Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

Oct. 10, 2024 - Stay Free - Russel Brand

01:09:28

“Trump Will END THE WAR In Ukraine” Col Douglas Macgregor On Ukraine, Iran, The Border & WW3 – SF471

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	so so
	In this video, you're going to see the future.
	Hello there you awakening wonders!
	Thanks for joining me today for Stay Free with Russell Brand.
	What a very special show it is today.
	Colonel Douglas McGregor is joining us.
	That won't be in the first 15 minutes when we're on YouTube.
	Oh no! That will be exclusively available in that sweet home of free speech that we call Rumble.
	Remember, click the link in the description and join us over there. And you awakened wonders,
	surely now you are getting ready for our new offering, Break Bread with Russell Brand.
	Episode one is with Tucker Carlson. I couldn't be more excited. It's Tucker Carlson as you've
	never seen him before, taking communion, talking about the Lord, talking about how globalism,
	in a sense, he believes is the sort of emergence of a dark spiritual force and that we're in
	spiritual warfare. You're going to love that. Become an awakened wonder. Join us for that.
	That will be absolutely fantastic. And also the Jordan Peterson conversation that I had
	earlier this week will be up tomorrow. It's 90 minutes long.
	It's fantastic. I've never had a conversation with Jordan Peterson like it.
	You'll love it. And on tomorrow's show, of course, it's Bobby Kennedy that will be joining us for a conversation about the weirdest, strangest election I can remember.
	but we're here mostly now to talk about the relentless march towards perpetual war and
	the exploitation of elders. Now when the Nord Stream pipeline story hit the headlines, and
	we were told that Russia had blown up that pipeline themselves as some peculiar act of
	sabotage, many of us thought it was ridiculous, but Seymour Hersh, Pulitzer Prize winning
	journalist pointed out that it was likely carried out by deep state agencies involving
	the United States and possibly other nations that are members of NATO and even Ukraine
	themselves, therefore an act of sabotage. Seymour Hersh was attacked by the establishment
	because of this, because that's how the establishment rolls.
	They operate on that level. There is no virtue, there is no reverence, there is no respect that
	can be applied unless you are a useful object for the advancement of their agenda.
	Bob Woodward, he of all the President's men fame, the man whose stories broke the Watergate scandal, he's still useful to the establishment and his new book has extraordinary revelations about both Joe Biden and And Donald Trump.
	Let's have a look at CNN's reporting on this story to see how, in a sense, this is a tale of two elders.
	Seymour Hersh, cast out because he challenges establishment power, and Bob Woodward, to a degree, still revered because his message can be useful.
	This is the way the system operates, and it's a lot more granular than just voices that directly relate to power, war, and geopolitics.
	Even a celebrity, if you're useful, can be propped up.
	But once you're no longer useful, oh my word, you will be chewed up.
	That's why these Diddy revelations are so fascinating because I believe they'll show you the true insidious, maybe even satanic, is that too far?
	Dark nature of Hollywood.
	There's institutional weird stuff going on there.
	These revelations are fascinating.
	But of course now we're focusing on the rather large issue of war.
	War. A soon-to-be-released book by veteran Washington journalist Bob Woodward is offering a remarkable and Shocking look at what President Joe Biden really thinks about some of America's closest allies.
	Example one, Woodward quotes Biden is calling Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu a bad guy, a quote, bad effing guy.
	But Netanyahu isn't the only world leader to earn Biden's wrath.
	The book War was obtained by CNN ahead of its release next week.
	It was obtained specifically by CNN special correspondent Jamie Gengel, who joins us now.
	Wow, some of these revelations.
	Here it is. Here is the book. I'll lend it to you.
	This is a treasure trove of revelations.
	I have to, I mean, I'm not exaggerating here.
	My jaw dropped in some of the anecdotes in here.
	Bob Woodward is still bringing the receipts after all this time.
	The book is based on confidential documents, notes, transcripts, first-hand accounts from participants.
	It is an unprecedented look behind the scenes at Joe Biden, unfiltered, profane.
	He likes to drop the F-bomb.
	We really learn how leaders and top U.S. officials speak to each other and about each other behind the scenes.
	But there's also some notable news about Donald Trump in this book.
	There are new details about former President Trump's relationship with Vladimir Putin.
	Specifically, the book reveals phone calls Never before revealed between Trump and Putin, including a verbatim conversation where they discuss that Trump secretly sent to Putin scarce COVID testing machines for his personal use.
	This was at a time during the height of COVID where everybody wanted One of these.
	And we actually have, Woodward has, the conversation between Trump and Putin in the book.
	If that conversation had continued, it might have gone, don't worry too much, because COVID isn't actually that bad.
	Unless you have a great deal of comorbidity issues, unless you're suffering from the lifestyle diseases that's caused by living as a kind of larvae blob on the conveyor belt of big food, big agriculture and big farmer corporatism.
	interesting story, interesting insights, particularly when contrasted with the way that another
	elder of the American media establishment, Seymour Hersh, has been treated and discredited.
	Here is Glenn Greenwald revealing that a Danish newspaper Politiken have confirmed some of
	the stories that we knew to be true at the time because of common sense. Remember when
	a multiple major US media outlets, as well as a small handful of think tank experts,
	they always quote, tried to convince Americans and Europeans that it was mostly Putin who
	blew up his own Nord Stream pipeline. I do. Here is this Danish reporter, Thomas Farsi,
	saying that it was indubitably and undoubtedly an event that involved the United States,
	deep state and Ukrainian forces.
	There you go. The common sense, many people might argue right there.
	To get some new and deeper insights into military matters around the world, I'm having a conversation with Colonel Douglas MacGregor.
	Let me know in the comments and chat if you're familiar with Colonel Douglas MacGregor.
	His revelations have always been pretty staggering and extraordinary.
	I have a brilliant conversation with him about which war is most likely to bring about global Armageddon, and what a ridiculous conversation to be having with anybody.
	But the significance of talking to experts is, In a sense, the duty and the drive of a channel like ours, we're limited in our purview and our understanding, but thanks to the miracle of technology and the availability of guests like Colonel Douglas MacGregor, we have the opportunity to speak to people who know a lot more about these subjects than I do.
	And in fact, the reason that I'm now somewhat informed on the subject of the pandemic is because of the Oracle season.
	We'll post the link in the chat right now.
	The Oracle season are our special symposiums where we talk to experts and they explain to us unique insights for the first time.
	When we were talking about pandemics, I was lucky enough to have Robert Malone, Steve Kirsch and Pierre Corey all in the same room.
	Here's an excerpt from that conversation available for...
	You, if you're a Locust member.
	Can you tell us, chronologically, how you began to understand the way that this pandemic was being reported on was inaccurate?
	And what were the early indicators?
	Just to sort of let you know, that in late 2019, I was still thinking, oh my word, this is seismic.
	This is terrifying.
	I was traveling in an airport from Australia back to the UK. I was scared when my kids were touching stuff.
	At what point did you realize that there was a disparity between what was being communicated and the reality?
	So late 2019 was really early.
	I didn't even become aware of the virus outbreak in Wuhan until I got a call from Michael Callahan on January 10th of 2020.
	So that's when I first became alerted to it.
	In terms of the difference between all the messaging, the propaganda that was coming out of China and then Northern Italy, Versus the reality that various epidemiologists were actually documenting.
	J. Bhattacharya is a key name here.
	That kind of came to my attention during January and February, but then really in March was when a cascade of things happened.
	We had our initial book censored by Amazon.
	And I realized that the guy from the CIA that I'd been communicating with was lying to me.
	And that's kind of what set me down the path of understanding what was going on.
	He was misrepresenting the origin of the virus and a lot of the storyline around it.
	Alright, now it's time for my conversation with Colonel Douglas MacGregor and his interesting insights in geopolitics.
	Recorded this in the Washington studio of Rumble.
	And Colonel Douglas MacGregor, as always, helped me understand the true at-depth movements of geopolitics right now and their historic undergirding.
	You will love this conversation.
	Stay with us. Thanks for joining us, Colonel Douglas MacGregor.
	It's such an honor to be speaking with you in Washington, in the midst of the swamp.
	That's right. The honor is all mine, by the way.
	Thank you, thank you. We met yesterday at the Rescue the Republic event in which we were participating, and it seems to me that this is an important time to rescue the republic.
	Now, this is a conversation that has to happen simultaneously on various planes.
	The individual level, the level of absolute subsidiarity, the local level, power, Connected to people that can make an impact using the levers of politics that are already available to them to influence their communities, particularly in a time leading up to an election.
	But there is also, of course, a global dimension and pressing potential Armageddon.
	The reason I suppose that I'm asking this question right now is because of the strikes within Lebanon and also Donald Trump's recent declarations After some of the personal, I was going to say incursions, but their assassination attempts, that his experience have been connected to, in particular Iran.
	I wonder if you could help us understand how this escalates the likelihood of that region exploding into further conflagration, sir?
	Well, I think if you had to choose between Eastern Europe and Ukraine right now and the Middle East and try to establish which one is by far the more dangerous, I would suggest the Middle East is more volatile.
	I think the war in Ukraine is effectively over militarily and has been for some time.
	Ukrainians have been bled white.
	And whatever we do to try and help them at this point is not going to work.
	And it's inhumane, frankly, because they've lost 600,000 soldiers killed in this war.
	Those are World War I-level statistics.
	You know, during World War I, we fought for a total of 110 days in World War I. That's all we were in there for.
	And in 110 days, we had 110,000 deaths and 200,000 casualties.
	In other words, wounded. So that's why I say the loss of 600,000 lives Is horrific.
	Then when you compare that with the numbers of Ukrainians that have left the place, you know, the Ukrainian nation itself is practically dead.
	And that's what people in the West don't seem to understand.
	We've been pushing this war and insisting that we fight to the last Ukrainian.
	Well, we're getting close. Ukraine itself may not survive this.
	But I don't see a major war breaking out there.
	And the reason I say that is because, as you pointed out earlier, very recently, Putin made a public statement and simply said that this business of long-range strikes into the heart of Russia, into its cities, and putting its own military power, particularly its nuclear deterrent at risk, it's unacceptable. And that if any third party, in other words, a nation that is hosting long-range strike weapons for the United States and Great Britain, if that's Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, Finland, Poland, Romania, whoever it is,
	They will be treated as co-belligerents.
	In other words, you will be seen as doing something that your nuclear power ally is actually doing.
	And we reserve the right to use a nuclear weapon to deal with that.
	We won't tolerate it.
	That had the desired effect.
	And that's why when Starmer came over from London and he had this big proposal to strike deep into Russia, Biden and his staff said, no, we will not support that.
	So I think there's a recognition that things have gone far enough.
	What nobody wants to do in the West is say, this was a mistake.
	We need to back down and get out of there.
	So I think that will happen after the election.
	Now, Donald Trump, fortunately, thankfully, has been arguing for that for some time.
	That's good. But I think it will happen regardless of whom's elected, because we just can't afford it.
	We don't want to go to war there.
	That's quite obvious. The issue now is really shifting to the Middle East.
	And the Middle East is entirely different.
	Before you embark on that complex topic, there's a few things I would like to comment upon.
	It's interesting how the term cycle of American electoral politics affords the military-industrial complex to, I would contest, Advocate for military action that, even to someone as uninformed about geopolitics as I am, would seem to be, if not futile, downright dangerous.
	Ergo, you can't have a war with Russia, can you?
	Because aren't Russia a nuclear superpower?
	This fact was somehow obfuscated for a number of years, a couple of years.
	Meanwhile, this misadventure cost hundreds of thousands of Ukrainian lives.
	Nothing is meaningfully achieved.
	And you start to think, well, how will they...
	Put the milk back in the bottle.
	How will they suck that fart of death back into the rectum?
	And of course, the valve and opportunity there afforded is that there will be another administration and likely a different category of still profitable war is...
	Introduced to continue the conveyor belt of death and destruction.
	Thank you for the calibrating exercise of if you look at this in the lens of World War One, because we tend not to look at Ukrainian deaths with that level of...of paralysing scrutiny of like, oh well, yeah, that's World War I for the United States of America.
	And can I just add to that again before we move on to the Middle East and the terrifying game of brinkmanship we're engaging along Putin's red line?
	Zelensky is once again in this election period apparently participating in the Democratic Party's election campaign with the ghoulish spectacle of signing missiles.
	What do you make of that trivialisation of death and war?
	Well, it's not the first time that it's happened.
	And I think Americans, in general, are really not paying that much attention to what's happening in Ukraine.
	The average American doesn't really know where it is.
	If you were to stop an American on the streets of Kansas City, Missouri, or Portland, Oregon, and ask him or her some questions about NATO and Ukraine, I don't think you'd get very many coherent answers.
	This is something that's a huge problem for people to understand that live outside the United States.
	A Spanish general staff officer that worked for me at Supreme Headquarters of Light Powers Europe many years ago said it best.
	He said, the United States is not just a nation.
	It's not just a separate place.
	It's a planet. And there's a lot of truth in that.
	And when things don't go our way overseas, when we don't get what we want, when we fail, when we lose, we just leave.
	After 10 years in Vietnam, we left.
	Gone. And suddenly, the mainstream media no longer talked about what happened in Vietnam.
	It was no longer topical, no longer of any interest.
	Now, truly, people, it took years for people to figure out what a waste this was, what a tragedy it was, and say it needs to stop.
	Too long, frankly.
	But that's kind of the way Americans are.
	Oh, well, that didn't work.
	We leave. Now, we leave because we don't live in these places.
	And this is something that Charles de Gaulle tried to get across to people.
	He said, you want to bet on the United States to save you from the Soviets.
	This is back in the 60s.
	You want to bet on the United States to provide security.
	He said, where do Americans live?
	They don't live in Europe.
	He used to say, the Americans don't live in Europe.
	Britain is an island.
	And that leaves the rest of us on the continent.
	We have to take care of business ourselves.
	Of course, he took France out of the military dimension of NATO, threw us and our headquarters out of France.
	That's how we ended up in Belgium.
	De Gaulle was right.
	And Europeans need to understand this.
	And this is something I keep telling people overseas.
	Don't look for someone to come and rescue you.
	You need to rescue yourself.
	You need to protect your country.
	You need to protect your culture, your identity, who you are.
	Everybody's talking about weight loss injections because the results are so dramatic and who doesn't love drama?
	What if you need to lose weight but you don't like injections?
	Doctors created a weight loss supplement called Lean and the results are remarkable.
	The studied ingredients in Lean are shown to lower blood sugar, that's good, burn fat, We're good to go.
	Get started with 15% off and free rush shipping.
	Add lean to your healthy diet and exercise plan.
	Do you know what that phrase does?
	I mean, don't be like an idiot and just think you can guzzle lean and it's all going to be okay.
	Add it to a healthy exercise plan in order to lose that hard, stubborn-to-shift 10 pounds.
	even though I believe that you are absolutely beautiful as you are, just lose that £10 because
	you wanted to. Visit takelean.com, enter brand 15 for your discount, that's promo code brand15
	at takelean.com. Thank you. I think Americans are now on the defence here in the United States and
	they realise that their culture, their identity, their way of life are at risk but not because
	of anything in Ukraine.
	It's happening here because of this ideologically driven government that seems determined to denationalize us.
	That's the problem we have here at home, and we have these open borders.
	And increasingly, people are feeling the impact in terms of criminality, but also just spending, because these people are receiving free medical care, they're being put up in hotels, they're being cared for, they're getting better treatment than the average American citizen.
	That's beginning to sink in, and people say, what are we doing?
	And we have over 100,000 combat troops sitting on the border with Poland and Ukraine and Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, and down in Romania.
	Now we're sending thousands more troops to the Middle East.
	And people are saying, well, we think we should defend Israel if Israel's attacked.
	But Israel's not under attack.
	Israel's attacking. Israel's waging war.
	It's waging war in Gaza.
	It says it has to drive out or kill everybody in Gaza or they're not going to be safe.
	They're turning on the West Bank.
	Now they want to invade southern Lebanon because unless they go there and destroy everything and kill everybody, they won't have any peace.
	And people are beginning to say, did we sign up for this?
	But it's a little late in the game because we have all these carrier battle groups.
	We have over a thousand jet fighters.
	We have thousands of troops.
	You know, we have huge numbers of bombers that are placed in the region.
	We're ready to attack Iran tomorrow morning.
	All Iran has to do is strike back at Israel.
	And we're ready to go.
	Has anybody discussed this?
	Has there been a debate? No.
	There's no debate. Colonel, we are at a series of extraordinary tipping points on the basis of what you've just described.
	You began your answer by explaining how America, when they reach an irrefutable juncture, will just depart and the story will dissipate.
	But for the spectre of returning veterans whose voices have, of course, been heard mostly in the sort of, I would say, would you, the sort of film culture of the 1980s where Vietnam was revisited and that narrative and America's shadow and the shadow it cast on the souls of the veterans was explored in the host of extraordinary films that came out of that conflict When you explain that America's relationship with these almost colonial principalities set up as, you know, bases and like, you know, I've heard it, you know, and forgive this because I know this is a contentious issue, but...
	Israel described almost as a sort of a terrestrial battleship in the Middle East from a certain strategic perspective.
	So that's something that I'm just recounting.
	And I consider it to be intriguing that when these colonial outposts are utilized, it could go two ways.
	either as you've described in those the countries that border the former Soviet Union now Russia,
	they might realize, hang on a minute, we're not particularly bellicose, adventurous nations,
	and we're being partnered in a matter that's likely going to expedite potentially nuclear
	conflicts. That's when you're dealing with new somewhat neutral territories to use that word.
	But when it's more hostile and volatile regions, you know, and I guess Ukraine qualified because
	of all their sort of ethnic, regional, and historical disputes with Russia,
	you can, it's a very incendiary and dangerous situation.
	But before I yield to you once more, Colonel, I'd like to note that you turn to the subject of mass migration.
	And it's, for me, one of the things I suppose I still want to attest to and advocate for, as someone that's sympathetic to liberal arguments, and arguments that once for a moment seemed like they were arguments of the left.
	I don't know what to do with these taxonomies anymore.
	Is to point out that part of the problem of imperialism and colonialism is the displacement of people, the disruption of lands.
	And any true America First movement, or United Kingdom First, or France First movement, I believe, and this is what I'd love your view on, or incorporate...
	Less meddlesome interventionism in these nations because of the destabilization that it causes.
	There's a reason that people are coming from Venezuela.
	There's a reason that people are coming from the various countries that European misadventure has impacted.
	Take Heishi and its recent position in the news cycle.
	This is a country that's been exploited by the United States of America to a ridiculous degree.
	And not, I would add, By the kind of patriotic sort of forces that I would have characterised as basically, you know, George Soros is over there with the Clintons saying, you know, we're going to help you in this way and that, and apparently participating in the election of their government.
	So I wonder how you see not only the sort of potential risks of American advocacy and support in nations, because, you know, depending on the volatility of that nation and its regional disputes, it could lead to conflagration.
	And also the fact that this other issue that's affecting American patriots and American identity is the oft-sighted crisis at the border and how these things co-mingle.
	Well, first of all, keep in mind that until quite recently, people viewed war in the United States as something that happens on someone else's territory.
	That's very important to understand.
	In other words, whatever happens, it doesn't happen at home in the United States.
	That's changing. It's changing for the reasons that you're outlining.
	We know that a million people right now are leaving Lebanon.
	A million people.
	Most of them will go north into Turkey and then try to move from Turkey to Europe.
	Some will try to go further afield if they can do it.
	The Turks aren't very happy.
	They've already got three or four million refugees living on their territory right now, largely because of us.
	We were trying to remove, what's his name, Assad from power in Damascus.
	And of course, the Iraq war didn't help matters because we displaced large numbers of people from Iraq.
	So you're on to something that's very important.
	What we're finding right now is, sure, if you open your borders, anybody who can will come because they look at the United States as an opportunity for income, better life, better state of living, especially when you promise them at the same time free medical care and free cash and all sorts of other things.
	This isn't going to work because the American people are really feeling the pain.
	And just as people in Great Britain are feeling the pain from the mass migration into Great Britain over many years, for a long time people complained about it.
	I remember watching a BBC television documentary.
	This is 20 plus years ago.
	It was called Bloody Foreigners.
	And it was all about how much everybody was upset over the massive numbers of foreigners pouring into Great Britain.
	Well, that was over 20 years ago.
	So I can imagine it's much worse now.
	We're almost in the Western world, in the United States, in Great Britain, in the West.
	We are like a giant rowboat.
	And the rowboat has people on the oars, and it's got people steering.
	And we've taken aboard several people that we didn't want to drown.
	We brought them in. But the problem is the boat is now overloaded, and it looks as though the boat could sink with all of us in it because we simply can't afford it.
	We can't cope with it.
	We can't survive it.
	Because when the people come into the country, they do what you would expect them to do.
	They set up a version of their country on your soil, and then they expect you to respect them and do as they wish, without regard to what it is that you may have or may not have in your country.
	All of these things, you talked about a juncture, we sometimes call it a strategic inflection point.
	All of this is in fact coming together and there's one other factor that we haven't considered.
	That's the fragility of the financial system and the economy.
	And what you get through the mainstream or from the Bank of England or from the Fed or whatever it is or the ECU, what do you get?
	You get, oh, print more money.
	This isn't a problem.
	We can master this. We can cope with this.
	Well, the truth is we're reaching the end point where we just cannot print more money.
	We can't afford to inflate ourselves.
	The bottom line is I don't know what's going to happen, but if you look at the potential in the Middle East for a war that will spread rapidly beyond Iran, because if Iran is attacked by us, the Russians and the Chinese will not allow Iran to be pulverized into submission.
	That will not happen.
	Why?
	Because they do business with Iran, and they see Iran is inextricably intertwined with
	them.
	They depend, and China depends very heavily on all the oil and natural gas that come out
	of the Persian Gulf.
	And a war with Iran would inevitably result in the destruction of the oil facilities and
	the refineries in Iran, and probably close down the Straits of Hormuz.
	The Chinese don't want that.
	By the way, neither do the Japanese nor the Koreans.
	And if you go to Russia...
	What? For the same region.
	Yeah, they're all very dependent on it.
	And the same resources and the same relationships. Absolutely.
	You have people right now trying to build an alternative to passage through the Suez Canal.
	They're trying to build rail lines and road lines that run from the Indian Ocean at the bottom of the Iranian state border on the Indian Ocean all the way up through the Caucasus Mountains into Russia and from there into Europe.
	Because they don't want to have to deal with the problems that exist in the Red Sea and the Suez Canal right now.
	And that route, if they build it as they plan to, is a lot faster than moving by ship up through the Red Sea, through the Suez, into the Mediterranean, and then up to the North Sea.
	So everyone is already tired of dealing with us and our meddling, which is causing everyone to be miserable.
	So that's clear.
	That's unambiguous. The BRICS, the whole BRICS movement, Explain that BRICS movement.
	I knew that was coming.
	I know sort of a bit what it is, but it will help.
	This started with Brazil, Russia, India, China.
	Now it includes Saudi Arabia.
	The Turks want to join it.
	It looks like there are another 84 states on the planet want to join it.
	It promises to be an open free market system where everything is gold-backed.
	In other words, the currency is based on existing gold holdings.
	Like this country used to be.
	Exactly. And that gets them out from under us.
	Because our financial system, surprise, surprise, in the 50 years after World War II, was structured to do what?
	Make us wealthy. Give us a high standard of living at the expense of everybody we do business with.
	So when you do business in dollars right now, we're literally passing our high debt on to everyone else.
	Because we have no brakes.
	There's no one breaking the movement to what I would call financial Armageddon.
	Nobody wants to go down with us.
	So they're building an alternative structure.
	We see this as a threat.
	Well, it may be, but we created it.
	In other words, just as we created the war in Ukraine by trying to push this NATO issue, build up an enemy force inside Ukraine designed to attack Russia, designed to harm Russia, and you've listened to the comments, our goal is to harm Russia and drive them back into the Stone Age to divide the place and all this kind of nonsense.
	We are doing those kinds of things everywhere.
	And right now, our unconditional support for Mr.
	Netanyahu makes it abundantly clear to everybody in the region that we are backing them not just for defense of Israel, but for Israeli supremacy in the region.
	And the majority of people who live in the region are interested in living in an environment of Israeli military and political hegemony backed by the United States.
	So you look at what's happened on the war front, which you've talked about.
	You look at the massive migrations that have come out of the Middle East and North Africa, largely as a consequence of our policies and the chaos and criminality we've created in many of these countries.
	Then you add to that the impact of the migration on our societies, which has been to weaken them, weaken our national sense of identity, weaken the coherence of our societies.
	You know, we talk about social cohesion, where our social cohesion in this country is very low.
	That's the problem. In order for a large country like the United States to survive over time, it needs strong societal cohesion.
	Now, there are people in Washington that says, well, that's why these wars overseas can be good.
	They'll force cohesion on the nation.
	No, they won't.
	We were very reluctant to go to war both before World War I and World War II. The reason Eisenhower ended the war and pulled us largely out of Korea was because there was no support for the war in Korea.
	Vietnam hung on for years until people finally figured out we're not defeating communism, but we're killing 2 million people in Vietnam.
	And what good is this and how do we benefit from it?
	And all we do is take losses and ruin the economy.
	I mean, we've been through all of these things.
	The American population is beginning to wake up.
	Not fast enough in my judgment, but they're beginning to wake up.
	And that's why you and I and RFK Jr.
	and Tulsi Gabbard spoke yesterday and said, we've got to end these overseas wars because we know what it means.
	The wars breed corruption.
	They breed spoilation.
	They breed division.
	In other words, they only enrich a small portion of the population.
	Remember the seven richest counties in the United States?
	Surprise, surprise, they're right where we are.
	They surround Washington, D.C. So, where's the benefit to the larger population?
	There is no benefit. All you have to do is drive across the United States and see what life is like.
	This is not 1965.
	This is not 1995.
	Things are not good. Americans know that.
	They ask, why? So we know that peace and prosperity ultimately go together.
	And that's what Eisenhower said.
	He said people need to know that, yes, we can secure our country, but we can also have prosperity.
	In other words, we keep defense expenditures and defense activities in check.
	There's a limit to how much we're going to invest in it.
	Today, we have a trillion dollar defense budget.
	And what are we doing? We don't defend our borders.
	We don't defend our literal waters.
	Everybody complains about the massive criminality.
	The police are not allowed to do their jobs in many cases, or if they do, they go to jail and they're afraid to act.
	And they'll tell you flat out that in many of our big cities, they're going to need military support to restore some measure of order.
	I remember in 2003, just before we went into Iraq, there was this lovely lady who lived in Washington, D.C. She was an Afro-American or black lady.
	She was about 65 or 70.
	She was interviewed on television.
	And the story was carried in the Washington Post.
	They said, what do you think about the decision to intervene in Iraq?
	And she said, well, I wish they'd send the U.S. Army to my neighborhood and get rid of all the criminals and drug salesmen and everything else and bring some peace to my neighborhood.
	Well, she was right.
	And right now, we're sending 700 National Guardsmen from Tennessee over to the Middle East.
	Eastern Tennessee was virtually destroyed by this Hurricane Helene.
	Why are National Guardsmen in Tennessee going to the Middle East when they should be addressing the damage from the hurricane inside their own states?
	The same thing is happening in all the other states.
	What are we doing? This is where Donald Trump gets a lot of support because he says, we can't live in a world that's America last.
	Let's be honest, most K-cup pods are serving you mouldy, pesticide-laden rubbish.
	Chains like Dunkin', they're stinking the place out with their stale coffee and expecting you to say cheers.
	1775 Coffee makes sure you don't have to drink a chemical soup when you want a caffeine lift.
	1775 Coffee steps in to slap the mediocrity right out of the competition.
	Their K-Cup pods are filled with single origin, high altitude beans, hand-picked by people who know what flavour
	actually is.
	It's coffee that will slap your brain fast awake!
	Faster, in fact, than a government scandal.
	Who doesn't need an injection of this new caffeine inflection?
	Kamala Biden? Get this stuff down here.
	You've got a choice of medium roast, dark roast and mushroom blend.
	Yeah, actual mushrooms like lion's mane and reishi to boost your brain power as well as giving you an immediate lift.
	Because let's be honest, if your coffee isn't strong enough to overthrow a small government, what's the point?
	This coffee is for people who don't want a participation trophy.
	This is coffee for winners.
	Go to 1775coffee.com, grab your 24-pack and tell Corporate Coffee to take a hike.
	That's go to 1775coffee.com, grab your 24-pack and tell Corporate Coffee to take a hike.
	Caffeine that will help you overthrow the powerful.
	The same thing happened...
	With the Maui fires, when there are internal crises, there are no resources, forces, or will to contend with them.
	And this, I suppose, is a rather simple revelation that for all of the rhetoric campaigning and ephemera, the agenda of the elites that control this country, and I'm, in a sense, Begin to hesitate, Colonel, even to use a word like country, because it's clearly a sort of a glommed-on consensus of financial, resource-led.
	Sometimes I query that there might be even darker agenda at play that go beyond materialism.
	To wit, I mean, a type of spiritual warfare.
	Because when I ponder the breadth of Of the crises that you're outlining, it seems impossible that such a thing could take place either without the total nullification of good concomitant with the sort of suppression of talk of...
	Sacredness and basic principles.
	I mean, you need to get too theological or esoteric about it.
	The simple values of service, kindness, relationship, community, those kind of ideas.
	On a broader scale, I wanted to remark on what you're describing.
	And I know that you're a...
	Historian, and you understand in particular military history, that when you outline and conflate the current economic and financial crisis that could be ignited by BRICS, were that to become a reality alongside the sound to me
	pretty complex regional disputes that while somewhat dislocated through the ulterior powers that are
	interested in those regions could easily become a sort of first world war type of
	conflict and then when I think about that I wonder if I can see that while listening to you explain it
	then surely the people that are in charge of you know American foreign policy and the people
	that are running NATO and the people in the United Kingdom and France can also see it.
	And then, so the arguments that we make for nationalism, nationalism as opposed to globalism, you know, I suppose when people consider nationalism, there's this idea of exclusivity.
	You remarked on the issue of migration.
	Rather than assimilate, communities want to recreate their own conditions.
	Now, you know, if a nation is anything, I suppose it's a set of shared values, community, you know, we could unpack that obviously for hours.
	But I wonder if at this point, these principles of subsidiarity that you and I have discussed
	elsewhere, i.e., as it seemed intended by the forefathers of your nation, a regionalized
	government, regionalized control, government that operates in service of the people rather
	than from a position of domination, might in an evolved form, respectfully include,
	in the same way as even a quaint depiction of New York would have an Irish neighborhood
	and an Italian neighborhood when migration was presumed to be European.
	I wonder, in order to accommodate or even create a kind of new consensus and social cohesion, There might need to be a kind of, I'm not talking about constitutional change, but a kind of cultural conversation about what America looks like.
	Because I can see in my own country that whether a referendum on, do you want net zero migration?
	I think, you know, this referendum is not taking place for a reason, because I think that's what people would say is, yeah, we want net zero.
	Then I wonder what the conversation becomes about deportation.
	You know, this is where, like, sometimes I have a tough time with the right when, you know, when you hear, like, sort of Trump Initially say we would deport the 14,000 murderers and criminals that are pouring across the border.
	I wonder if codified within that are projects of deportation that might be kind of pogrom-ish rather than selective.
	I think that's a very good question and it deserves a good answer.
	And there are various ways to look at it.
	Between 1815 and 1924...
	Roughly 32 million people came to the United States overwhelmingly from Europe, from all parts of Europe, from the Caucasus Mountains all the way up to the Arctic Circle.
	That's a period of not quite, what, 110 years?
	Now, why 1815?
	Well, until 1815, The country was not a status quo structure.
	In other words, it was not fully built.
	But by 1815, you had administration.
	By 1815, you had roads and bridges.
	In other words, we were organized.
	Until 1815, we weren't, and so we called those people, quote-unquote, settlers.
	And they still constitute a very large portion of the American population.
	My ancestors came during that period.
	And when they showed up, there was nothing here, literally.
	Were they Appalachian Mountain, McGregor?
	No, no, no, no. The McGregors came a little later, but my mother's family came in 1681, and they were Quakers that came to New Jersey initially, Burlington, and then moved from there down to Philadelphia and so forth.
	So they were settling the country.
	There wasn't much there. And you had Finns and Swedes and Germans, all sorts of people that came in, but that merged quickly into a country, into a nation.
	You know, Sam Huntington said in 1776 when we declared independence, we were already really a nation, but we became an independent state, nation state, which we hadn't been before.
	But between 1815 and 1924 you have 32 million people come into the country.
	That sounds like a great deal, but if you spread that out through several waves of immigration, those are relatively small numbers.
	We've had more than 40 million within the space of 15 to 20 years, just at the end of the 1980s, into the first part of this century.
	We now have more than 52 million people, more than 52 million living inside the United States who were not born in the country.
	We've never had that high percentage of non-Native-born people in the United States.
	In 1924, we shut down immigration.
	Because people felt that we needed a pause to ensure that the people who were coming in, that their children would become Americans.
	How was that politically received, if I may ask?
	It was very well received at the time because people were very upset by the fact that these people that were coming in in the 1880s, 90s, early 1900s were not all speaking English.
	They were not becoming part of American society.
	Who were they in that era? Mostly Southern Europeans and East Europeans.
	And as a result, they shut it down.
	And by the way, we had no public school system in the United States until after 1900.
	The reason we started public schools was for immigrants.
	Because you were not simply taught reading, writing, arithmetic, and English.
	You were also taught citizenship.
	That's why people now say, well, that's quaint.
	We don't need that anymore. We would stand up in schools every morning, first thing in the morning, we would say the Pledge of Allegiance to the flag.
	I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, to the Republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, justice for all, and so forth.
	There was a reason for that, because you were dealing with children and grandchildren.
	People didn't speak any English, didn't understand any of those things.
	They all became Americans.
	So by the time the Second World War ends, 1945 to say 1965, we are a very homogenous, cohesive population.
	That then begins to change in 65.
	There's new immigration legislation that actually favored non-Europeans.
	And that has resulted in a tremendous demographic change inside the United States.
	And we have long since, quote-unquote, breached the limits of assimilation.
	So when you look at the situation in the United States today, a lot of people are saying exactly what you're hearing in England and other countries.
	We need to stop.
	We need to halt immigration, period, in order to sort things out, find out who's here.
	Now, the second thing is the illegal dimension of this.
	And I think the best solution is you just don't say, everybody who's not here legally, pack your stuff, you're leaving.
	What you do is you say, all of you who came here illegally, you have 90 days to pack up your gear, leave voluntarily, and on the way out, Give us your name, and as soon as we think we can accept more immigration, we will let you come back.
	Those of you who refuse to leave, who do not register with us, we will confiscate your property and you will suffer the consequences under our law.
	We have to establish the rule of law.
	They're so brutal, I would say, because if you think if that project were not undertaken
	with conciliatory projects internationally for the territories to which those people will return,
	who in some cases would directly have borne the consequences of American interventionism,
	it would seem like a cruel exodus. I just want to sort of tag that. Also, prior to...
	Well, you realize, for instance, when it comes to Mexico, that more than a third of the Mexican population lives
	inside the United States.
	Yeah, but I didn't say illegal.
	I mean, most of these people are not illegally here.
	I'm just pointing out that they already send billions of dollars every year back to Mexico.
	But then I suppose we get into the query of the establishment of that southern border in the first place.
	Exactly. Let me get back to that.
	That's very important. In 1929, after the stock market crashed and the Depression set in, Herbert Hoover made the decision to deport 9 million people back to Mexico.
	He said, I've got to free up jobs for Americans who are now jobless on the streets.
	If I don't do this, there will be violence.
	Americans will resent the non-citizens who are holding down jobs that previously they would not do.
	Now, it didn't end there. Franklin Roosevelt deported another 3.5 million.
	Harry Truman deported another 2.5 million.
	And ultimately, Eisenhower, before he left, deported 1.5 million.
	Now, that border exists for a reason, because we fought a war with Mexico.
	You know, the Mexicans will never forgive us because they say we took all this land from them.
	But there were less than 110,000 people living in those lands, and most of them were Native Americans or indigenous tribes.
	They hadn't done much with it.
	We filled that overnight with millions of people.
	Millions. But the truth is, we did not keep Mexico, even though we marched into it, we conquered it, and we temporarily occupied it for a year because we recognized that we could not change the people that lived there and their culture to operate in a way that was commensurate with being Americans.
	In other words, English, the rule of law, these things are very important.
	South of the border, there has never been, strictly speaking, rule of law on the British model.
	And you see, that's something that we created and held to very, very consistently throughout our history.
	We punished a lot of people, but we kept the rule of law.
	If you talk to people, as I do regularly, a good friend just became an American citizen.
	He's Turkish. And I said, you know, I've never asked you this, but just tell me, why did you really want to be an American?
	He said, oh, that's simple. He said, I love this country.
	I enjoy traveling through it.
	I can go anywhere. I can see anybody.
	But he said, I don't have to bribe anybody to do anything.
	And when you talk to people like that, that have gone through the process and it took him years to become an American, it was not easy.
	When you listen to them, the things that they value are the things that made us a great nation, a great power, and a successful economy.
	And those things do not exist south of the border.
	I suppose there's a requirement for social codes in order to even make the claim of being a nation, or indeed a civilization, or a society.
	Well, your borders make nations. Yes, without that, I recognize that, without that liminal space.
	But what I am...
	Queering with, for example, the relationship with Mexico, and also the pre-1945 homogeneity that you described as a level of social cohesion that this nation is now bereft of, is that I reckon were we to incorporate into our conversation as an expert in African-American studies, they would say that in that The claim that you've made of homogeneity would have baked into it repression,
	and if not actual slavery, systems of social...
	The man you should talk to on that subject is a man named Thomas Sowell.
	Yeah, yeah, yeah. What would he say?
	He's very, very good. I do want to talk to him.
	I see him all the time. And he tries to sort myth from fiction, truth from reality, and that's a whole separate subject.
	Again, there was a book written by an African-American.
	This came out several years ago.
	His name escapes me. He spent time in Africa, and he came back and wrote a book that angered lots of black people because said, thank God you're in the United States.
	Let me tell you what Africa looks like and be grateful that you're here.
	That didn't go down well because we have also, I think, unfortunately, cultivated a certain sense of victimhood with certain groups, and it becomes a political reality, even if it's not based on historic fact.
	And I'm not saying that anyone who came into the country was not subjected to some form of injustice.
	If you want to go back far enough, go back before the Civil War, if you were Irish and Catholic, you were not treated well at all inside the United States.
	We can talk about all the reasons for this sort of thing, and I'm not saying that it was right.
	What I'm saying is that we worked through these things over time because we do have a sense of justice in the United States.
	We have something called the Bill of Rights.
	And ultimately, if you read the Bill of Rights, that triumphs over virtually all the injustice if you enforce the law.
	And remember, when segregation was broken by Eisenhower, he sent the 101st Airborne Division down to Arkansas to ensure that little girls who were black could go to schools where everybody was white.
	It worked. It corrected the injustice.
	Now, do we live in a perfect utopia?
	I'm sure we can find lots of people who don't think so.
	But I happen to think that most of the time, most Americans view their country in a positive light, at least domestically.
	But right now, they feel that their country is slipping away from them, much as people in England do, much as people in France do, and in Germany and other countries.
	They're afraid to say anything in Germany.
	I lived there for years.
	I was a student there.
	I talk to Germans all the time, and they'll be frank.
	They said, I can't say any of these things in public, or I'll be tarred and feathered as a Nazi.
	The police will come to my door and accuse me of being some sort of far-right nationalist.
	He said, I've been a socialist in the Social Democratic Party all my life, and I'm telling you, these are disastrous times, and we now have whole sections of the country that we can't even walk through safely.
	Where if you do and you're a German woman, you're at risk of being raped and on and on and on.
	This can't last over time.
	A government of any country has its first solemn obligation to protect its citizens.
	There's nothing in the Constitution that obligates us to let anybody come into our country who wants to come here.
	Yes. When I was considering these social codes and the obvious value of law and order, the alternative to which is chaos, and I suppose that the entropy of chaos is destruction, further disorder, decay.
	And that consensual governance and social codes that are achieved consensually and via a relation between a community, it seems to me, are likely to succeed.
	I'm listening very carefully to what you're saying, and you're describing a phenomena that I'm seeing in other milieus, this sort of exponential and rapid change, rapid availability of information, rapid inflation, rapid migration, a sort of vertiginous incline away from being able to sort of really cope with What is this?
	A boundless quality.
	All these things, in a sense, feel like an acceleration into chaos, accompanied, as we were covering in the earlier part of our conversation, with regional conflicts backed by superpowers.
	I sometimes feel that we're being coached into disorder.
	And the only way to oppose this disorder, or the only way, but a way, firstly there needs to be a recovery of some sort of basic principles, and I wonder from where we might derive them.
	Essentially, it appears that your position is the sanctification of documents like the Bill of Rights and the Constitution, which are being sort of attacked sometimes in an explicit and obvious way.
	And elsewhere, in practice, they're being...
	Actually, what I wonder if could be recovered, and it seems to be necessary to recover, would be a sense of nationhood being about inclusivity rather than exclusion, even though we acknowledge in our conversation that you can't have nation without border because otherwise that's impossible.
	Yeah, and I've also dealt with people that have come to live in Germany, some Americans, mostly Brits and others, and some were very unhappy.
	For instance, why were they unhappy?
	Because on Sunday, things are quiet in Germany.
	You just can't make noise.
	If you do, your neighbors will show up and say, what are you doing?
	Now, some people say, well, that's extreme.
	I think they should be more tolerant.
	It's Germany. You know, they're Germans.
	That's the way they live. So when you go into another country...
	You have an obligation to take them seriously.
	You don't walk all over their culture, their way of life.
	You don't ignore their laws.
	This is the problem. It's not the only problem.
	And as an Englishman, you'll really appreciate this.
	This was this gentleman whose name was Sir William Wallace, became very famous as a freedom fighter in Scotland, and the official history said about him that he believed that the only good Englishman was a dead Englishman, and he put the theory into practice at every opportunity.
	Well, we're not talking about that.
	In other words, we're not talking about killing anybody.
	What we're simply saying is that the borders exist for a reason.
	You know, people want to live a certain way as a collective group.
	Can others enter that group?
	Of course. In small numbers, you can take almost anybody anywhere.
	But when you...
	That's why I was trying to get the point across.
	32 million over 115 years...
	Compared with 40 million over a space of maybe 12 years.
	That's insane. You can't absorb it.
	And it creates friction and anger and violence.
	And that's why, during the Depression, you had all these efforts to move out people that were foreigners.
	We didn't want foreigners holding down jobs that Americans needed to avoid violence.
	Now, when that ended, after the Second World War, we got out of the Depression and so forth, everything changes.
	My point is that we're in a difficult situation right now.
	We have to recognize exactly what you said, reality.
	Reality is we're not all Renaissance men, and we're not inviting everybody to show up and live in our living rooms.
	You know, most of the people that want these sorts of things, they live in gated communities.
	They're remote from reality.
	It's the point I tried to make yesterday when I was speaking about the $35 trillion debt.
	The people that are responsible for this gross overspending and mismanagement, they're not on the hook for it.
	We are. The rest of us out here who live the unwashed middle, the working class, the people that show up and fight for the country, they're the ones who are treated as though you're mindless cattle.
	It's your job to do what we tell you.
	We don't see it that way.
	William Wallace, who you mentioned, was executed at the same site in London, this where St.
	Bart's now stands, and Smithfield Meat Market, where Watt Tyler, the leader of the peasant revolution, came out of Essex like me, was similarly executed after bringing his rebellion to London.
	He was beheaded there. Well, the reasons were here, you know.
	What I suppose I'm alluding to, and to your last point, is that there is clearly a requirement for an informed citizenry that have a set of values that are so potent, whether they are based on individual rights, the rights of the family, the rights of the community, the rights of the nation.
	These rights, which, you know, in a sense can only come from God and the divine if they're not to be arbitrary conjecture, These rights have to mean enough for us to sacrifice for ourselves and maybe sacrifice ourselves.
	We're up against a ruling class, as you know, that does not see it that way.
	First of all, they don't think that human distinctions, the things that separate various peoples into groups, into races, into ethnicities, into cultural, whatever it is, they're all irrelevant.
	I saw this in the Clinton administration in the 1990s when I was involved in the Balkans.
	And I sat at a table, and one of the Clinton appointees said, well, you know, after all, and I was a lieutenant colonel at that point, Colonel McGregor, the Serbs, the Croats, and the Bosniaks, they're all the same.
	There are no differences, and they effectively speak the same language, so there's no reason why they can't get along.
	And I said, well, this may come as a shock to you, but the Bosniaks, the Serbs, and the Croats actually think they are very different, with different histories.
	The language is not entirely the same.
	And the Bosniaks in particular, many of themselves, regard themselves as Turks, and at least culturally Muslim.
	So waving your hand and saying they're all effectively the same won't work.
	Well, this is the problem.
	People talk about diversity, but they all want to crush it.
	They want to homogenize everybody into this, you keep using this word nihilism, which is a good word, into this sort of nihilistic, amorphous mass of workers.
	Who are just herded in one direction or the next.
	Go fight here, go to this factory, go to there, do this job.
	That's not what Americans want.
	I don't think most Europeans do.
	No one wants it, I don't think, except for the elites that could plainly benefit.
	Well, I suppose one of the things we're talking around, Colonel, appears to be sort of the imposition of top-down power, power sort of like being imposed, rather than a power that is consensual and lateral.
	Of course, there can be a transcendent power, but this is a power that rightly is celestial and belongs to God.
	Once that power is removed, we're free to create whatever rational gods and edicts.
	Well, if you know no higher power than yourself, which is the way the ruling class thinks, because they dismiss out of hand all these things as fairy tales.
	They may not say so publicly, but privately, they regard all this as nonsense.
	It doesn't matter. These are the globalists that you're referring to.
	And they're in power.
	Now, will they last? I don't think so.
	Because I think people are beginning to pay attention.
	See, this is the big problem in the United States.
	People have not paid attention to many things for a long time.
	Why? Life is good.
	Oh, it doesn't affect me.
	That doesn't matter. It doesn't bother me.
	It's starting to bother people everywhere.
	And they're beginning to say, wait a minute, I don't sign on for this woke nonsense.
	I don't believe that men have babies.
	You know, I don't think that people's genitalia can be chopped off and they can be converted into something else.
	I don't care about your operation.
	So wait a minute, I don't buy that.
	That's what's happening.
	And those people are beginning to stand up and say no more.
	And I think it will ultimately terminate this globalist regime that is governing the West.
	At the same time, they're beginning to figure out, look at what's happened in Ukraine.
	Look at the hundreds of billions of dollars we spent there.
	Where are all the new hospitals that should have been built in the United States?
	Why can't they repair roads and bridges?
	Why aren't we paying policemen enough to work Why are we fighting over there?
	You said you're defending a democracy?
	Ukraine's the most corrupt place in the world.
	It's probably number one in human trafficking of women and children.
	We don't know how bad it is, but it's very, very bad.
	So we have a government that's clamping down, oppressing churches in Ukraine.
	Why suddenly this anti-Christian mentality?
	Why are we attacking the Orthodox Christian Church?
	This is beginning to be felt.
	But no one asked any hard questions up front.
	Nothing was debated because, well, if you have a professional force and you can send it anywhere, provided it doesn't take a lot of casualties in one day, no one will pay attention.
	Now, we lost 58,000 killed in Vietnam over about an eight-and-a-half to nine-year period with another 100,000-plus wounded.
	But it still took all those years to wake people up to understand what was happening.
	Well, 600,000 have died in less than three years in Ukraine.
	And we continue to shovel money in that direction.
	We know lots of it is going to banks in Cyprus and Albania and God knows where else.
	They're selling half of the equipment they get from us on the black market.
	You can go on the dark web and you can buy anything you want.
	Why are we watching javelin missiles that were sent to Ukraine show up with the Mexican drug cartels?
	It's all for sale. People are beginning to figure this out.
	But the elites, they don't care.
	Because they're living well and they're well paid.
	Remember, Washington is donor-occupied.
	Policy is made by donors.
	Billionaire oligarchs.
	We have ours now.
	They're the ones who are determining what the policy should be.
	Americans are sensing it, but they haven't really figured it out.
	They need to. Yes, and it appears increasingly, and I'm thankful to be in this position myself, that what is required is nothing less than personal salvation From, with Jesus Christ.
	And at that point, I feel so much becomes plain that Jesus Christ loves us, that we are loved.
	With this love and with this acceptance, there is no requirement to yield to top-down ideas, whether they are economic or cultural.
	But what we are in and of ourselves is an expression of a type of perfection, whilst it may be fallen and coloured by sin.
	We can return. We can be redeemed through him.
	And I feel that when this idea is masked, annihilated, obfuscated, lost, and forgotten, people are very, very hungry, looking for things.
	And hungry, bewildered, famished people will feast upon the insidious and synthetic milk of this culture.
	Who are the four horsemen of the apocalypse?
	Nihilism, atheism, Marxism, globalism.
	All of which reject out of hand everything that you just said.
	They reject out of hand that human beings, as human beings, have any innate value.
	We're just fungible commodities, ready to be vaccinated, ready to be herded, ready to be managed and told what to do.
	That's un-American. That's not American, is that Christian?
	Yes, Colonel, thank you very much for that wonderful education.
	I can see the necessity from bottom-up organization and communication, and I'll be glad to talk more about ways that communities can organize politically to ensure that the existing structures that make this republic democratic and free are correctly utilized.
	Thank you, sir, for your time and for your attention and for your wisdom and expertise.
	Oh, thank you for Thanks for talking to me at all.
	I appreciate it.
	Thanks, Colonel McGregor.
	Thank you very much for joining us for this episode of Stay Free with Russell Brand.
	We will be back tomorrow with a fantastic conversation with Bobby Kennedy.
	It's...
	I don't think I've ever had a better conversation with Bobby Kennedy.
	It's been up for local subscribers for an entire week now.
	The same way that the Jordan Peterson conversation will be up tomorrow.
	It's fantastic.
	And as we move into the break bread era, we have conversations online with prominent Christians
	about Christianity.
	You've got to enjoy these fantastic conversations while you can.
	So become an Awake and Wonder now.
	Click the link in the description.
	Support our content and our work and take this fantastic journey with us.
	You'll be starting with a brilliant conversation with Jordan Peterson tomorrow, a fantastic
	conversation for our new break bread with Russell Brand with Tucker Carlson next week.
	And tomorrow we will be back with a conversation with Bobby Kennedy.
	You're going to absolutely love it.
	be back tomorrow not with more of the same but with more of the different.
	Until then, if you can, stay free.

▲