Here's the News: New War Bill Aims to Secure Billions More for More Wars!
As Biden’s National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan refuses to rule out direct strikes on Iran and new bills aim to secure billions more for multiple wars, are both political parties now committed to an escalation that threatens all-out war in Middle East? --💙Support this channel directly here: https://bit.ly/RussellBrand-SupportWATCH me LIVE weekdays on Rumble: https://bit.ly/russellbrand-rumbleVisit the new merch store: https://bit.ly/Stay-Free-StoreFollow on social media:X: @rustyrocketsINSTAGRAM: @russellbrandFACEBOOK: @russellbrand
Hello there you Awakening Wonders on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you download your podcasts.
We really appreciate you, our listeners, and want to bring you more content.
We will be delivering a podcast every day, seven days a week, every single day.
You'll get a detailed breakdown of current topics that the mainstream media should be covering, but if they are covering, they're amplifying establishment messages and not telling you the truth.
Once a week, we bring you in-depth conversations with guests like Jordan Peterson, RFK Jr., Sam Harris, Vandana Shiva, Gabor Maté, and many more.
Now enjoy this episode of Stay Free with Russell Brand.
Remember, there's an episode every single day to educate and elevate our consciousness together.
Stay free and enjoy the episode.
No, here's the fucking news!
Hello there you Awakening Wonders, thanks for joining us on our voyage to truth and freedom.
Hey, if you want more of our content exclusively early and if you want to join us when we chat to what I would call proper journalists like Tucker Carlson, Glenn Greenwald or leaders like Vandana Shiva, Bobby Kennedy, join our Awakened Wonder community and perhaps we can do something magnificent together, create a movement that we all participate in that's unified but decentralized and we oppose the establishment that seems hell-bent on leading us into.
More and more forever wars.
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?
With significant but proportionate force.
Lovely phrase, significant but proportionate.
That's one of those things that would have been workshop.
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 just 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?
Tangently 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.
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 thing's 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 pass an audit.
Do any of us believe at this point that it's going to reach a resolution, that the Houthis
are going to sort of stop doing that?
This idea that you can kind of kill everyone that you don't agree with, whether it's in
Canada for euthanasia or in the Red Sea for 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 they're 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 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, that'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 into 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 it?
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.
They're 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 are 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 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, they've clearly calculated, this will be good either way.
Like whatever happens, Iran get involved in a war, that'll be alright, Iran don't get involved in a 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.
Like, 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 aren't gonna 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 propagandise.
Watch, 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 Iraq, there's still people dying and stuff.
If you went to any of these regions, you'd meet people with limbs blown off, and yeah, that's where 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 alright to do this.
Oh my god, I've been lied to!
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 going to get into... It's theatre, innit?
It's just entertainment.
That's not...
What 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 in the Matrix when different people are occupied by agents or whatever,
you sort of 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.
It'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 web 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 U.S.
and U.K.
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 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 gonna 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 U.S.
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, same people in charge now, telling us that we should go to war, 45,000 troops stationed 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.
accept 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 1 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
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.
I think it's There's 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 the television, it becomes clear that it isn't the best version, 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, I think.
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 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 a 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.
That's just what I think!
And remember, we make this content every single week, and we make exclusive videos where I get right into the philosophy behind some of these ideas for our supporters.
You can become one of them.
And you can also join us and ask questions to brilliant journalists like Greenwald, Tucker, and leaders like Vandana Shiva and Bobby Kennedy.
It's worth it, and if it's within your means, we'd love to welcome you there.
More important than any of that, though, is if you can, please stay free.
