, you want to know about it.
	And if it's connected to weaponry, I think it's already becoming quite suspicious.
	That's just what I think.
	Let me know what you think.
	We've got in many respects the toughest job in the world, which is to protect health against infectious diseases and environmental hazards.
	And it is tough because we know that the risks of new and emerging infections, including those of pandemic potential, is increasing.
	How do you know that?
	For decades, scientists at Porton Down have been involved in medical research, as well as the work on chemical and biological warfare, for which the centre is perhaps better known.
	That's not so philanthropic!
	Look at this room!
	These female scientists doing great work to protect us all together.
	They're doing vital work to protect us.
	They do this other thing where, you know, the most devastating and awful thing is imaginable.
	Children being napalmed and bombed and diseased and consequences for generations.
	They do that as well.
	So they're not just heroes then, are they?
	Admittedly, they're involved in the development of tools that could be utilised, or in the wrong hands, or if terrorists were to get hold of those weapons.
	What about governments having those weapons?
	What about wars being waged across the world in your name using those weapons?
	You happy about the Ukraine-Russia war?
	You happy about what's going on in Gaza?
	You happy about what's going on in Yemen?
	You're funding it!
	During the pandemic, laboratories like this one played an absolutely vital role in assessing how effective the vaccines were in combating the coronavirus.
	Okay, well luckily the COVID inquiry has been curtailed because it seems that there's still some room for debate about how effective those those medications were, what the adverse events were, the
	cause of myocarditis, the sudden increase in cancers previously thought to be quite novel.
	So whatever research they were doing into the efficacy and safety of vaccines, we might want to
	go back and do a few more trials.
	But as well as monitoring how effective existing vaccines are against new COVID variants,
	the new Vaccine Development and Evaluation Centre is looking at emerging threats for
	which no vaccine yet exists. Any minute now though.
	Just give Albert Baller a little bit of advance notice.
	I'm from the UK.
	You may not know how the BBC is regarded.
	They were a treasured institution, the arbiter of truth, a connection to ordinary people, one of the great gifts of the immediate post-war era that celebrated and demonstrated the togetherness of a nation.
	I have to say now that the BBC has become a conveyor and purveyor of propaganda.
	It's heartbreaking to say that.
	One of those is Crimean Congo Hemorrhagic Fever.
	We can't continue to bring you this content without your support and love, and without the love and support of our fantastic partners, particularly at a time when the New World Order, and they're getting stronger by the day, are poisoning your food, Your water, and now we've found out, even your skincare.
	Did you know, according to the FDA, companies in the US are allowed to market skincare products as non-toxic, while they still contain up to 49% toxic ingredients.
	These ingredients are illegal in Europe and other countries.
	These toxic ingredients and plastics could penetrate your skin and immediately enter your bloodstream, disrupt your hormones, become embedded in your organs, and may eventually give you, I'm sorry to tell you this, I'm not a doctor, terminal illness.
	What is the solution?
	Well, Sharlene Bollinger, former model, current wife and mother, founder of The Truth About Cancer and Vaccines, has thankfully created a solution.
	Her work has been so effective that the Biden White House has put them on the disinformation dozen just for telling the truth.
	I'm telling you all of this because Sharlene has developed the most luxurious, toxic-free, anti-aging skincare line on the planet.
	Charlize.
	Charlize is second to none, so you will look great and feel great.
	Their packaging is in, well, look at this.
	This is high vibrational Italian glass, never plastic, to preserve the quality and efficacy of these ingredients.
	Stop supporting companies that are slowly killing you with poison.
	Go to charlize.beauty today and use the promo code brand to purchase this toxic free luxury skincare line that have been supporting us beautifully.
	That's charlize.beauty or click the link in the description below and use the promo code brand for 25% off your purchase today.
	Get it for yourself.
	All right, come on.
	Let's get back to bringing down the globalist elites.
	Changes to climate and the way we live.
	They can't choose which bit of propaganda to convey.
	Climate change is causing this.
	It's more likely to be climate change than a lab leak that causes us to lock you in your homes next time, but we'll never know because the COVID inquiry is not happening till summer of 2026.
	God knows how hot it'll be by then because of you and your recycling!
	I mean, viruses like this one could find a way to the UK.
	Why are you not saying that there might have been a lab leak at the Wuhan Institute of Virology?
	Why are you not saying that indeed this type of research itself could be the problem?
	Do you understand the extent of the research that's being done?
	Do you understand how possible, likely, plausible and common lab leaks are?
	Any idea how much it appears that establishment interests benefit from pandemics?
	I am not suggesting for a second that the entire thing was a dastardly plan.
	I will however point out that the institutions that benefited most from the pandemic are the state, globalist interests, big pharma, ability to regulate, ability to profit, ability to surveil, ability to censor, all increasing during that period.
	This version of reality, we're just beavering away here with these little mites that are being caused because you have not done the recycling, It's your fault and we're stepping in to help you.
	The entire characterisation of the relationship is bogus.
	The relationship between the state.
	And what that threat is.
	We talked to Bill Gates.
	So that is the challenge which I think you heard our Chief Scientific Officer, Professor Isabel Oliver, describe.
	But there are a number of steps that we can take.
	Look at the propaganda behind them.
	We are impactful.
	We are insightful.
	We are telling you the truth.
	We can be better prepared in terms of surveillance.
	And inclusive.
	Oh my god!
	This is about a potential pandemic.
	You know we're on the very precipice of signing a treaty with the WHO that will mean that they will demand 5% of the health budget of every member country and will be able to impose legislation on every member nation without any kind of consultation, referenda or opining from you as an individual.
	Your freedom is being limited by this kind of propagandist measure, this kind of
	perspective. And the people have got warnings under them are us. Look at the warning right
	now. Oh, careful, COVID misinformation.
	Look at this. Already, even in a story that's about future pandemics that they're getting
	the solution for by doing more research that possibly caused the thing in the first place
	in a chemical weapons factory, they're telling us that they're impactful, insightful and inclusive.
	We include all of the government messaging in one healthy little package.
	So we're doing that work separately.
	But what we do in the UK...
	Don't get bogged down in the fact that in this lab they're doing chemical warfare.
	from the Ministry of Defence.
	Although we do collaborate a little bit.
	Facilities for chemical warfare.
	Don't get bogged down in the fact that in this lab they're doing chemical warfare.
	We're all just a team of scientists working together to ensure you're free.
	Get ourselves ready both to isolate new pathogens, to develop assays so that we can test them accurately,
	and to work with other partners, with academics and with pharmaceutical companies.
	Right, they're your partners.
	OK, so do you think that in the event that there was another pandemic and there was a vaccine, even though we are funding the research, they might potentially profit from it?
	Is that why 10-year deals were done with Moderna?
	Is that why Pfizer made sure that there was a 75-year period before we could gain access to some of the clinical trial data?
	Well, this all seems incredibly transparent.
	You better delay that COVID inquiry because you don't want people thinking too hard because they might think they're way out of obedience.
	What would you say is the most important lesson that was learned from the pandemic?
	People will do whatever you tell them to if you terrify them enough.
	So I think I was going to say partnership was the immediate work that comes to mind.
	Partnership!
	What with the private sector and corporations and pharmaceutical companies.
	Listen, I'm not saying anything about that individual or any of those scientists.
	All individuals, I believe, are sacred.
	I'm sure all of us are doing the best we can with what we've got.
	But this kind of Systemic corruption?
	This kind of propaganda?
	Weapons manufacturers partnering with big pharma in order to create preemptive vaccines after we've just had a pandemic possibly caused by research into preemptive vaccines?
	Seems like the sort of area where if you actually lived in a democracy people might get a little referendum, a little consultation, a little conversation rather than a puff piece telling you that this is good for everything from equality to the climate to recycling without any legitimate questions being asked.
	This is the news.
	Don't you think that a question that you might like to hear answered is, look, some people are concerned that actually this pandemic was caused by research of this nature.
	Can you allay the fears of our viewers by telling us that this is extremely safe and assure us that the biggest risk to our future is emergent natural origin viruses rather than these kind of Frankenstein gain-of-function terrifying for-profit endeavours that potentially caused the last one?
	And it is that continuing work which we are planning to continue going forward so that we are ready working together as soon as a pathogen appears and actually obviously beforehand so we're prepping as fast as we can.
	There is that target of being able to deploy hopefully a vaccine within 100 days of the threat being identified.
	Why are we normalising the next pandemic?
	Why is that happening?
	Why is that on the news?
	Get ready, disease X, it's happening, it's inevitable, it's unavoidable, we have treatment in 100 days.
	We should still be dealing with the reckoning of the last catastrophic response to a pandemic.
	Were the social measures effective?
	Were the medicinal measures effective?
	What were the consequences of it?
	There's gonna be a worse one, get ready, get primed.
	Do you think that it's simply the function of the media to prime you and prepare you to be continually compliant?
	Is the function of the culture to limit your horizons, limit your optimism, limit your freedom, whether it's at the level of entertainment, certainly at the level of propagandist news institutions like the one we're just witnessing, To prevent you from going, hang on a minute, I've got a lot of questions about the last pandemic, and who made money from it, and how it disrupted infrastructure, and how it destroyed individual lives, and how it's used to normalise the impediment of human freedom, before we go marching gleefully into the sequel like it's Iron Man 3.
	How close are you to that particular target, to making that realistic?
	So that is an ambition.
	So to get from an identified pathogen to a vaccine and to therapeutics within 100 days.
	I mean, to put it in context, that's about a third of the time that it took us to get a Covid vaccine.
	You should have took your time a little bit.
	Have a look at some of the people lit again against AstraZeneca.
	Into people's arms.
	And that was an outstanding record.
	Usually, It takes about five to ten years for a new vaccine to come through.
	Let's have a look at some of the results in five to ten years of your last success.
	So it is a really challenging ambition and it won't work for all viruses and bacterias.
	Indeed.
	But I do think it is possible for many and the more we think about it in advance the more likely we are to achieve it and that's what the purpose So there you are.
	Disease X is on its way, but fear not, because the chemical weapons industry are already preparing a solution and state media are already normalising that endeavour.
	And the Covid inquiry has just been abandoned and booted off into the faraway future.
	And the key word is partnership.
	As long as we've got partnerships in big pharma, all of our futures are safe and secure together.
	But that's just what I think.
	Let me know what you think in the comments and chat.
	Well if that made you lose your faith in the system, get ready because Whitney Webb is our guest today.
	Whitney Webb has become something of an expert on Jeffrey Epstein and his relationship with deep state agencies and but she as you are about to discover if you're not familiar with her work is a lot more than that and has a lot more to offer.
	In a sense, Whitney Webb is able to provide the cartilage between the types of theories and ideas that peripherally exist and the even darker reality of what's happening globally Right now.
	So we talk about Epstein but what Epstein significantly represents when it comes to financial crime in addition to the more salacious stuff that we're familiar with and additionally we talk about the limitations of populist politicians and the false dichotomies that exist i.e.
	we're often offered alternatives but they don't mount to alternatives at all and just how close we are To entering a dystopia.
	In fact the conversation ends with basically learn how to garden.
	But it's the way that we get there that's significant.
	Whitney is of course a contributing editor at Unlimited Hangout and the author of the book One Nation Under Blackmail.
	You can find her work at unlimitedhangout.com and support her at unlimitedhangout.com forward slash join.
	All of that's posted in the chat and I recommend you support Whitney's incredible work.
	Whitney, hello and thank you for joining us.
	You must be very popular this time of year.
	Um I don't know exactly what you mean by that but yeah I have gotten a lot of interview requests because Epstein stuff has happened recently and so yeah I tend to get more interview requests when when things happen there.
	Because yes yes I suppose if like uh if something happens in the world of botany or biology David Attenborough might get a call if something happens on Epstein Island it's to Whitney Webb That we turn to understand what's been going on, because I suppose it's one of those news stories that used to exist primarily as a peripheral and indeed conspiratorial subject.
	This is, I suppose, one of the trends of the post-independent media world, is subjects
	that were regarded as conspiracy theories, like, you know, there are islands where famous
	and influential people go and have illicit and indeed illegal criminal sexual encounters
	and they're being blackmailed as a result of it.
	That, when I was, you know, 25, that was stuff that, oh, that's Alex Jones, that's David
	Icke, that's not true, that's crazy.
	Now it's just, it's the normal news.
	So that must be, as nearly one of the primary independent journalists writing on this subject, and given that you're I would guess somewhat younger than I am, has this always been something that you've understood to be true or have you similarly gone through sort of gradients of shock and disbelief while covering this story and learning about it?
	Yeah, so I think definitely prior to 2019 there were efforts to sort of obfuscate what was going on with Epstein because he's obviously been sort of known since 2007 and to sort of attempt to join it together with other ideas that make it sound crazy.
	You know, I think that was one of the functionalities of a movement.
	Uh, QAnon, for example, that took, you know, aspects of truth about stuff, you know, for example, Jeffrey Epstein was doing and then sort of adding things that are not true or, or, you know, unable to be ever corroborated in order for people to more easily dismiss it, you know, or just dismiss the aspects of it that are true.
	And I think, you know, there's been efforts to try and manipulate, um, this scandal in particular.
	Um, and also, you know, I think another major problem.
	Within the world of Epstein reporting for the mainstream and also the independent media is a tendency to focus on the most salacious bits of the story, which sort of distract from other aspects of the criminality of someone like Jeffrey Epstein, who was not just a sex trafficker, but was involved in a lot of financial crimes, has a lot of very extensive ties to Wall Street giants like JP Morgan.
	To some of the biggest names in Silicon Valley, for example, a lot of this doesn't get scrutinized properly because of the extreme focus on, you know, certain figures who have been known to have been Epstein associates for some time.
	So people like Bill Clinton, accusations against people like Alan Dershowitz, for example, Prince Andrew, you know, these are the names that just get circulated over and over again.
	And a lot of stuff that, you know, you know, has been known about Epstein for years, sort of
	periodically gets rehashed, I guess, or, you know, slight details get added to it, but
	it tends to overly focus on as much like salacious stuff as possible. I think in
	order to attempt to control the narrative and sort of paint Epstein just as a sort of like
	a sex trafficker and a sex blackmailer when he was actually involved in a lot of other
	stuff and to keep the focus on particular names that are useful to the whole divide and
	conquer attempts in the United States.
	So having it be Clinton versus Trump and things like that.
	I mean, I think we still see that all the time.
	And some other important names in the case, like Thomas Pritzker, for example, who's not sort of a guy that's very behind the scenes, but very powerful in the US don't get talked about very often.
	Yes, I suppose which individuals you focus on might be part of the bias.
	The fact that the salaciousness and a bias towards thinking about those things, there's all sorts of psychological and indeed biological reasons why that might be the case.
	I wonder sometimes, Whitney, because I don't know that much about it, but when I sometimes see very extensive reported lists of people that might have gone to that island, that Would it have been that it was like parties full of really really attractive women or is it who to some degree were not there voluntarily or is it actually like people were kidnapped people they were under age they were coerced there was involuntary sexual activity taking place is there a whole range because when you're sort of seeing people that seem like pretty
	I don't know, from the outside, vanilla celebrities.
	Is it that what they would have experienced is... In fact, isn't there a famous piece of public content with someone talking about it and just going, I went to this island and it was amazing and there were all these parties and there was attractive women there and it didn't... at least it appears from that person's perspective, like, I was participating in this criminal, pedophilic evil, you know, like, is it so, like, what's actually happening when the people go there?
	Um, yeah, so as far as I understand it, the girls that were there, it was a mix of girls that were sort of there voluntarily because they'd been promised certain things by Epstein and Maxwell, like help with a modeling career, for example, or promised, you know, help with paying for university, things of that nature.
	And then some women who were there more or less involuntarily, like their passports had been seized by Maxwell, for example.
	You know, there's examples of that where, like, they were forced into a much more exploitative relationship.
	In my opinion, you know, it's both really exploitative because you're, you know, promising something that you're most likely not going to deliver on to these girls in order to get them to do stuff.
	Or you're, you know, seizing their passport and, you know, going that much farther.
	So there was different, you know, degrees of exploitative behavior.
	To get these girls there, which I'm sure manifested in different, you know, behavior.
	But I think the idea that Epstein wanted to project at these parties was sort of a, you know, an ambiance to have, you know, people he was targeting for the purpose of sexual blackmail.
	Obviously, you want those targets to be at ease so that they're more likely to engage in the type of behavior you want to catch them in.
	So I'm sure there was an effort to make it seem like a billionaire playboy Uh, you know, type of environment, but ultimately the girls that were there, uh, were there because of these, you know, uh, exploitative mechanisms, um, of various types that Maxwell and Epstein used on their targets.
	Exploited to varying degrees.
	Although it is possible to imagine that some people there were just like, oh, I'm at this fancy party is what I'm there at.
	But it's difficult to imagine that.
	But it seems like some people that were continually there.
	And also, I suppose what you say is there are some things that are difficult to prove or corroborate, but it's difficult to know how exploitative, how criminal You know, even though any exploitation is obviously wrong, it's difficult to know how dark it could have got.
	And also I suppose, but like you, I'm more interested, even though I'm interested in that stuff because I'm a human being, I'm interested in where it intersects with power, where it intersects with deep state agencies, and where it's being used to, in a sense, orchestrate powerful people and significant events and it does appear that what Jeffrey Epstein is is a sort of a visible facet of systemic corruption that's financial as well as sexual and international and elitist.
	Absolutely.
	Yeah and that's I suppose what is being revealed and that's the information that's sort of being managed.
	Yeah, I definitely think so.
	There's definitely efforts to keep certain names out of the press.
	So, for example, the JP Morgan case with Epstein that was, you know, eventually settled, so it didn't end up going to court.
	Some of the names that were subpoenaed were the two co-founders of Google, and one of the cool co-founders of Google, Larry Page, completely disappeared and was never served that subpoena.
	He was basically hiding from that.
	That's very significant, especially when you consider that You know, Google was essentially created with CIA assistance and money and has collaborated, you know, relatively closely with the NSA and also like the military in the years since.
	And these guys had some sort of shady dealings, apparently, at least the USVI felt so, but with Epstein and JP Morgan.
	And of course, the head of JP Morgan, Jamie Dimon, has a lot of connections to sort of the Wexner, the Leslie Wexner circle in Ohio.
	Of course, Epstein being a key, you know, part of Wexner's network with, you know, Wexner's one of his most well-known benefactors.
	And of course, Leslie Wexner is a person that, despite the insane amount of connections and, you know, financing he gave Epstein, properties, Complete control over his assets, essentially.
	He hasn't been the target of any lawsuits, really, or scrutinized very much by the mainstream press, and it's because he's an extremely powerful individual, worth several billion dollars still.
	So I suppose it seems like when you mention powerful institutions that have curious origins, notably Google founders and the way that Google was founded, I suppose it seems like the way that this story is being covered is to kind of keep you, to keep it buoyant at the level of Oh Bill Clinton he was president like 30 years ago that's pretty crazy but the story could be this shows you the intersection of all kinds of forms of power and in a sense what the limitations are of the sphere of reality that most of us operate in and do you feel that that's something that's increasingly happening?
	I mean I know this isn't actually your particular area of expertise I'm in a way a bit foolish to but you've got so many you've reported on so many things but I just get a sense now, Whitney, while we're reporting on Davos, for example, and you can see figures from the WHO talking about disease X, and you can hear Bill Gates, another, you know, purported client and friend of Epstein's, of course, talking about more vaccines and more vaccines.
	Meanwhile, there are a lot of Conversations now about excess deaths.
	There's a recent report that suggests there's been an increase of 8% in child death in this country and possibly beyond that.
	And I'm wondering how you feel as an independent journalist that operates in all these spaces, that 2024, for all of the kind of fear and trepidation that there is this year, there's an election in the United States, an election in the United Kingdom, is also like a sense of An avalanche of information about even the pandemic period, added to which, you know, the sort of Epstein story and ancillary stories that one might ponder as a result of it, the nature of power and the intersection between those different types of power.
	Do you feel like it might be a point where it's difficult to maintain a cohesive, homogenized version of this is what reality is when you have so much inquiry, so much revelation, so many counter narratives?
	Yeah, so I think what you're talking about is one of the main reasons why there's an increased push towards censorship from, you know, the US, the UK and the EU, major efforts to regulate the Internet in general and also AI.
	And there's also.
	You know, essentially, the blueprint for how to do this was written and I believe 2021 by Henry Kissinger and Eric Schmidt, the former Google CEO, basically talking about that we need to move to an internet model, essentially, where most information people are consuming for, you know, to form their political opinions is produced by generative AI.
	And that also we put AI in charge of censoring the narratives that we shouldn't have sorted.
	So I mean, they definitely Are looking to move towards unprecedented models of narrative control, and it's precisely because, you know, independent media has had a lot of successes, but I think at the same time, there's a lot of efforts to sort of muddy the waters with independent media to try and blunt its impact that it's been having, you know, not just the censorship drive, but I think, you know, going forward, especially as we get closer to the elections, every
	Particularly in the UK and the US, I think there's going to be a lot more efforts to censor the ability of counter narratives to, you know, get out there and reach people.
	And you have a lot of these efforts in the UK, right, with the online safety bill, for example, and some of these other, you know, legislative initiatives that are trying to You know, again, regulate the Internet, essentially, and where this is going long term is about having some sort of government issued I. D. Tied to everything you do online through your Internet service provider in the U. S. They call it the driver.
	They tried to do it in the Obama administration.
	It was called the driver's license for the Internet.
	But now in the.
	More modern era, the goal is to have the digital ID that's being implemented in various countries around the world, have that be tied to what you're doing online, so they know not just what you're posting, but what you're reading and consuming, so that they can more effectively manage that with the artificial intelligence algorithms they want to put in charge, essentially, of managing all content online.
	Race against time, when you describe it like that.
	That there are these emergent technologies that can be used by censorship.
	I'm astonished to hear the name Henry Kissinger mentioned in association with something so avant-garde.
	And that while that's happening, that like most of us or many of us have access to and to a degree the ability to corroborate Information that seems more and more likely to make you disobedient and deeply cynical about the state and the establishment, if I could just use a simple term, than ever before.
	I saw a speech recently by Barack Obama, I think he was at Stanford University in fact, and he was saying that, you know, we need more control.
	So something like a version, but of course an advocate version, Where he convivially conveyed the importance of being able to censor and control misinformation precisely because it muddies the water.
	But I was struck when I was watching this significant figure of the establishment, this elder statesman of the establishment saying that independent media muddies the water, that that is precisely what The establishment indeed has to do to create enough doubt, enough uncertainty for us to sort of broadly be compliant, to broadly say, well, I will restrict my democratic choice to one of these two broadly similar parties.
	And I suppose a significant outlier does come in the form of Donald Trump, he does seem to be the kind of an anti-establishment
	avatar in so much as whatever you think of him or his policies, it's pretty
	plain the establishment are infuriated by him, unless there's more layers to this than I can
	imagine.
	And it's interesting that the more he's indicted, the more he's in court, the more popular he
	It seems that that would be an outlier.
	And indeed, we've seen sort of like populist movements across Europe, and many of them do appear to have a sort of an ethno-national component.
	or a nationalist component or a patriotic component. I don't know really where I land anymore. I've
	sort of had to go on such a wild and carooming journey. But what broadly seems to be in place
	is anti-globalism, anti-politics, anti-establishment. And if forces emerge that are able to harness and
	direct that, it is going to be very difficult, I would think, to maintain control without
	constant crisis and new measures for asserting that control, likely technological, likely around
	And I wonder how you feel what will happen as populism and anti-establishmentism continues to rise and top technology and authoritarianism simultaneously arise.
	What do you predict will be things we'll see in the news cycle or indeed what things you're aware of because you're reporting on them already?
	They're going to define this space, this fissure, this line for the next year or so.
	Yeah, so unfortunately, I think a lot of some of these more anti-establishment politicians that are being put out in front of us are not really, they're more of a controlled anti-establishment than anything that's organically anti-establishment.
	And I think sort of, you know, in Trump's case, the political persecution of Trump sort of reinforces his anti-establishment credentials among his base.
	And it's important to keep in mind that a lot of that credibility, that anti-establishment credibility he The reason he had lost that with his base is because of things like his continued assertion that Operation Warp Speed was a good thing and how he was responsible for that and the vaccine and a lot of other things that he did when he was in office that were very against his campaign rhetoric.
	And what I think people, frankly, should do is pay a lot more attention to a politician's actions, particularly when they're in power, than just their campaign rhetoric, because oftentimes there's a big gap there.
	So like in the case of Trump, for example, you know, when he was in office, he put people like John Bolton in charge, you know, as a national security advisor, who's a notorious war hawk, even though previously he had campaigned on being anti-war and against the neocons and the Iraq war and all of that.
	But John Bolton is one of the most notorious neocons of all.
	Um, and, uh, you know, other things, uh, happened during his term that are not good at all from an individual liberty standpoint.
	For example, his attorney general, William Barr, legalized pre-crime in the United States, which is the exact, uh, some of, uh, that, that exact program really has been used to go after people that were present on January 6th, but didn't necessarily engage in anything that can traditionally be deemed illegal.
	Um, you know, that framework was produced during the Trump administration.
	Wow.
	And I think for a long time, Americans and also elsewhere have sort of been pushed into choosing between the lesser of two evils and things like that, but ultimately that doesn't lead to good.
	You're just getting, you know, one that's slightly better maybe than the other guy, but a lot of that, you know, these differences at the end of the day, Um, are about political rhetoric more than actual action when these people are in office.
	And, um, there's definitely been, you know, an effort, um, to oscillate between left and right.
	And, uh, you know, for decades to keep sort of, you know, the left, right paradigm going, which, which is one of the main ways that sort of these more global agendas, um, are able to advance.
	Um, and people get frustrated with one and then switch to the other.
	So, you know, there's a, an effort right now to frame.
	Sort of these right-leaning figures as anti-establishment, not just with Trump, but people in Argentina, like Javier Mele, for example, or Bolsonaro in Brazil, for example, right?
	A lot was said about Javier Mele's, you know, rise to power, that he was anti-establishment and all of this, and that he was going to depose the political elite in Argentina, and had a lot of campaign rhetoric similar to Trump.
	But when Javier Mele came into power, he put a lot of career Wall Street people from JP Morgan, from Deutsche Bank, the Epstein banks, essentially, in charge of key parts of the economy.
	He's not going to shut down the central bank.
	He's not actually going to dollarize, which he campaigned on, and, you know, several other things there.
	And at his recent WEF address, he was essentially framing the solution to the world's problems, more or less, as moving it away from government controlling things to corporations controlling things.
	And, you know, essentially what we have as seen through groups like the World Economic Forum is that ultimately it's all about public-private partnership, and the governments and the corporations essentially are controlled by the, you know, it's really the same group at the end of the day.
	I mean, if you think about the U.S., for example, the government, the politicians are owned by corporate America, so hand over More direct power to the private sector, the most powerful multinational corporations, or hand it to the government.
	It's really the same people ultimately making decisions, and it's the decisions that benefit the 1%, not regular people.
	And so my concern is that people are going to, again, focus rather myopically on the campaign rhetoric and not on the actions of people when they've been in power.
	And, you know, hold them to account and instead, you know, sort of get in this space where people become sort of apologists for these politicians at times when they start doing things that go against their campaign rhetoric and promises, probably because they don't want to be wrong or don't want to admit that maybe they've been had or something like that.
	But I think it's definitely, you know, groups like the World Economic Forum and these other entities have supporters both on the left and the right.
	And I think there's a renewed effort to sort of reframe the current opposition in the U.S.
	and also the U.K.
	really anywhere as being more like against unpopular initiatives.
	So in the U.S., for example, you know, you have Trump speaking out against CBDCs, people like Ron DeSantis as well.
	But I've done some recent reports recently that the plan in the U.S.
	was never to have A direct-issued CBDC, the model instead is to have a synthetic CBDC, which is a U.S.
	dollar-denominated stablecoin that may not be a CBDC in name, but is just as available and programmable as a CBDC is, or can be.
	So the same dangers of a CBDC would be true for a, you know, a synthetic CBDC, which is basically, you know, A CBDC instead of being issued by the Federal Reserve or the Central Bank would be issued by Wall Street.
	Is that really that much better?
	Having Wall Street and Jamie Dimon and Bank of America program and surveil your money than it would be than having Jerome Powell, head of the Fed right now, do it?
	I mean, not really, but this is The kind of, you know, bait and switch that I'm talking about here.
	So you have Ron DeSantis and Trump say, you know, no to a CBDC.
	But, you know, for example, Trump and Jared Kushner, who played a very prominent role in his cabinet was, you know, privately promoting the idea of having this, you know, dollar denominated stable coin, why Trump was in office.
	And there's been a lot of moves towards that on the part of the Fed, which in the US is owned by Wall Street.
	So, You know, again, I think that this might be celebrated as some sort of win, you know, see no CBDCs in the US, it's a victory for freedom.
	But if you're having, you know, the most corrupt people in the banking industry programming and surveilling your money, instead of the Federal Reserve, which is owned by Wall Street, anyway, in the US, it's not really a victory at all, but it's going to be framed as that.
	Brilliant.
	Thanks.
	Although, you know, thanks for taking away all of the populist hope that I was beginning to indulge.
	But it's pretty fascinating, Whitney.
	I mean, and I'll hand right over to you straight away.
	But like, it seemed as you...
	We've laid out a set of various false dichotomies that we are offered, whether it's between a kind of centralised globalism predicated on state power, or centralised globalism predicated on corporate power, but the WEF wants partnerships between those entities anyway.
	And then you talked about with the currencies, oh, does it make any difference whether it's the Federal Reserve that's owned by Wall Street or Wall Street itself?
	That's not what we were being offered.
	And what does, and hello and welcome to all of our community members right now that are joining us live.
	And I'll be passing on your questions to Whitney.
	And indeed, if you're watching this on Rumble right now, remember you could watch this content live if you become a member of our community.
	And this, I think, is an important question because I think the reason that the rhetoric of anti-establishmentism is becoming so successful is because that's precisely what people want.
	Now, am I also correct, Whitney, because I'm assuming I'm correct about that bit, in assuming that what we're experiencing is now the availability and possibility, because of technology, because of decentral, you know, because of the different types of cryptocurrencies, for example, because of the immediacy and democratic potential of the type of technology that we now harness, The decentralization and the disempowerment of these various occupants of these paradigms that you've outlined, whether it's corporate global power, state global power, you could now actually have
	You could have communities that are self-governing, maximum amount of individual sovereignty.
	And I ask you all of this because for them to work as hard as they currently are to censor and control, to introduce measures such as you've already explained to us, artificial intelligence, censoring...
	It must mean that the inverse is true and when you, you know, one by one break down these apparent anti-establishment populist figures and say that in a sense they do exist within the framing of the establishment and, you know, you give clear examples of appointments made by people that campaigned as populist but governed as somewhat centralist.
	What does represent anti-establishmentism now?
	What political figures or movements or ideas are there Yeah, so I think the whole purpose of these controlled anti-establishment figures is precisely so people look to them and don't actually do anything themselves, presuming that these politicians are going to save the day, sort of as political saviors.
	What I think were the real hope for anti-establishmentism lies is with regular people building alternatives to the establishment.
	So really the only way to get out of this mess with where the establishment, you know, global power is taking us really comes down to people building alternative systems and divesting from the establishment as much as possible so that we're not dependent on these systems they're trying to force us into.
	And the only way to really do that is to build something at the local level and actually actively create something new.
	And I think the powers that be are hoping that we will remain dependent on them and dependent on the political figures they provide for us instead of taking any sort of, you know, individual responsibility or accountability and, you know, community building ourselves because the government Um, the corporations, you know, we don't need them, they need us, and they are essentially creating systems, whether it's digital ID, CBDC, or equivalents, um, that are all about controlling the population at mass, and part of this is tied up with speech and all of that, and I, as I see it, really the only way is to
	Uh, start doing something, you know, us little people, you know, actually creating something decentralized.
	We're not depending on these people at all, depending on, you know, the new money they want us to use or the new ID system they want us to use, which is, you know, basically going to lead us to a.
	A system where everything is surveilled and also where everything in the world is a financial product.
	I mean, there's these efforts right now by Wall Street to turn parts of the natural world that have never been included in the economy to monetize them and securitize them through this model, this vehicle called Natural Asset Corporations.
	Larry Flink of BlackRock was just talking about how they plan to tokenize everything.
	Including like human relationships, you know, calling it social capital, human capital, all of this stuff.
	Now there's natural capital.
	I mean, they literally want to turn everything into a financial product that they can put on the blockchain and trade and surveil you at the same time, decide what you can and can't do.
	It's completely insane.
	The only way to not let that happen is to build something else so that you can say, no, I'm not going to participate in this crap authoritarian system.
	I'm going to participate in this system instead.
	And we have to build that.
	And if we're reliant on people, whether it's Trump or Malay or any of these figures, no, people are not going to be building.
	They're going to be waiting for these figures to build it.
	And when these figures have been in power, they have not built those things.
	Oh, God.
	End dependency now.
	End dependency now.
	Wherever you are dependent on this system, you are owned by this system.
	That slavery is being replaced by dependency.
	And if we are dependent on devices or new forms of currency, or we cannot control our food, and increasingly the control of food seems to be an issue, and more and more vital resources, and there are attempts to control energy.
	It seems like that And I became sort of a little befuddled when you said that human relationships and children's dreams and sunsets, autumn, are going to become, like, all being tokenized.
	How could that even, how could that work?
	I mean, I suppose it's only one step on from Monsanto patenting seeds and Bill Gates's magnificent work across Africa and in India.
	In measures for controlling agriculture, what is this natural assets coup that BlackRock are up to?
	The rest of our conversation, and it's really worth it, will be available for our supporters now, immediately.
	If you want to see the rest of that conversation, join us over on Locals now.
	It's there.
	It's fantastic.
	It is worth it.
	The reason we need your support is because of what Whitney Webb is describing.
	There is a necessity to organize and create a movement, and we are dedicated to that.
	We are participating in that with you.
	We're not pledging to be Leaders are superior because what this requires is a new modality and a new mentality of decentralization and empowerment of the individual and you'll learn a lot more by jumping into what we talk about in the latter part of our conversation.
	Support Whitney's work as I said before at unlimitedhangout.com.
	There's a link in the description for how you can support her work.
	Thanks for joining me.
	Get over to LocalsRightAway, get out of that stream and into our hearts.
	Press that red awaken button right now.
	Remember, if you can't get Rumble for some reason, get the podcast.
	I just want to mention some of our new members like BK Ramza, Graz Maria, India Najen, Rickle Pussy, Biden My Time.
	All of you are welcome.
	See you next week, but more important than that, if you can, please stay free.
	Many switching, switching, switching.

▲