Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

Feb. 16, 2024 - Stay Free - Russel Brand

59:16

“Putin Wanted HILLARY!” In 2017 | BOMBSHELL Evidence EXPOSES Russiagate AGAIN! - Stay Free #306

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	so so
	brought to you by In this video
	In this video, you're going to see the future.
	Awakening Wonders, thanks for joining me today for Stay Free with Russell Brand.
	We are live and you are alive.
	That means there's a chance.
	As long as we are connecting to one another, they cannot defeat us.
	If you're watching this on Rumble right now, you're in for a hell of an experience.
	We're going to be talking about The endlessly escalating forever war that Biden is advocating for and Stella Assange is on the show today ahead of next week's hearings here in the UK in which it will be determined whether or not Julian Assange has the right to appeal.
	That's pretty extraordinary isn't it?
	There's got to be a trial in order to establish whether or not there can be an appeal.
	How many bureaucratic layers between freedom and that man Can they implement?
	Astonishing really, given that so far Julian Assange has never stood trial for the charge of espionage, which as you know was deployed under Barack Obama, that change and hope candidate, more than under any other president.
	Now the first part of the show will be on YouTube, then we will be on Rumble.
	If you're watching us on Rumble now, give us a like!
	Give us a subscribe!
	We've got loads of things to talk to you about.
	If you're one of our awakened wonders like Becca Dee or Amy Chippendale or the Right Brain, thank you for supporting our content.
	I hope you're enjoying the additional videos we give you, like how to challenge authority with Terrence McKenna and we've got another exclusive video for you where we analyze Lee Fang's recent appearance before a subcommittee over there in the United States talking about censorship and free speech and the emergence of these new AI agencies that are becoming expert in managing the public discourse.
	Now, if you want to monitor how much the culture has changed and how much it has gotten out of control, you could look to the re-emergence of Jon Stewart in the mainstream media space.
	When Jon Stewart was last at the center of this culture, it was accepted that you could be somewhat critical of political figures on both sides of the aisle.
	Since then, censorship has risen to a High, high, high Fahrenheit levels and now if you criticize Joe Biden it's a problem.
	Let me know if you saw Stuart on the Daily Show, the new rebooted Daily Show, and let me know if you saw the view, frantic, that anyone would criticize Joe Biden for being Elderly, and perhaps pointing out that a person in that position ought not be grappling with senility and descending into senescence with such obvious consequences.
	You know, particularly when, in a minute, we're going to be talking about the ongoing forever wars.
	We'll be looking a little bit at Rishi Sunak and his patronizing videos.
	But first, let's start with The View, talking about Jon Stewart.
	Frantic that he's not Simply advocating for four more years of Biden, when Joe Biden may not even have four more years left.
	And I say that with all due respect.
	I love it that Jon Stewart is back, but what's so offensive to me is there's difference between age and intelligence.
	There's a difference between age and vitality.
	There's a difference between age and really being up She's not actually talking about her co-host there on The View, Joy, and I think there's a distinction between hosting The View and running the United States of America and perhaps the
	The free world.
	Hey, remember that Stella Assange is joining us later.
	If you've got any questions for Stella, post them there in the Rumble chat with Julian Assange's hearing coming up on Tuesday and Wednesday next week.
	We will be streaming live from the Royal Court.
	If you're in the United Kingdom, you can join us there for this historic occasion where the possibility for a little bit of democracy and a little bit of free speech will be discussed privately behind closed doors by highly paid judges.
	Cooking is not the same as running the free world.
	cooking in front of people. Cooking is not the same as running the free world.
	She's still exactly Robert De Niro and Al Pacino are getting it in. They've got babies.
	Pretending to be a gangster is not the same as being an actual gangster and running the free world.
	He's in their 80s. Okay. Jay's 86.
	Representative Maxine Waters, 85.
	Bernie Sanders, 82.
	Nancy Pelosi, 83.
	I don't know.
	They look like they know what they're doing.
	I don't know what they're doing when it comes to investing.
	In fact, is it true that if we just invested in the commodities that Nancy Pelosi, or Paul Pelosi, sorry, it's not Nancy Pelosi that does the actual investing, that we will be ahead of the market, ahead of hedge funds?
	Is that true?
	Let me know in the chat if that's true.
	They have the wisdom, they have the history.
	The problem with this country is that we don't value people with their wisdom.
	We don't value seniors.
	We don't value entrepreneurs.
	Okay, I'm sick of this ageism problem.
	There's a difference between revering our elders and connecting with the sacred and remembering this Lent that we must allow God to move ever closer to us and allowing someone that's possibly grappling with cognitive decline to make very complex decisions.
	Certainly in the UK we have a different problem.
	We got one of them haircut politicians.
	We got a haircut in charge.
	We got one of your Macron's, one of your Trudeau's, a little bit of liberal language.
	Although Rishi Sunak is purportedly a conservative leader, he lacks none of the WEF's panache when it comes to communication.
	And he's YouTubed his way into a modern communication set.
	This is brilliant.
	This is Rishi Sunak.
	You know, like when you're in a relationship with someone, the relationship's not going very well, and the person goes, no, the relationship is going well.
	Here's Rishi Sunak doing that.
	He's essentially, he's our prime minister, if you're watching this in the United States, you may not know that.
	Here's Rishi Sunak telling you why things ain't so bad.
	Hi, I wanted to talk to you a little bit about what's going on in the economy and the plan that we're working towards.
	But before then, I wanted to take you back to the context that we found ourselves in.
	It's so patronising and extraordinary, isn't it?
	As politics amends to become more accessible, can you see that it somehow becomes more banal and more disingenuous?
	Remember Covid?
	Someone in the Awake and Wonder chat's going, oh no, he has a master plan!
	He's got a whiteboard!
	There's a master plan coming!
	And the enormous impact it had on all of us.
	And because of that, we did a lot of things to get the country through Covid.
	Like supporting the NHS, vaccine programme, furlough.
	That's why most nurses are now considering industrial action.
	That's why most junior doctors are knackered and exhausted.
	It was convenient to support the NHS for a while, while wrangling people into mass compliance.
	But is the NHS, generally speaking, being supported now?
	Or is it being covertly privatised?
	And look at this extraordinary little circle that is drawn that looks like the coronavirus in microcosm itself with all of these tangential arrows and angles emerging from it telling us why things are great and there's nothing to worry about.
	Those things cost around 400 billion pounds with all the other support we provided.
	All that support we've provided?
	Your life's fantastic!
	Just as we were recovering from Covid, we saw a war when Russia invaded Ukraine.
	That meant that everyone... Bloody war when Russia... Like, think how many times you could dispute everything he's saying.
	Hold on, what about the NATO impeachment on former Soviet Union territories?
	Was that money during the Covid period well spent?
	And where the hell are you doing this?
	Hetty Hope on the Awaken Wonder Locals chat and you can join us there.
	Remember you can get additional content by becoming a member of our community.
	He says, is he in his bedroom?
	I don't know, there's a lot of beige going on.
	There's energy bills.
	Johnny Freedom simply says, what a dick!
	Off Gem estimated that they would go up from around £1,300.
	Did Britain go to war officially then?
	That's a good point, you know, Razbender.
	That's extraordinary.
	War!
	War!
	A war just happened.
	Yeah, we're not supposed to be in that war.
	To £4,500, unless the government did something about it, which it did.
	It provided about £100 billion of support to everyone.
	Remember the reason that Julian Assange is in Belmarsh right now without trial is because he reported and facilitated the reporting of whistleblowers through WikiLeaks openly in a way that was hardly advantageous to the kind of elitist interests that Rishi Sunak no doubt represents. Last year, one of the things that won't
	feature in his graph is that he paid 20% tax. He won't be telling you about the
	relationship between his father-in-law's firm and the WEF. Look it up for yourself. It's called Infosys,
	that company. And he won't tell you about Thalim Partners, the hedge fund that
	invested heavily in Moderna right before Moderna became a very profitable organisation
	around the time that Covid appears on Rishi's wee whiteboard graph there.
	Their energy bills. But all of these things meant that we saw high inflation. That's what
	caused all the pressures with the cost of living.
	At the beginning of last year, I set out five priorities.
	The first of those priorities was to halve inflation.
	What's happened to inflation?
	Look at this!
	What he's essentially going to do is give you information that makes it look like they're doing a fantastic job, when I think many of us might dispute that.
	Russ looks like Fonzie.
	Astonishing.
	Okay, guys.
	It says here that we're leaving YouTube in a minute, but we could, if we wanted to, reduce the 10-minute period.
	There's other ways we could adjust that, guys, so you should wait for me to cue that.
	That would always be my preference.
	Take that off, please, and we'll do that in a second.
	Thanks very much.
	Let's have a look.
	Over the past year, well, according to the Office of National Statistics, inflation was around 11% when I became Prime Minister.
	Now, inflation has more than halved.
	Oh, there you go.
	Everything's fantastic.
	What we're being invited to do is to ignore the evidence of our own eyes, our own ears, our own hearts, our own experience.
	To avoid the evidence of soaring fuel prices, grocery and food bills, the ongoing sense that the infrastructure around us is crumbling, the despair, the woe that is immersive and evident and abundant all around us and except that this man with the dead eyes and the whiteboard is telling you the truth.
	So around 4% that's good progress but we've got to keep going because inflation belongs back down at 2%.
	What does that mean for you And your family?
	Well, first and foremost, because inflation is coming down, that eases burdens with the cost of... That house looks like a little sad face.
	If you're watching us on YouTube, start the countdown if that's okay, guys.
	Thank you very much.
	We're gonna leave now to do our conversation with Stella Assange.
	We're gonna be talking to Stella Assange in a moment.
	About Julian Assange's hearing and yeah, so join us over there.
	Click the link in the description.
	See you in a few moments.
	Thank you very much.
	Cheers for joining us.
	Right.
	Yeah, there's a very sad house, says Sue's Joy over on Locals, mostly because people can't afford one.
	Yes, Stella is coming up.
	Let's have a look at this Hillary Clinton story then, just if you pull that up for me guys and we'll do that.
	Cheers, number seven.
	Thank you very much.
	So, I can't see that.
	Michael Schellenberger says the US government said in 2017 that Russia favoured Trump as president, but now sources reveal for the first time that the CIA cooked the intelligence to hide that Vladimir Putin Biden or Trump?
	Clinton not Donald Trump as president. CIA cooked the intelligence to hide that
	Russia favored Clinton not Trump. Also in a Kremlin TV interview Putin appeared to
	indicate that his preference would be Biden over Donald Trump. Let's have a
	look at that.
	Biden. He is a more experienced man, he is predictable, he is an old-fashioned politician.
	But we will work with any leader of the United States that the American people will trust.
	I suppose what we can glean and deduce from that is that Putin would prefer to deal with that professional class of politicians who are widely suspected to belong to financial interests, in particular those of the donor class.
	Then a maverick like Donald Trump who may be somewhat erratic.
	That's basically what I took from that.
	We did a poll a little earlier where we asked who do you trust to handle Putin in the war and unsurprisingly, because we're beginning to know what your preferences are guys, 75% of you said Donald Trump.
	No one!
	2.7% Hillary Clinton and some of you RFK.
	Let's have a look.
	And we polled elsewhere.
	I think that's, oh yeah, 66,000 votes.
	Again, just endlessly Donald Trump.
	But RFK, as with most polls, emerging as a real contender.
	In case you weren't terrified for a moment about impending escalating war, Let's consider nukes in space.
	A new, terrifying story.
	We've had sub-aquatic nuclear weapons.
	We've had nuclear weapons of every description.
	We're being bombarded with propaganda to keep us terrified and traduced continually and constantly.
	But have we had space nukes for a while?
	No.
	So here they are.
	Russian nukes in space.
	Multiple sources are telling CNN tonight that the U.S.
	has new intelligence on Russia's efforts to deploy a nuclear anti-satellite system in space.
	Keep in mind, if nukes were launched to the U.S.
	from space, they would be undetectable.
	And this news gives ominous context to the fact that one of Putin's mouthpieces floated this very idea on Russian state television nine months ago.
	Be afraid!
	Be very afraid!
	There are nukes in space now.
	There's always something to be terrified of.
	Invisible space nukes could be raining down on you any moment now, perhaps.
	It is the rapture.
	Hey, listen, while over there in Russia, not detecting any space nukes, and in the opinion of the legacy media, simply creating propaganda for Putin, here's Tucker Carlson, Shopping.
	I mean, he did seem to have a pretty good time in Russia.
	Did you see this moment?
	So a long-standing feature, maybe the longest standing feature of Cold War propaganda in the West, was the Soviet grocery store.
	No products, no choices, shoddily made things.
	And it wasn't actually propaganda, it was real.
	And you can look up the pictures on the internet if you want.
	So we thought it would be interesting to take a look at a contemporary, modern day, 2024 Russian grocery store, two years into sanctions.
	So we're gonna try and buy what a family of four would buy every week.
	That supermarket looks pretty bloody nice, actually.
	We've got Stella Assange coming in in a moment.
	In fact, we're going to bring her in here right now for a conversation about the hearings that are taking place next week.
	And let's look at the glorious success of the legacy of Soviet communism.
	Let's see what the selection is and we're going to see what it costs.
	Now, Russia is famous for its bread, which is one thing I can assess pretty well.
	Oh, come on!
	Unicorn and Minnie Mills?
	All right.
	Ho, ho, ho, ho, ho, ho, ho.
	And this is Russian wine.
	It's from Crimea, which not only has the warm water naval base, but also is the source of most of the grapes in this part of Russia for wine.
	So it's apparently pretty good.
	You check out of a grocery store, and you've got gum, razor blades, and candy.
	Actually, they hide the razor blades, because we steal them.
	But these all seem to be Western products.
	Mars, Twix, Snickers.
	Milky Way, Bounty, Gillette.
	It's astonishing, actually, because I mean, we didn't have time to show you the subway one.
	He's absolutely dazzled by the subway, though there are some pretty impressive murals out there.
	Now it's time for our long anticipated and it's an interview that I'm very excited to bring you.
	I'm joined now by Stella Assange, ahead of Julian Assange's hearings next week.
	Stella, thank you so much for taking the time to join us today.
	My pleasure, Russell.
	How significant are the hearings?
	Because we're going to stream live from the Royal Courts on Tuesday and Wednesday.
	Any of you that are watching, it would be fantastic if you could join us if you're available.
	How significant is it?
	How likely is it to lead to a positive outcome for Julian?
	Well, it is the critical hearing.
	We're saying it's the final hearing, because although there's a small chance that he could win this, that would only mean that he would go to a full appeal down the line, maybe eight, ten months, and that Julian will remain imprisoned.
	But the worst case scenario is what we're focused on, which is the most likely scenario, which is that he loses.
	And there will be no further appeals in the UK.
	That means it's the end and then the UK will move to extradite him, basically.
	Isn't this an entirely unprecedented situation to have someone charged with espionage and then extradited without trial?
	Has this ever happened before?
	Well, the U.S.
	has brought an espionage case against a journalist, and this has never happened before.
	They've used the espionage statute, which is from 1917, and was originally written up to catch actual spies.
	And they're not claiming that Julian's an actual spy.
	They're saying, basically, that journalism can be reclassified as espionage and that publishing to the public is the same as giving information to the enemy.
	How has this reframing taken place almost in real time, where Julian went from a collaborator with some of the most prestigious news organisations in the legacy media world, like Le Figaro, The Spiegel, Guardian, New York Times, all of whom participated in the publishing of the caches of WikiLeaks information.
	How has he gone from being central to that media organisation to being maligned and imprisoned?
	What exactly took place to move him from being within that institution and a sort of celebrated truth teller to being a criminal?
	What happened?
	Well, Russell, the thing is that Julian was a massive media critic and there was this, originally there was this attack on him.
	They said that he's not a responsible journalist and the legacy media talked about itself as responsible journalism.
	They didn't like Julian.
	He wasn't their kind of journalist because he had a different model.
	WikiLeaks has what is called a scientific journalism model.
	You publish original source documents and then you comment on those.
	Whereas the media traditionally sees itself as a gatekeeper.
	Yes, curates the information and in a sense tells us how to interpret the information and I suppose what Julian and WikiLeaks were offering was open source information.
	What was hugely significant I suppose was the advent of the technology itself that allowed Chelsea Manning or Edward Snowden to make, let's face it, heroic choices To blow the whistle on, in both of these cases at least, US military activity that was literally illegal.
	Let's forget, let's not forget that the actual crimes were committed by the United States in foreign territories.
	War crimes, and in the case of Edward Snowden, spying on their own citizens, or at least through their relationships with the Five Eyes Nations, on a variety of different nation citizens in ways that transgressed their own laws.
	It's extraordinary, really, isn't it, that those revelations have not continued to be regarded as heroic.
	It sort of shows you how much the cultural and media landscape has shifted in the intervening years, doesn't it?
	Yeah, I mean, Julian was able to publish at the time because there were anonymizing tools on the internet that he was able to harness and take advantage of to bring a new sort of journalism and to really inform the public in a way that was revolutionary and remains revolutionary.
	And since then the media has picked and chosen some of the aspects of what WikiLeaks introduced.
	But even the technology is now under attack.
	There is an alleged source of a different WikiLeaks publication who just got sentenced to 40 years and they used the use of anonymizing technology against him as evidence of criminality.
	That's extraordinary.
	One of the reasons that we remain fascinated by Julian's case is it represents a benchmark both in media reporting but also in the kind of righteousness or lack thereof within the political class that there are so few people Within our political communities that are willing to speak out about Julian indicates, like Keir Starmer is never going to go, it's a disgrace that Julian Assange is in prison, something's got to be done.
	Hilary Clinton, obviously, because she personally I suppose, suffered as a result of WikiLeaks is unlikely.
	So there's no figures on the left, or within the establishment left, let's say, certainly, that are willing to speak out on behalf of Julian.
	And also, I suppose, Julian's case provides an opportunity for people that are both on the left and the right that believe in free speech to come together in defence of The kind of values that a little while ago, ten years ago, we all understood were pivotal for any democracy, but now we seem to be negotiating on.
	Well, Julian's greatest sin seems to be that he is truly objective, that he's exposed everyone, and that's why you don't have the kind of You know, championing of Julian by any given party or class of people who's in power.
	But at the same time, that means that people from left and right also have an interest and can defend him because he is truly just a exposer of wrongdoing no matter Who is doing the wrongdoing and he's in prison not because of any crimes that he committed but because he exposed the crimes of others.
	Yeah that seems unusual and I suppose what you're saying is that in a way it demonstrates that there are no consistent values or principles because Julian Assange couldn't be used in a partisan fashion.
	He became useless to the political class because The revelations exposed hypocrisy and corruption throughout the political establishment and couldn't be particularly or specifically exploited by either party.
	Next week, on Tuesday and Wednesday, the hearings take place.
	What can we do to support that and what can the people watching this stream do?
	Look, this is the final hearing.
	If Julian loses, which is the most likely scenario, because statistically it is most likely and what is being asked by these judges is to say that their colleague was wrong.
	I think it's pretty clear that Julian will lose this round and then the UK will move to extradite him.
	And we need a lot of people on the streets.
	We need a lot of noise around it if he can't be there.
	To basically show the establishment that they can't get away with this.
	It's a political case and that means that public opinion really matters.
	What type of reporting do you anticipate then, given what's transpired in the last 10 years?
	Do you imagine that this will be covered by the BBC or by CNN or even by Fox News?
	And what type of coverage do you envisage there being of this hearing in what we generally call the legacy media?
	Look, they're always the same attacks, and they're the same attacks that they had 12, 13 years ago, which have been dispelled again and again.
	I had a press conference yesterday, and I told the journalists there that they are misleading the public when they repeat things that I just told them were wrong.
	But, you know, there is maliciousness among some parts of the media, and they don't want to show what the what the real implications of this case are because I guess they're cowardly and maybe because they don't expose wrongdoing and Julian shows them to be lacking as journalists.
	Quen B saying in our Awakened Wonder Locals chat, my question for Stella is do you believe that Citizen Whistleblower should have the same protection as and can you just scroll back for me on that so I can see the end of that question guys?
	Or is it quicker for me to do it?
	Excuse me.
	Yeah, I'm doing it.
	I'm doing it.
	Oh no, I'm not doing it.
	Yeah, could you pass on the Quimby question for me?
	I'll just get Gareth to repeat it.
	That seems like that's the quickest way to get it to me.
	If wars can be started by lies, peace can be started by truth, said Julian Assange.
	That's ChatterX on the Rumble chat.
	And the Hemby question in the locals chat that I just asked for you to grab for me.
	Thank you.
	Gal?
	Oh no, just tell me.
	If, if citizen...
	Should citizens...
	Could you just say it, Gal?
	Should citizens have their same...
	My...
	Oh, it's up on the screen.
	Should citizens have the same protection under the law as those which journalists such as Julian Assange is reclaiming?
	I see, I don't understand that question entirely.
	I guess that's sort of the challenge there.
	Well, whistleblowers should, of course, be protected.
	But Julian is in a different category to whistleblowers.
	In fact, he's often described as a whistleblower in the same breath as Chelsea Manning or Edward Snowden.
	They were the source of journalists' publications.
	And Julian, of course, is the journalist.
	He is the publisher.
	And he is being accused not as a whistleblower, but as a journalist.
	And that's why it's so important for this case to be dropped, for people to really
	understand that what is being done here is criminalizing journalism
	so that people, so that those in power basically can get away with it and that their cover-ups are
	never exposed.
	The reason I figure this is such a significant case is because
	we can use this to understand how much our culture has moved.
	We can use this case to demonstrate the lack of clear moral principles at the heart of our culture.
	It seems to me that our inability to have an open conversation about Julian Assange, the unwillingness and inability of the legacy media to report on it, was a significant moment in when our culture radically changed.
	Now, whatever you think of the Tucker Carlson and Vladimir Putin conversation, it's accepted that we all hand over control of the information we receive to centralised forces.
	It's become kind of normalised, the idea of censorship.
	Something significant happened.
	What we're experiencing at the moment collectively is a kind of race, a kind of arms race in the social media space between absolute free speech and new democracies and new systems of communication and government emerging and perhaps unprecedented tyranny and I feel that if Julian Assange is extradited that will be a significant step in the wrong direction.
	Absolutely.
	One of my favorite clips of Julian's is one where he says that people who are connected to the Internet are the best informed generation and part of the greatest bullshit detecting mechanism that the world has ever seen.
	But what's happened is that the Internet has since then become manipulated.
	And the kind of model that WikiLeaks and Julian represent is a horizontal model of information.
	And of course, what the new era is, is a top down kind of filtered model to keep the public uninformed and manipulated.
	Yeah, and to limit conversation and to limit choice to a very small pool in both instances so that we have the illusion of choice and the illusion of information and the illusion of free speech while actually entering into a kind of banalised and bureaucratic version of tyranny that may not be obvious to us as people that were schooled on tyrannies that were militaristic and dictatorial in terms of identifiable mustachioed figures with medallions about their chest but nevertheless what we appear to be entering into now is in order for to maintain security in order to maintain safety in order to access ever greater convenience we're giving up freedom even the freedom to communicate so it's a I think it's a pivotal moment in the in this discourse isn't it Stella?
	Well, Julian already said about 10 years ago that we live in what he said was a media-ocracy, where the media basically determines the scope of how we see the world, what we can discuss, and so on.
	And so there's a different movement now.
	There's a popular movement, it's international, of people on the internet finding shows such as this one to get non-manipulated information which challenges the viewer as
	well.
	It's the opposite model of what WikiLeaks and free information and informed public actually
	stand for.
	We're certainly not manipulating the information.
	We're simply spilling it out onto the internet in an almost erratic fashion and allowing
	our glorious audience, all of you watching in our Rumble chat like Jake Long XXX and
	in our Awake and Wonder chat over there on locals to make of it what you will.
	Now there's perhaps no subject that has been more significant in the Assange case than
	the ability of the powerful to wage war indiscriminately or certainly without due diligence or due
	accountability.
	We appear to be at a significant moment when it comes to the conflict with Iran, potential
	escalation of tensions and hostility between the United States and China, and the ongoing
	proxy war between Ukraine and Russia.
	We've got a report coming up on that.
	I suppose in almost every instance it's clear that war and militarized conflict is the most
	extreme aspect of what we're discussing.
	While we might continually be alert to the potential for climate change and environmental disaster to disrupt or all other trajectory of our kind, it seems to me that war and the potential for Armageddon and meltdown is one of the subjects around which we were most educated during this WikiLeaks era.
	In fact I'm continually referring to Julian Assange's edicts and sort of paraphrasing that the point of the Afghanistan war was to perpetuate it rather than to end it and that conflict alone cost two trillion dollars and we're about to embark on it seems like you know there's a bill Potentially being passed now to prolong the Ukraine and Russia war.
	Potentially spending money engaging in hostility with Iran.
	I wonder if this is the kind of stuff where we need more clarity of reporting and it's the kind of subjects that are being increasingly censored and where it's more and more difficult to get clarity of information.
	Well, of course, Russell, it's no coincidence that Julian is in prison.
	He's the foremost, the journalist who has done the most to expose war and really basically change the course of war towards peace.
	In the case of Afghanistan and Iraq, he is a hero of the world who doesn't want to see war and he's in prison.
	And of course if he were out, if WikiLeaks had been able to continue its work as it had, then we would know a lot more about these conflicts.
	Stella, thank you so much for joining us today.
	Next week, join us live in London for Julian's final hearing.
	That's on Tuesday and Wednesday.
	We'll post more information about that and we'll post in the chat additional information from you, Stella, about how people can support us during this.
	Now, it's time for us, as I just indicated, to talk a little more Here's the news.
	about the increasing hostility in the Middle East.
	As Biden's national security advisor, Jake Sullivan, refuses to rule out direct strikes on Iran
	and a new bill aims to secure billions more for multiple wars, are both political parties
	now committed to an escalation that threatens all-out war in the Middle East?
	Stella, thanks for joining us and we'll be talking to you more
	on Tuesday and Wednesday, of course.
	Thanks, Russell.
	Hey, thanks for joining us.
	Here's the news, no, here's the effing news.
	Here's the news.
	No, here's the fucking news.
	Jake Sullivan, who advises Joe Biden on national security, refuses to rule out strikes directly on Iran.
	And while all the talk in the world is about raising billions for forever wars, are we on the precipice of all-out war in the Middle East?
	Oh, I do hope so!
	Jake Sullivan, who you might have seen at Davos, is now on MSNBC doing one of those half interviews that political figures sometimes do where they sort of go on the television and then don't even tell you anything.
	Are you refusing to rule out strikes inside Iran?
	Well, I can't say that on the television.
	What are you doing on the television then?
	So here is Jake Sullivan, National Security Advisor to your President, Joe Biden, refusing to rule out strikes inside Iran.
	What will happen to the Middle East, and indeed the world, if America starts bombing Iran?
	Is it going to be great for everyone, do you think?
	Great for your children?
	Great for your taxis?
	I do hope so.
	Let's get into it.
	Is the United States already in a wider war in the Middle East, Jake?
	What the United States is doing is responding to threats as we see them.
	That's amazing.
	It's not in a wider war.
	It's responding to threats as we see them.
	Does your response to those threats as you see them, sometimes to the casual observer or someone who might have studied military history, look a bit like a war?
	Lovely phrase, significant but proportionate.
	That's one of those things that would have been workshopped.
	Yes, it was significant, but it was proportionate.
	People have talked a lot about proportionality when discussing the dynamics between terrorists and national armies.
	Well, what would be a proportionate response?
	And actually, it is a ridiculous word when talking about war, isn't it?
	Because if you talked about proportionality and reason, you'd surely get to the point where you agreed that diplomacy and peace was the best proportion to offer everybody.
	This rationalisation of military escalation is a curiously modern phenomena.
	In the days of barbarians and Mongols and Saracen swords swinging about, I think people at least knew, look, We want to be powerful.
	We're stronger than you.
	You're going to do what we tell you or we'll force you.
	Now people try to present war to you as if it's, well, that's all we could do.
	It's the only way to bring about peace.
	Sadly, I hate war more than anyone.
	But has the war expanded?
	Has the war expanded in the region, Jake?
	Well, first, we don't accept that what's happening in the Red Sea, for example, Kristen, is entirely tied to the war in Gaza.
	Entirely tied?
	Somewhat connected?
	Tangentially connected?
	A little bit tied?
	This is very curious.
	When you watch old media experts engaged in discourse, you'll notice that what you're watching is a ballet of syntax.
	Non-commitment, vague ideas, generalities, rather than sort of like casual discourse.
	Because of course Jake Sullivan can't go on Joe Rogan for three hours.
	This is the kind of metered language you'll get from the legacy media.
	This is why we need independent media.
	That's why it's important, significant, epochal even, that Tucker has spoken to Vladimir Putin.
	Because what's happened now is everything is shifted.
	Now we're confronted with information that's not gone through this type of filter.
	Because the Houthis are attacking shipping that has absolutely nothing to do with Israel.
	Oh, those hoothies.
	So, there are connections among these things, to be sure, but... It's weird, because then he keeps telling you that there is a connection.
	One thinks for certain, bombing Iran can't make this situation any better.
	You can't just bomb Iran and then just go, well, let's just hope that people respond to that rationally.
	Whether or not the Houthis are engaged in this activity in the Red Sea as a response to events in Gaza or not, the bombing of Yemen in a kind of tit-for-tat violent exchange between the American military and the Houthis is hardly likely to make the situation any better and is yet more of this fuel-to-the-flames mentality that seems very good for the military-industrial complex, very good for generating a state of anxiety around the world, extra taxation, more money for the Pentagon who can't Do any of us believe at this point that it's going to reach a resolution?
	That the Hoofies are going to stop doing that?
	This idea that you can kind of kill everyone that you don't agree with, whether it's in Canada from euthanasia or in the Red Sea through this kind of military activity is so ridiculous.
	And now we have the benefit of the kind of hindsight we do, whether it's the invasions and wars in Iraq and what that subsequently led to, or even the Suez Canal like nearly a century ago, 70 years ago.
	You kind of learn first of all of these events through a patriotic lens.
	That's our canal!
	We should use it when we will!
	Then you find out, yeah, what Egypt were doing is just saying, well, that canal's in our country.
	Go on, off you go.
	I mean, the fact is, Yemen is a lot nearer to the Red Sea than Milwaukee.
	These are distinct threats as well that we need to deal with.
	Uh, on their own basis.
	So in the Red Sea, we need to deal with the threat to commercial shipping.
	And we are doing so with a coalition of countries.
	Like, they're making, actually, imperialism and colonialism just sound like, well, it's business as usual.
	There are commercial ships in the Red Sea.
	And of course, all of us, in one way, tangentially or otherwise, are benefiting from commerce and America's role in the world.
	And I sometimes wonder, wish almost, that someone would say, look, do you realize what this is?
	If China and Russia gain global preeminence.
	Your little way of life and your cute little shirts are over baby.
	But I don't see that.
	I don't recognize in my own such as it is analysis of global events an agenda by Russia to start sort of getting a Madrid or New York or for China to start running around in Frankfurt.
	It seems like they're doing stuff in their regions that are mostly connected to trade and geographical disputes that are a significant part of their history.
	whereas America are bombing Yemen, where they used to bomb Vietnam and Afghanistan, all these places
	they thought what the hell's that got to do with us all of a sudden? What is this role and is this
	possibly a time to revise it? Even if it's being done with the best intentions, we have to do that,
	these people are savages. When we were doing it, the British, that was our idea, these people
	are savages, they need us to do it. And what the version of that's playing out now? Maybe it's time
	to review it. In Iraq and Syria we need to deal with threats to our troops and we are doing so
	including with the strikes the president ordered Friday night.
	Why are there American troops in Iraq and Syria?
	Because Iraq and Syria aren't in America, are they?
	Well, you mentioned Iraq and Syria.
	Let me ask you, how do you respond to Iran's foreign minister calling this a strategic mistake that will destabilize the region?
	Is the United States bracing for a counterattack?
	It's weird how they manage to call things not wars but proportionate and significant responses when we've now established in the last three days America's bombed Yemen, Syria and Iraq and are sort of pondering whether or not to bomb Iran.
	This isn't a war though.
	Well I'm not a bit surprised that Iran didn't like the strikes that we took on Friday night so that would be par for the course.
	We are prepared to deal with anything that any group or any country tries to come at us with.
	And the president has been clear that we will continue to respond to threats that American forces face as we go forward.
	So the general posture is that America have the right to have troops in that region, protect commercial interests that possibly are at odds with other regional interests.
	And it's interesting when we discuss migration and border security that America or all over the world?
	Why the hell are these people from all over the world arriving in America?
	Is there anything to do with globalism that your country is engaged in at the moment?
	Yeah, we go around the world bombing loads of people and asserting our right to practice certain globalist principles.
	And when I say you, I don't mean people in America.
	I don't even mean your American military.
	I mean the forces that are behind even your government.
	The deep state, the military-industrial complex, who appear to benefit from the They've clearly calculated this will be a good, even way.
	Like whatever happens, Iran get involved in war, that'll be alright.
	Iran don't get involved in war, we'll just carry on.
	They've not thought about the impact on you economically, spiritually, psychologically, or even the mortal impact of more dead service personnel.
	Have you ruled out strikes inside Iran?
	Well, sitting here today on a national news program, I'm not going to get into what we've ruled in and ruled out from the point of view of military action.
	It's funny how meta the news has become.
	Like, everyone knows what this is and this does.
	Well, sitting here on a national news program, I'm not going to get in and out of what we will and won't do.
	Well, what's your bloody job then, mate?
	What are you doing here?
	If you're just going to say what you won't say, what you will and won't do.
	What you'd want to see is, no, we're not getting into bombing Iran, that's going to escalate war in the region.
	I suppose is what you want to hear, isn't it?
	But he's not saying that.
	And I suppose the best guess has to be because they probably are going to bomb targets inside Iran.
	What I will say is that the president is determined to respond forcefully to attacks on our people.
	So much rhetoric involved and grandstanding and like the sort of the idea of Biden responding forcefully.
	If you've seen Joe Biden in public, he can't respond forcefully to his own heartbeat.
	The president also is not looking for a wider war in the Middle East.
	Well, Yemen, Iraq, Syria.
	Won't rule out Iran.
	That's a wider war in the Middle East.
	Linguistics, packaging, semantics, all the while saying, you can't let Tucker interview Putin, he'll propaganda us.
	What?
	That's propaganda.
	People are getting bombed all over the Middle East.
	Meanwhile, let's not call it war.
	What do you imagine it would be if in three days targets were hit in Florida, New York and California?
	This is a war.
	This is the worst thing.
	Let's go.
	That's not, oh, it's a skirmish.
	It's a significant but proportionate response.
	That's a mentality that has to be shed in order to achieve peace.
	Is it off the table?
	Are strikes inside Iran off the table?
	Even the way the discourse is conducted, like strikes in Iran.
	This is when people are dying and stuff.
	If you went to any of these regions, you'd meet people with limbs blown off, and yeah, that's when Michael died.
	You can't even watch these kind of documentaries.
	You try and watch them sometimes, like maybe Michael Winterbottom will make a documentary, and it's like, yeah, this five-year-old kid died, and then you sort of think, oh, shit, oh, no, they're the same as us.
	Oh, my God, they're the same as us.
	I've allowed myself to think that because they've got different sounding names and they've got different outfits on, that it's all right to do this.
	Oh, my God, I've been lied to!
	Are strikes inside Iran off the table?
	We love you and we need you and we also need our partners and supporters and today we have The Wellness Company supporting us and we're proud to represent their products.
	Recently, clusters of respiratory illnesses in northern China and what is being referred to as White Lung Syndrome in the United States are scattered across our beloved headlines in our legacy media.
	This draws attention to the importance of being prepared for medical emergencies, doesn't it?
	Doesn't it?
	With close to 90% of pharmaceuticals in the US being produced outside of your country, what happens when inevitably Klaus Schwab decides that there is another global crisis?
	Countries clamp down on exports.
	They will stockpile.
	The prices of drugs will rise and the pharmacy shelves in America will be empty like the food shelves of Europe now because of the trucker protest.
	It's already starting to happen.
	You can feel it, can't you?
	Well, the Wilderness Company's medical emergency kit's got you covered for times like this.
	The Wilderness Company is home to Dr. Peter McCulloch.
	Hero!
	Dr. Drew Pinsky.
	Friend, both have been on the show, and other truth-telling doctors who are empowering you to take control of your health.
	40% of Americans say they would avoid a doctor or a hospital unless it was a catastrophic situation.
	The wellness company's medical emergency kit provides a solution.
	This handy little kit includes Eight potentially life-saving medications for you, along with a guidebook for the safe use.
	You're not gonna guess there's emergency antibiotics, antivirals, antiparasitics to help you and your family keep safe in the face of natural disasters or supply chain shortages, I suppose, or medical emergencies like white lung or COVID, like I said at the beginning.
	So to take advantage of this offer, go to twc.health forward slash brand and grab your medical emergency kit right now.
	That's twc.health forward slash brand code brand, by the way, saves you 10% of checkouts. So don't
	wait until it's too late. Take control of your health with the Wellness Company's Medical
	Emergency Kit. They're our sponsors today. Let's get back to the content. Again, Kristen,
	sitting here on television, it would not be wise for me to talk about what we're ruling
	in and ruling out.
	So you're not ruling it out?
	Get a room, you two.
	I'll just say the same thing one more time, which is, I'm not gonna get into... There's theatre, innit?
	It's just entertainment.
	That's not news, is it?
	That's like, she's playing the role of someone, I'm giving you a pretty hard time here.
	And I'm playing the role of someone.
	Like, you know the Matrix, when different people are occupied by agents or whatever, you still think that these are, in a sense, just wax and motifs of a...
	hidden ideology and of an agenda of powers that are way beyond them. Like if she just went one
	day, I'm sick of this crap, like she'd be out of a job. If he went, yeah probably we're gonna
	bomb Iran, you're out of a job, they're irrelevant aren't they? They're just sort of, they've got
	probably less power than us. What's on the table and off the table when it comes to the American
	response. So there you go, let's get an alternative perspective on this conflict because Christine,
	who has many qualities, and Jake, who's adorable in his way, are not really able to give us much
	in the way of insight, so let's see what we can do together.
	On Friday, the United States carried out airstrikes on seven locations throughout Iraq and Syria in what U.S.
	officials said was the beginning of weeks or even months of attacks across the region.
	That we will not be calling a war.
	War sounds mean.
	Nasty.
	I like strikes.
	Love them.
	It's like baseball.
	Over the next two days, Saturday and Sunday, the US and UK launch further airstrikes against the Houthi rebels in Yemen.
	Yemen.
	Good.
	The attacks mark the beginning of our response, and there will be more steps to come, National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan said Sunday on CNN's State of the Union.
	In other words, the United States' endless war in the Middle East, which has killed millions of people.
	Millions of people have died.
	Like, the way they're discussing it, it's like, sort of, what brand of cake mix you like most.
	And, like, millions of people have died of this not war.
	...and destroyed entire societies over the course of the past three decades, is entering a new and more deadly stage.
	Now, this has been going on for ages and ages, three decades.
	We've kind of got used to it, tuned it out, can't really be bothered with it, getting on with life.
	And now, it's escalating into, actually, we're going to need you to pay a bit more attention to this, and maybe even take a little short holiday to the Middle East.
	It's a one-way ticket, so it's not too pricey.
	U.S.
	officials have made it clear that central target of the U.S.
	military offensive is Iran.
	Appearing on Meet the Press Sunday, Sullivan was asked directly if the United States would rule out strikes inside Iran.
	Sullivan declared he would not do so, stating, But I will freely discuss actual things that are on the table.
	For example, that's a pen.
	when it comes to the American response.
	But I will freely discuss actual things that are on the table.
	For example, that's a pen.
	I got that at a hotel I was staying at recently.
	When Republican House Speaker Mike Johnson followed Sullivan on the same program,
	he made an even more explicit threat to attack Iran.
	When asked, do you want to see strikes inside Iran, Johnson replied, it should not be off the table.
	Everyone's obsessed with the table, aren't they?
	It's the table.
	One thing we can be clear about, it's the table.
	Wars, and what they are and what they aren't, and millions of dead people, and how they happen to get deaded, that I won't discuss.
	But tables, all day long.
	I love the grain in this pine table, for example.
	How did you varnish that?
	How many coats?
	The only thing that's being varnished is the truth.
	The back-to-back appearances by officials of both the Democratic-controlled White House and the Republican-led House of Representatives were meant to convey the unanimity within the US political establishment for the escalation of the war in the Middle East.
	Alright, so even the sort of curating and staging of like, here's this guy, what do you think?
	War's not off the table.
	And you, sir?
	Nothing's off the table.
	The whole point of it is just go, look, see, whoever you vote for, War.
	The Biden administration is proceeding with staggering recklessness in flaming a regional war that threatens to draw in the entire world.
	People act as if, like, world wars aren't a thing.
	You can't have world wars, you know.
	There have been them before.
	They're going into regions that are full of disputes.
	They're provoking Russia over here.
	They're provoking China over there.
	They might bomb Iran.
	They've done these three countries in the last few days.
	They're pretending that it's proportionate.
	Can someone tell us What's the actual plan?
	What's the ideal endpoint?
	Look, we're just gonna do that in Yemen, then we'll do that in Syria, then that, then that, then that, then... Oh no, yeah, you're right actually, we're all gonna die as a result of this.
	A full-scale US war with Iran would have catastrophic human, political, and economic consequences, eclipsing even the bloodbath caused by the 2003 invasion of Iraq.
	One thing that's worth pointing out is that Iran do have a nuclear arsenal, which means that even though Iran sounds a bit like Iraq, remember, well, no, actually, Iraq also had weapons of mass destruction.
	That's why we went there, to get our hands on those weapons of mass destruction.
	But when we got there, wait a minute, there were no weapons of mass destruction!
	That means the same people are in charge now, telling us that we should go to war, 45,000 troops stationed over there, millions of people there, This whole thing's our fault!
	Every statement made by the White House to justify this war is a lie.
	Every one.
	Every statement to justify a war.
	The White House declares it's not seeking war with Iran and every airstrike is justified with the assertion it was not an escalation.
	We've reached the era where people just lie.
	In the immediate aftermath of 9-11, we did some things that were wrong.
	it but fund it. Each new illegal airstrike is presented as a defensive action to protect
	US troops, but the very presence of these troops in the region is the continuation of
	decades of bloody US wars throughout the Middle East, which have killed more than one million
	people and have been accompanied by the systematic and deliberate use of torture as state policy.
	In the immediate aftermath of 9-11, we did some things that were wrong. We tortured some
	folks. The US maintains over 45,000 US troops throughout the region, coupled with dozens
	of warships and hundreds of military aircraft.
	Well, that's an interesting perspective on the situation.
	I felt then, like if you have family members that are in the services, that maybe it's just so in us now that the service is sort of a way of life and this is part of what we do.
	This really forecloses on the possibility of a different vision of our future where we're not at war and the best shot for kids from, you know, what they would call flyover states is to go and die on some far-flung irrelevant campaign at the behest of globalists.
	Possibly a better version of reality for the people of Iran, the people of Ukraine, the people of Russia, the people of Delaware, for all of us.
	This can't be the best version of global events.
	And when you watch them discussing it on television, it becomes clear that it isn't the best version, and that they've just not thought enough about it, or they have thought about it, and the conclusions they've reached are at odds with our interests.
	The latest offensive in the Middle East is a crucial element of an unfolding global war centrally targeting Russia and China.
	The subjugation of Iran, lying at the heart of Eurasia, is a critical component of the United States' drive for global military domination.
	In its effort to militarily encircle and economically strangle China, Washington is seeking to drive a wedge between Beijing and Iran, which is a large oil supplier to China.
	Why don't they just tell us that?
	Go on then.
	Do your war.
	A major factor in instigating the escalation against Iran is the massive setback suffered by the United States and the European imperialist powers in Ukraine.
	Even as US imperialism doubles down on its fight against Russia to the last Ukrainian, it has opened up another front in the global war.
	This is why recent events are so significant, because now we're gaining access to an entirely different perspective, and one that might be more conducive to our shared survival than the one that we're metaphorically bombarded with continually.
	That we are told, oh, Russia is an unprovoked aggressor.
	We heard Hillary Clinton say that.
	And what's clear is there is a route to peace, but it involves the withdrawal of a kind of a long established American ideology of kind of commercial imperialism, would you call it that?
	In his appearance on Sunday, Sullivan was keen to point out that the U.S.
	strikes against Yemen and conflict with Iran have absolutely nothing to do with Israel.
	This too is a lie.
	Less than 10 days after the events of October 7th, we warned, the U.S.
	is using the present crisis to put into effect long-standing plans for a war with Iran, as the Middle East is in front of the U.S.
	war with Russia and war plans against China.
	Certainly, whatever the truth of that is, I've heard, and you've heard, loads and loads of times people going, we want a war with Iran, how are we going to get a war with Iran?
	American New Century, those boxes that Trump was meant to have had, war with Iran, it's a thing that's been going on long before I heard the word Houthi, for example.
	The massive armada the United States immediately sent to the Middle East was not just a show of force, it was meant to be used.
	Ah.
	Since then, the United States has mobilized its armada to repeatedly bomb Iraq and Syria while strikes on Yemen have become virtually a daily occurrence.
	American imperialism confronts a staggering domestic crisis in which democratic forms of government are breaking apart under the pressure of enormous and ever-expanding social inequality.
	Even as they are enmeshed in a bitter factional struggle that is rapidly intensifying into a full-scale constitutional crisis, both US political parties are committed to a massive escalation of war throughout the Middle East and across the globe.
	Both.
	Both.
	So that means, as Noam Chomsky once said, in all instances where both parties agree, you have no choice at all.
	That's not democracy.
	That's the opposite of democracy.
	The domestic political crisis in the United States is a major factor in the global eruption of US imperialism.
	The deeper the crisis, the more aggressive the American government becomes abroad, hoping to project its internal tensions outward.
	Well, you saw for yourself the way that Jake Sullivan conducted that conversation.
	You saw the way that the media framed it broadly as theatre.
	And the perspective offered to us here from a, you know, pretty far-left organisation,
	left in the old sense of the word, where what they're really interested in is attacking imperialism,
	attacking corporatism, attacking crony zombie capitalism, is that this is an exploitative, deceptive attempt to
	engage in wars against both Russia and China.
	Maybe some of you will argue that the historical affiliation between those nations
	and sort of old school communism means you can't rely on this analysis.
	But I think there are plans to engage in what looks like a global conflict.
	I mean, that sort of makes sense, doesn't it?
	It sounds more true when you hear this is an attempt to encircle Chinese interests and get stranglehold over their relationship with Iran.
	You don't go, well, that's propaganda.
	You think, oh yeah, no, God, of course.
	Knowing what we know about the most recent conflicts in that region, that makes perfect sense.
	But that's just what I think.
	Let me know what you think in the chat.
	See you in a second.
	Thank you for choosing Fox News.
	Good day.
	No, here's the fucking news!
	Ah, and the chat is alive with controversial insights.
	Endless.
	I mean, I'm very happy, in fact, with the degree of conviviality in that rumble chat.
	In the Awakened Wonder chat, I see a lot of love also.
	Thank you so much for joining us today, because it's important, I think, to give a voice to Stella Assange and the significant campaign of which she is Now the face.
	Remember, the hearings for Julian Assange to have the right to have an appeal take place next Tuesday and Wednesday, and we will be there live.
	If you can join us for those, please join us outside the Royal Courts of Justice.
	That's what they're called to this day, and we will welcome you there.
	It's going to be a significant couple of days for all of us that are interested in free speech and the nature of contemporary media.
	Remember, if you're watching us on Rumble, Subscribe to our channel, give us a like and also consider joining us over on Locals where we give you additional content which enables us to create better and indeed more insightful and potentially more constructive content going forward.
	I'd like to welcome some of our new members like Pooblius2024, Hadley232, Brian900, J.J.On and R.Bender.
	Very childish.
	Thanks so much for joining us.
	We've got a fantastic show for you on Monday and next week will be defined by free speech and the ongoing campaign to free Julian Assange.
	Join us next week, not for more of the same, but for more of the different.
	Until then, if you can, stay free.
	Switch on.

▲