Stay Free - Russel Brand - The Vaccine Ideology Unmasked | Dr Peter McCullough - SF658

Dec. 3, 2025 - Stay Free - Russel Brand

01:00:27

The Vaccine Ideology Unmasked | Dr Peter McCullough - SF658

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Ladies and gentlemen, Russell Brandon trying to bring real journalism to the American people.
	Hello there, you Awakening Wonders.
	Thanks for joining me today for Stay Free with Russell Brand.
	Today I'm talking to Dr. Peter McCulloch, one of the early adopters and brave voices when it came to speaking the truth to power during the pandemic period.
	Peter McCulloch stayed the line and stayed the course when it came to the truth about vaccines.
	And today we're talking about his new book, Vaccines, Mythology, Ideology, and Reality.
	What you'll find fascinating, I really enjoyed the number of correlations between scientific orthodoxy and religious orthodoxy.
	You may think you've heard that horse being flogged already, but not to this degree and to this depth.
	For example, look at this Euro coin, this 20 Euro coin that sort of essentially tries to equate transubstantiation with vaccination.
	It's amazing.
	It's a brilliant education.
	If you're watching this anywhere other than Rumble, click the link in the description.
	Get on over to Rumble.
	And if you don't have Rumble Premium yet, get Rumble Premium now.
	Remember, you can join in the conversation in the comments and chat if you're part of our locals community.
	I love you guys.
	I love you like crazy.
	Thanks for supporting us over here on Stay Free with Russell Brand.
	We appreciate it and we'll appreciate it yet further if you'll support my glorious new venture, Reborn with Russell Brand.
	You get the opportunity to win this mother effing truck.
	No, it's not a truck, it's more of a Jeep, Jeep 392.
	My word, have a look at this glorious creation.
	But without further ado, let's get on with this conversation with Peter McCulloch.
	It's a brilliant conversation.
	If you're not ready to handle some great chunks of truth, then you should take a vaccine before listening.
	Praise the Lord.
	Check it out.
	Dr. Peter McCulloch, thank you so much for joining me today for Stay Free with Russell Brand.
	It's a special occasion to have for the honor of your attention.
	Thank you.
	Thank you.
	The reason I admire you so much is because you're one of those people that stepped up when it mattered and was bold enough to tell the truth when there were obviously consequences.
	And now you're rightly being rewarded.
	Your new book, Vaccines, Mythology, Ideology, and Reality, is available now.
	There's a QR code up on the screen for those of you that want to buy it.
	Tell me, like, I mean, we're just living in this extraordinary storm of new information.
	Just today or earlier this week, I was reading that they are now saying, yes, there are not ample clinical trials to claim that there's no connection between, for example, autism and vaccines.
	Tell me where you stand and what the benefit of reading this book is for a parent and indeed anyone that cares about truth.
	Well, like you and so many people around the world, I was blown away with the complete madness that occurred with the COVID-19 vaccine campaign.
	And with my co-author, John Leake, who is a historian, we decided to look into this and did our own investigation.
	300 years of history.
	We go back to actually Cotton Mather in the United States, 1721, about 50 years before Edward Jenner in the UK.
	And what we uncovered from the very beginning is that there was an incredible fear of infectious diseases, bold claims made by vaccine developers that couldn't possibly have been true, and then always a tremendous amount of money and power.
	And early on in vaccines, they didn't even know it caused the disease, let alone whether a product, you know, an injection or something else would stop it.
	But when we saw things roll out with the COVID-19 vaccine campaign, again, a blind acceptance of the vaccines based on essentially a religious faith, not scientific evidence, then it started to fit together.
	And so the book is written as a narrative.
	It's not a boring medical book, and it's not a timeline.
	It's a character-driven description of what happened.
	An ideology formed around vaccines, you know, driven by these various factors.
	And Russell, if I could go a bit further and just say the ideology essentially says this, that we have fear and susceptibility to infectious diseases, that through the brilliance of mankind, man can improve upon God's creation.
	Man outdoes God with vaccines.
	However, since the vaccines aren't perfect, in order for this to work, everyone must take them without exception.
	And if someone is injured or disabled or even dies due to a vaccine, they should accept that.
	Their families should accept that for the greater good.
	And that vaccine ideology has been in forward motion now for 300 years.
	It's an extraordinary ideology.
	I've never heard it put so succinctly, but it fits very neatly into a paradigm that I've been exploring for some time myself, where accumulative human authority undergirded by reason surmounts and surpasses divine authority.
	And once you accept that as a premise and the principle, you can deploy it, if not arbitrarily, wherever, you can apply it where it's required.
	You can employ it wherever required.
	And it does seem reasonable.
	I remember even before I knew any of this stuff that being kind of skeptical about vaccines when I considered, as the individualist I was, and I suppose to some degree remain, that whilst I can understand the idea that vaccines might be good for the whole, they may not necessarily be good for the individual.
	And that was sort of voided of any sort of spiritual insights.
	That was just a kind of my own counter-rational perspective.
	My rationalism versus their rationalism.
	I can see that for you, you might want to vaccinate everyone for the school system or whatever, but my Mabel and my Peggy and my Herbie might not want them involved in this.
	Now, that's before we start to understand the layers of deception and disingenuity that you've already started to unpack in the first few minutes of our conversation.
	Now, this transition from kind of snake oil selling and, you know, and well-intentioned entrepreneurialism and alchemic brilliance that sort of must have preceded the medical profession was somehow sort of lacquered and shellacked in sigils and insignia of medical authority,
	perhaps to mask, ironically, just how protean some of these ideas were and how insubstantial and how lacking in the kind of credible, clinically undergirded, double-blinded authority that most of us require before putting substances into our children's body.
	How exactly did they conduct that bait and switch, doctor?
	How did we get from, you know, I don't know, where was it where George Washington famously vaccinated troops?
	You know, where's that famous battle you guys had, you know, where all of the troops were sick and stuff and they were like literally prior to syringes and stuff vaccinating.
	Wenda, how did we get from an open, honest appraisal of the experimental nature, excuse me, of vaccine ideology into this sort of robust certainty?
	You know, we never really had it.
	We searched for the origins of vaccination.
	We found some dabbling in Africa and Egypt, but we had to start somewhere in our book.
	And so we picked a starting point, 1721 in Boston, Massachusetts.
	And the character of interest is Cotton Mather.
	Cotton Mather was probably one of the most influential intellectuals of the time in Boston.
	And he also was a Puritan minister.
	And he began with variolation, which is taking not a needle, but a scalpel and taking some pus from one smallpox pustule in one person.
	And then with a stab of the scalpel, inserted it to the skin of a healthy person to try to protect them.
	And Cotton Mather, early on, working with Dr. Boylston, proclaimed that this process called variolation, that it was a gift from God.
	So from the very beginning, a gift from God.
	Now, Cotton Mather also is well known for another activity he was involved in.
	And he was one of the consultants to the judges in the Salem witchcraft trial.
	He believed in witches.
	And it goes on from there.
	You know, King Edward III of Britain, he had his children variolated.
	And two of his children died directly after the procedure.
	But there was an acceptance here that we were going to accept loss in order to try to protect others.
	He must have thought it was valuable for his 15 other children.
	Benjamin Franklin was originally very critical of Cotton Mather, thinking, you know, this is, you know, this is potentially dangerous or may not work.
	No one even knew what smallpox was, let alone how it spread.
	But then he lost little Frankie to smallpox.
	And Ben Franklin did 180 and said, you know, I'm behind this.
	If this works, we're going to give it a go.
	And then Edward Jenner in the UK and Colster, essentially, he was at the right hand of the king and queen.
	And we move on to Louis Pasteur.
	Pasteur, you know, essentially would make bold claims and said, you know, I'll get back to you on the details later.
	And he made all kinds of claims that he had cured foul cholera and all kinds of diseases.
	When his memoirs finally came out in the 1960s, his family released them, we realized most of what Louis Pasteur was claiming wasn't true at all.
	He was stealing ideas from others.
	So we can ask the question, who has more arrogance, Louis Pasteur and the Pasteur Institute that was named after him, or Anthony Fauci?
	They're similar characters here.
	Remember Fauci proclaiming that he represents science.
	Very similar.
	The hubris is, you know, it's been said that history doesn't repeat itself, but it rhymes.
	And boy, did Fauci rhyme with Pasteur.
	Before we continue with our content, here's a quick word from one of our sponsors.
	Remember, if you get Rumble Premium, you get an ad-free experience.
	Here's a quick message from one of our partners.
	I hope it's funny.
	Do you want to support me?
	No, I don't.
	Yes, you do.
	Support me and support Rumble Premium.
	You won't only be supporting me.
	You'll get additional access to Mug Club, that's Crowder's gig.
	Tim Cast, that's Tim Paul's racket, and Glenn Greenwald's additional content.
	Join us on Rumble Premium.
	We make content every single week through Rumble because Rumble supports free speech.
	When I was under attack from the British government and the British media, Rumble stood firm.
	Yes, of course, there's crazy people on Rumble.
	There's crazy people everywhere.
	There's a crazy person living under this hat.
	That doesn't mean we shouldn't have the right to speak freely together.
	By supporting Rumble Premium, you're supporting me and content creators like me.
	You get additional content.
	And what I will say even more, drink down deep on the delicious irony in this one.
	You get an ad-free experience.
	If you want an ad-free experience of Rumble, get Rumble Premium.
	In the meantime, stay free.
	If you want to watch any more of this content and you're on YouTube, get off that demonic playground and join us over on Rumble and Rumble Premium.
	Click the link in the description.
	Go over there.
	It's extraordinary, actually, how these almost archetypal patterns are observable in this apparent chaotic slew of events passing through time.
	Where I've sort of first noticed that phenomena is in the bold and obvious example of the Russian revolution, where the centralist czarist model is replaced and somehow as if controlled by ethereal magnetic fields,
	the communism that replaces it or the Bolshevism initially eventually becomes a similarly centralized, corrupt institution that coalesces around one individual.
	It makes me wonder, Doctor, if, as with variolation, there is a requirement to honor whatever forces we cannot understand, the sort of extrasensory supernatural powers that likely organize, originate, design, create life.
	When we detach ourselves from that, we create diabolical models.
	And isn't Lucifer's primary creed the belief that we can set up systems aside from and parallel to God?
	So Pasteur and Fauci have a peculiar correlative.
	Now, we're in at the moment, in my country, I can see you're leafing through your own fantastic book, endorsed by the Children's Science.
	Russell, before you get off the supernatural, I wanted to point out the cover.
	So the cover features not only a genetic code, because where we are now with genetic vaccines, but look at the coin and look at the iconography of this.
	This is the classic tripartite depiction of a boy about to receive the Eucharist.
	And instead of receiving the body and blood of Christ, he receives a vaccine.
	The vaccine replaces his Savior.
	And this was issued by the Pope in 2022.
	It's a 20-euro coin.
	And in our book, we describe examples of this all over the world.
	We found a church in the South Island of New Zealand, which had a big bold yellow and red banner over it.
	It said, not even the blood of Jesus Christ can save you from COVID.
	Get vaccinated.
	Oh, my God.
	Yes.
	So the Biden administration rolled out what's called faith for vaccines during the COVID vaccine campaign.
	And he actually, in a sense, co-opted all the religious leaders in the United States.
	Billions of dollars were spent.
	And so the entire faith community bought into this religiosity around the COVID vaccines.
	I'd never noticed before the emulation of transubstantiation inherent in the body and blood.
	And when you consider that one of the, am I right, Doctor, in saying that one of the ingredients of is frequently fetal tissue from human embryos, that we're being invited, yeah, that's terrifying, that coin, we're being invited to participate in a transubstantiation in which we do not emulate or become like Christ.
	But what?
	What are these Luciferic forces?
	What are these counterfeit institutions that want us, like God demands, to come like little children, to depend upon them, to trust them, to submit to them?
	perfectly reasonable postures when you're dealing with an imminent and transcendent, irreproachable God, but a little more dubious when it's human reason detached from divine principle, which is where reason goes wrong.
	That's when reason becomes demonic, diabolical, in a way, unreasonable, ironically.
	And so that's fascinating and terrifying.
	And of course, one of the things that was most notable was we lost the ability to congregate.
	We were given a lot of falsehoods that were undergirded.
	In fact, that's what the pandemic period was characterized by.
	These are irrefutable truths.
	Follow these truths.
	Otherwise, you are a heretic and you must be shamed and you must be destroyed and you are the worst kind of person.
	And one by one, we've sort of peeled away these various liturgies that we were offered.
	And each one of them, whether it's masks or social distancing or lockdowns itself or the efficacy of the vaccines or the impact of COVID or the origins of COVID, one by one, it's been shown to be absolutely false.
	And almost, I suppose, like vaccines themselves, doctor, you know, we participate through faith.
	Like, I want to believe that there's some way that I can take an injection and be inoculated and immunized against infection.
	My faith is an ingredient in the vaccine.
	Now, how is it that we are so, I mean, I guess this is behavior in mass psychology, but why are we so reluctant to, a couple of years down the line, accept exactly what's happened to us?
	And what kind of effort in communication is going to be required from those of us that are to various degrees, of course, in your case, it was supremely so, aware of the truth of these events and the degree of duplicity of the pandemic period.
	What is our obligation now, obviously, write this book, but like, I wonder if people are, how people are going to receive such an unwholesome truth.
	Believe it or not, they may not receive it at all or they may not accept it at all.
	I was honored to lecture at Chautauqua this year, which is an age-old dialectic institution in Western New York where dignitaries have lectured there for hundreds of years.
	And I pointed out that when it's in the medical field and there's self-participation by doctors and nurses and others, we can get deeply off course.
	And I gave the example of the first great cocaine epidemic from 1860 to 1920, where virtually every medicinal product, every pharmaceutical company made cocaine products.
	And doctors and nurses became incredibly hooked on cocaine.
	It was in Chianti wine and Coca-Cola.
	And the doctors did not stop themselves.
	Halstead, the father of modern surgery, Sigmund Freud, they became cocaine addicts.
	And through that period of time, through that 60 years in one of our journals, GEMA, which is a well-cited journal, there was one paper of concern regarding cocaine addiction among healthcare providers.
	Now we fast forward to 1920 to 1978, smoking.
	By 1950, virtually every doctor and nurse smoked.
	There was campaigns by Philip Morris and R.G.I. Reynolds, an American tobacco company.
	Doctors gave out cigarettes in their waiting room.
	They proclaimed they were safe and they were studied.
	And when it was pointed out by two Bretts, the epidemiologist was Austin Bradford Hill and the doctor was Richard Dahl, that smoking caused lung cancer.
	They had the proof in 1950.
	No one believed them.
	The Medical Research Council in the UK did not believe them.
	Surgeon General 1964 Luther Terry presented the Surgeons General report on smoking to doctors who were all smoking at the meeting.
	He said smoking is causing lung cancer.
	They still rejected it.
	This went all the way till 1978 before the American Medical Association had its very first campaign about the health hazards of smoking and then the tobacco settlement in the 1990s.
	So here's two examples where there's great harm being done to the doctors themselves and the public at large, and they refuse to see it or accept it.
	Now we're five years into this COVID-19 vaccine.
	Some of the biggest supporters of vaccination were the doctors and nurses.
	And here we are right now.
	There's not a single chief of medicine at any major institution in the world who's come out and expressed any concern regarding these COVID vaccines.
	Not a one.
	It's very interesting to see that the marketing campaigns deployed now by Merck, Moderna, Pfizer et al. focus more on kind of lifestyle.
	I've seen some advertisements for the UK and the US.
	Part of your lifestyle.
	Take this COVID vaccine.
	They've recognized now that it's not a mandatable product that they have to appeal in a different and more commercial way.
	And I suppose that the lessons of the pandemic are so stark and severe that one can appreciate why they are, that people are reluctant to receive them.
	I suppose if one were to make it a more parochial, it's difficult to accept.
	In cases where children are abused by their parents, it's so sort of seismic to take on board the horror of that reality that it's sort of held at arm's length as a necessary survival strategy.
	And I suppose that with the pandemic, the conclusions that flow forth from just even a somewhat shallow appreciation of what took place are so stark that it amounts to.
	You cannot trust the World Health Organization.
	You cannot trust the American government.
	You cannot trust the BBC, CNN, the New York Times.
	You cannot trust your own family GP or medical practitioner.
	You can't trust nurses in scrubs in TikTok videos dancing around.
	It's like such a kind of a rejection and a dispelling of the kind of cultural sort of icons and idols that most people would rather just get their head down and have a drink and smoke a cigarette and do a line of Coke rather than sort of confront that you have to repent.
	You have to turn away from all of it.
	And it's hard.
	I mean, I've only been willing to do it because life kicked the absolute shit out of me.
	That's the only way that I've been able to come to a place of repentance.
	First through drugs and alcohol that I was chemically dependent on, then through sex, like through, you know, like I just loved having sex.
	I love it.
	I mean, I'm biologically programmed, one might say, to have sex and I had high availability.
	It took fake rape allegations that seem to be mysteriously concocted and amplified.
	And I, you know, I'm yet to stand trial, as I ultimately will in the UK, by God's grace, in June next year.
	It took that for me to have a look at what are you worshiping?
	What do you consider to be important?
	What matters to you?
	Where are you getting your meaning from?
	So I do, I understand it.
	I understand it.
	Most people are not going to want, like, you know, when you sort of look at vaccines beyond COVID vaccines and look at the childhood immunization, who among us want to start unpeeling that and unraveling, oh my God, I've given my kid this thing and it doesn't work and it might have been deleterious.
	I can understand it.
	It's a mind-blowing reality.
	And you're right, the portrayal now of vaccination is something like it's an elixir of youth or health or it purchases freedom.
	My next door neighbor is a proponent of COVID vaccination.
	He's had seven of them.
	And he always tells me, I'm well.
	He points to his arm and he's well, as if synthetic messenger RNA makes you more healthy than what you were, you know, as a normal, natural human being.
	But let me tell you, we're doing a lot of research here in Dallas at McCullough Foundation in my clinic.
	I'm in practice as a practicing doctor.
	And like you, I've faced adversity through the pandemic.
	But, you know, my patients have taught me much that the COVID vaccines have record injuries, disabilities, and deaths worldwide.
	I think many millions of people have died from a vaccine.
	Previously healthy people have lost their life with a vaccine that was supposed to protect them.
	Instead, it took their life or caused heart damage or blood clot or stroke or neurologic problems or cancer.
	And the risk goes on and on.
	But I have patients in my practice in research where the Pfizer or Moderna vaccine is circulating in their bloodstream with the dangerous spike protein that it produces 3.2 years after the shots.
	These vaccines don't go away.
	This is the difference between prior vaccines and the COVID shots.
	Now, the AstraZeneca and Janssen vaccines, those companies were ethical.
	They pulled their products off the market because they caused blood clots.
	And that's really the underlying reason why they're gone.
	But Pfizer and Moderna have persisted, and so has another company called Novavax.
	Interestingly, Novavax is just the spike protein, no genetics, far and away the safest vaccine in America.
	And our CDC and government never mentions it.
	It's never featured.
	So we've seen just the most bizarre sets of medical behaviors.
	Complete trust has been lost because there's been the suppression of early treatment, inadequate hospital treatment, and now this relentless pursuit of the vaccine.
	The public has woken up.
	A recent Rasmussen survey indicates 56% of Americans believe the COVID vaccines have caused large numbers of deaths.
	And yet we've had two presidents, no acknowledgement of this.
	All of our HHS secretaries, Robert F. Kennedy included, right now in office, will not acknowledge what's happened with the COVID vaccines.
	None of your prime ministers in the UK or your health directors.
	There's been no inspection of the vaccines to see what's going wrong.
	Are they contaminated?
	The vials appear to be different in research in terms of risk.
	And no country has undertaken a safety review of what really has happened, nor have they proposed to take them off the market.
	And so we're down in the United States.
	My estimate is less than 1% are taking these shots, yet there's a complete purchase of these and they're just poured down the drain.
	And this has been going on for years.
	If you want to watch any more of this content and you're on YouTube, get off that demonic playground and join us over on Rumble and Rumble Premium.
	Click the link in the description.
	Go over there.
	Because it's not an anomaly and neither is it actually enormous though the story is.
	It's merely an observable symptom of systemic corruption that you would find in every area where there are relationships between commercial entities of that size and bureaucratic bodies of that size.
	It's the modus operandi of state and commerce at the global level.
	And so I suppose that by investigating it explicitly and transparently, they would literally have to disband their entire model.
	Oh, for sure.
	Russell, I want to get to an important development.
	The McCullough Foundation received a grant and undertook a year-long review of this issue of childhood vaccines and autism.
	It's very important.
	This was published on the European Commission preprint server October 27, 2025.
	We had a press release.
	This was widely covered in the U.S. media, in shows really across the world.
	And with over 300 studies reviewed, our conclusions were that there are risk factors for autism, which is in epidemic proportions now in all Westernized countries.
	The risk factors include premature delivery, older parents, some exposures during pregnancy, like heavy psychiatric drugs, and then common genetic variants.
	But far and away, the biggest risk factor for the development of autism is combination vaccines.
	And so since 1986, in the United States, the companies have been relieved of any liability for their products.
	The number of vaccines have exploded.
	And as you learned at the Children's Health Defense Conference and others, there is this asymptotic rise in the rates of autism.
	We're not talking about just quirky young kids and children.
	We're talking about profound autism.
	Children who can't speak to their parents, they were normal.
	They were born normal.
	And after a big battery of vaccines, they had brain inflammation called encephalitis and now have taken on this post-encephalitic state, which includes the inability to speak, marketly impaired intelligence, unable to navigate in the bathroom, repetitive headbanging, injurious behavior.
	We now have 27% of the entire pool of autism having profound autism.
	And the biggest modifiable risk factor is combination vaccines.
	We've concluded that there's more children in the United States today with profound autism completely disabled than there ever was with polio.
	We've, in a sense, caused a major public health crisis through this vaccine ideology.
	And given the McCullough Foundation report, which is the only thing that's changed in the last three weeks, our CDC quietly, on November 19th, 2025, no press release, no announcement by Robert F. Kennedy or anybody else.
	They changed their language on the website to say, you know, our prior position on this, that the vaccines don't cause autism, that wasn't right.
	It wasn't based on evidence.
	And we're now going to look into this.
	We're going to do our own report.
	And that's what I've been encouraging.
	We sent this report to Robert F. Kennedy, all the public health officials in the United States, you know, on the day we released it.
	And the report has not been criticized by anybody in the medical community because it includes every single bit of scientific data that's evolved on this.
	The prior 29 studies that claimed there was no link to autism, this is astounding.
	And several, many of them come from what's called the Danish cohort study in Denmark.
	Those studies never examined the vaccine record of the child, never interviewed the parents, and never actually examined the child to see if they had autism.
	They were based on computer automated data.
	So the real live observation of a normal child getting a battery of vaccines and then being converted to autism, that came out in case series data, most of it since the CDC has actually made their original statements.
	So we think our report, you know, supported by lots of activism over the last 10 or 20 years by organizations like Children's Health Defense and recently World Council for Health in the UK and others.
	They played a role, but it was our evidence-based report that essentially forced the CDC to change their statements.
	And immediately they're attacked.
	So CNN now has completely turned against the CDC.
	They used to be in lockstep with one another during the pandemic.
	Yeah, well, there's points where I myself reach a threshold of fury that's difficult to maintain.
	And I suppose that's part of the challenge of operating in this space is being able to withstand the truth without going kind of crazy.
	When this was unfolding initially, Doctor, what I mean to say is when we were told, oh, there's an outbreak of a virus in Wuhan, China, are you able to now, with hindsight,
	at the end of 2025, to almost narrativize how that unfolded of what that was like for you as a person that had a degree of understanding of when you did you, for example, go, Wuhan, haven't they got that Institute of Virology there?
	And that seems odd.
	This is just peculiar.
	How was it for you when the events were unfolding?
	And how quickly did you suspect that this was not just what we were being told?
	Hey, there's this virus.
	It's a bit like swine flu or bird flu or smallpox in 1970.
	What was that like for you?
	And what were the markers that something other than what was being explained was taking place?
	There was a paper published in Lancet early on.
	It was kind of the investigation of the initial cases in Wuhan.
	And, you know, the conclusion is, well, it came out of a wet market, a fish market.
	But in that paper, at least a third of the cases had never gone to the fish market.
	And there was the Wuhan Institute of Virology there, which is the Chinese nationwide research lab for virology.
	Now, I had no idea that the U.S. was working with the Chinese on the creation of a virus.
	I hadn't read the prior papers by Ralph Barrick in 2015 and 2016 in Nature Medicine, the proceedings of the National Academy of Science.
	These papers are still in print today.
	They said, listen, we're working with the Chinese.
	We're creating a coronavirus.
	They actually named it a SARS-like Wuhan Institute of Virology 1 coronavirus.
	And they were trying to create a vaccine at the same time.
	And so this was actually right in plain sight.
	Johns Hopkins and the Gates Foundation held an event in 2017.
	It was called the SPARS pandemic.
	And they said there will be a coronavirus pandemic.
	They said it's going to happen in 2025.
	So they were off by about five years.
	They said it's going to come out of China.
	And they published their proceedings.
	I wasn't paying attention.
	Then November 2019, the Gates Foundation and again, Johns Hopkins hold a videoed event, you know, Event 201.
	And there, Averill Haynes, who was at the World Economic Forum, who became our national security advisor under Biden, she attends there.
	And George Gao, the Chinese CDC director, attends, and many other dignitaries attend Event 201.
	And they said, for sure, there's going to be a coronavirus pandemic.
	It's going to come out of China.
	And this is exactly how it's going to be played in terms of vaccination being the primary role.
	In fact, Averyl Haynes and George Gow, their workout group in Event 201 was how do we conceal that it comes out of a lab?
	So Russell, this was all in the open.
	The shortcoming is, certainly from my perspective, I wasn't paying attention.
	Now there are many books published on this that have pieced together the entire timeline.
	And bring it fast forward, Anthony Fauci, who's part of the co-conspiratorial team to create SARS-CoV-2, he gets a preemptive 10-year pardon.
	Almost certainly he requested that from Biden before Biden leaves his term.
	10 years of clemency for crimes that he knows he committed in the creation of SARS-CoV-2, in the fraudulent misrepresentation of what was going on to America, the suppression of early treatment and the promotion of the vaccines.
	And that combination led to a catastrophic loss of life.
	We can't bring you this content without the support of our partners.
	Here's a message from one now.
	Do you want to support me?
	No, I don't.
	Yes, you do.
	Support me and support Rumble Premium.
	You won't only be supporting me.
	You'll get additional access to Mug Club, that's Crowder's gig, Tim Cast, that's Tim Paul's racket, and Glenn Greenwald's additional content.
	Join us on Rumble Premium.
	We make content every single week through Rumble because Rumble supports free speech.
	When I was under attack from the British government and the British media, Rumble stood firm.
	Yes, of course, there's crazy people on Rumble.
	There's crazy people everywhere.
	There's a crazy person living under this hat.
	That doesn't mean we shouldn't have the right to speak freely together.
	By supporting Rumble Premium, you're supporting me and content creators like me.
	You get additional content.
	And what I will say even more, drink down deep on the delicious irony in this one.
	You get an ad-free experience.
	If you want an ad-free experience of Rumble, get Rumble Premium.
	In the meantime, stay free.
	It's not only that the events themselves are so staggering.
	It's when they are coupled with the way that this pandemic was initially rendered that I get a kind of almost visceral sense of vertigo.
	I kind of feel like overwhelmed because I'm remembering how Anthony Fauci was kind of packaged in this saintly manner and like how innocuous cultural artifacts like late night talk shows were participating.
	Then in my country, the UK, ghoulish condemnatory campaigns urging you to get vaccinated on a moral basis in much the way you described at the beginning of our conversation, has always been concommittant with vaccine ideology.
	That it's your responsibility as a participant and member of the whole the congregation, the community, to do this.
	And I actually, you know, when I think of Um Robert Kennedy's book The Real Anthony Fauci, I can remember reading parts of it because it's you know it's dense.
	It's a very good book but it's kind of dense and thinking this can't be true, it can't be true that he's involved in this anthrax Experimentation.
	It can't be true that HIV is somehow involved.
	There's been so many things that even I, who's somewhat open-minded to these ideas and sometimes to a fault, willing to accept anti-establishment ideas.
	I've like, now I've got a kind of appetite, doctor, to like, you know, when sort of people are talking about the Epstein files, I'm like, good, I hope this person is exposed.
	I hope this person is exposed because I'm now radicalized by my circumstance.
	So I want this system to be attacked.
	I want them to be brought down.
	I want them to be exposed.
	I'm no longer a neutral participant in trying to tell the truth.
	I'm not like you, a scientist.
	I'm an evangelist.
	So it's extraordinary to just look back at something that's so recent, even though time itself appears to be warping and bending because in a way, information is moving so quickly.
	How can we have an objective sense of time when data is being inundated, literally?
	So I wonder then if there can be ever, if there can ever be adequate reprisal.
	I mean, looking at your McCulloch Foundation report here on the determinants of autism spectrum disorder, a name that I'm familiar with here is Andrew Wakefield, who I met for the first time at their recent children's health defense event that we're both affiliated with.
	And I feel like Andrew Wakefield was more or less sort of called a paedophile and dragged through the streets and pelted with fruit and eggs.
	And like, isn't he, wasn't he just ahead of it and telling the truth?
	Well, there you go.
	Do you know that every in every one of these examples in public health, the person who makes the seminal observation is not celebrated, is not bestowed awards.
	In fact, they're denigrated, castigated, and sometimes lose their life.
	I mean, a great example is Ignace Simmelweis, 1855.
	Simmelweiss does careful research and discovers that doctors are transmitting infections to pregnant women in maternity wards in Vienna by not washing their hands.
	They just transmit the bacteria from one woman to another.
	And he does studies showing if they wash their hands with chlorinated lime, the infection rates plummet.
	But instead of being celebrated, he's debarred, debunked.
	If it was modern day, his Twitter account would be taken away.
	He'd be debanked.
	And ultimately, he was placed in an insane asylum, probably beaten, and he died.
	And that was in about a 20-year time span.
	And he had all the data.
	He was lecturing.
	Andrew Wakefield, and it's very interesting.
	He's a gastrologic surgeon.
	You met him.
	I'm sure your opinion is he seems pretty reasonable, pretty rational.
	He seems like a gentleman.
	He's not some wild individual.
	He makes an observation that when children get the MMR vaccine, measles, mumps, and rubella, and that was a combination product, new one at the time, 1998, that some children get sick, they get a fever, they have changes actually in their GI tract, the lymph nodes are on the GI tract, and they convert to autism.
	They were normal.
	They convert to autism.
	Well, this paper is published in Lancet.
	I've published in Lancet, you know, one of the best medical journals in the world.
	And it's a valid paper for 13 years, 13 years as a valid paper.
	But under tremendous pressure from the pharmaceutical industry, ultimately the paper is retracted.
	And through that period of time, Wakefield is smeared largely by journalists who are probably hired by the biopharmaceutical complex.
	He's debarred, struck off the register, if you will, and then he moves to the United States.
	What happened to Andrew Wakefield is nearly identical to Ignaz Simowise.
	Of course, both are right.
	And what we did in our report is we reached out to Dr. Wakefield and said, listen, we've got a lot of academic firepower.
	We have the truth at the McCullough Foundation.
	We want you to be an author and make sure we're correct on how we described what happened with his was called seminal observation.
	He made a seminal observation.
	And now you see it all over social media that Dr. Wakefield has been vindicated.
	In fact, Senator Ron Johnson has put out a public call for the vindication of Andrew Wakefield.
	So hopefully, we'll all live long enough to be vindicated.
	I mentioned smoking, by the way, and Richard Dahl in the UK.
	Richard Dahl ultimately was knighted.
	He was knighted for being correct.
	And there's been books written about him where he's finally vindicated.
	But from the time he made the observation until his vindication was about 45 years.
	Yeah.
	Oh, man.
	Well, think about this.
	Andrew Wakefield, but also Andrew Wakefield makes the observation in 1998.
	So, you know, here we are, two plus 25.
	We're at 27 years.
	And if you do any search on Andrew Wakefield, the first thing you tell you is he's a conspiracy theorist.
	He's corrupt.
	He's an anti-vaxxer.
	You know, he took money from family members or he all kinds of untruths.
	And that's one of the problems with artificial intelligence is it's completely poisoned now by those who are programming artificial intelligence and how it portrays information.
	Yeah, check this.
	Like you, as you said, you put it into Google, which is just all you really want from Google is information.
	Andrew Wakefield is an English fraudster, anti-vaccine activist, and former senior surgeon.
	He was struck off the medical register.
	Like, you know, I wonder how long I have to scroll down.
	The MMR vaccine autism, refutation, retraction, PMC, means was moments of vaccine behavioral, the long read, doctor who fooled the world, Andrew Wakefield, British medical journal charges, fraud.
	In a way, you start to see how the machine works.
	It's very difficult for me not to be sort of personally affected by this because inadvertently I strolled into this territory myself just because I had a YouTube channel and that's the way that I work.
	And it's a kind of natural progression.
	If you work in media and you're competent at communicating, you realize that there's no requirement anymore for the brokerage of centralized systems, whether they're movie studios or TV organizations or production companies, particularly if someone like me, where stand-up comedy was always what was most expedient because that's the minimal brokerage.
	But as I'm sort of a moral man, I have to acknowledge that promiscuity by its nature is morally transgressive unless you are hedonic and decadent and living within a hedonic and decadent set of a value system.
	So, you know, what's been very difficult for me is acknowledging that promiscuity when you're a famous man and sleeping with 20 year olds, 25 year olds, you know, when I was 30, when I was younger, that's morally incorrect.
	But what happens is you can use the raw material of a promiscuous person who's like, you know, at the scale that I was operating at, been in lots of restrooms and bathrooms with strangers.
	You can mobilize and metastasize that if you've got an appetite very easily.
	And I bet the initial journalists involved in the reports that led to criminal investigations, which will lead to me standing trial.
	I bet these journalists are not thinking, let's destroy Russell Brand.
	He's a great guy, but, you know, we can do it.
	I bet they think they're doing great work.
	Oh, this guy's been exploiting women.
	We can really do something worthwhile.
	In the same way that people that are attacking anyone who's in the crosshairs of the system just because they're inconvenient, just because the system's recalibrating itself.
	The fact is, is were it not for independent media, that entire pandemic period would be regarded differently.
	That 56% of Americans that now regard the vaccines as cynically, skeptically, dubiously, that is because of Joe Rogan.
	That's because of a whole new strata of media has gotten our hand because of the technology.
	And they can't get it back in the box fast enough.
	Indeed, I consider the kind of real arms race of our time, doctor, to be a kind of an information war.
	Wasn't Alex Jones perspicacious there with that title?
	Can they centralize control of information before too many people are turned off forever from these institutions?
	Like, look at that WHO treaty that included in it the ability for confiscatory tax, but also for the ability to censor.
	Something like that WHO treaty would have passed, may yet pass, but would have passed were it not for robust opposition that coming primarily out of independent media responding to experts like you that no longer are gatekept in the manner that they once were.
	And it's just interesting to watch the collateral damage, particularly for me because I'm part of it, like to just see how this thing just sort of spawned and got out of control and the countermeasures to retain control, what's included within it.
	It's fascinating and terrifying.
	Jay Bacharia being a great example, because when I sort of first spoke to Jay Bachario, he was like, like me in a kind of a state of bewilderment.
	And now there he is at the NIH or Marty McCari, now at the FDA.
	I mean, one of the things that I'm encouraged by, and I can sort of sense in your tone and timbre, doctor, that you're perhaps frustrated that Secretary Kennedy hasn't done more.
	For example, when you said to this day, they've not said the COVID vaccines explicitly don't take them.
	But you must have had enough interfacing yourself with these institutions of power to recognize why that is.
	What do you feel?
	Well, it sure is codified into law as people, as these individuals enter the government, if they break from the government narrative, they're on their own.
	They actually have to get their own lawyers and they can be accused and tried of all kinds of things.
	So they actually have to follow a government narrative.
	Now, Bhattachara and Macri were in my frequent contributor group at Fox.
	I still am.
	I was on hundreds of times during the pandemic and it gave a counter narrative to Fauci.
	But I was the only one in that group who recognized the harm of the vaccines and was willing to speak my mind.
	The others never broke that vaccine ideology and they took the shots as well.
	And once people take the vaccines, it's very hard for them to recognize that they have done harm to their body.
	Their children have done harm to their children as doctors, done harm to their patients.
	So most actually adopt these psychological coping mechanisms.
	And the most common one is they just don't want to talk about it.
	And so we come up to this all the time.
	We have family members that say, listen, we don't want to talk about it.
	And so I said, listen, we can talk about blood pressure medicines, cholesterol.
	We can talk about anything, but we can't talk about vaccines.
	And so you know something is wrong with the vaccines.
	And, you know, the ship turns very slowly.
	And it's good to have a new crew in Washington, no doubt about it.
	But one thing I've learned is if you're not in government, you actually influence public policy a lot more and public sentiment.
	You can actually influence history a lot more if you're not in government.
	And that's exactly what we've done at the McCullough Foundation.
	There's no doubt about it.
	We've changed public sentiment.
	This book has New York Times bestseller, despite the New York Times probably doing everything they can to suppress our book.
	And so you can't stop it.
	You can't stop Russell Brand.
	You can't stop Dr. Peter McCullough.
	And you're right.
	Independent media now is becoming very dominant.
	And this government aspiration of totalitarianism is falling apart.
	Remember the statement by Jacinda Ardern, former prime minister of New Zealand, during the pandemic, she said, there will be a single source of truth.
	Think about that aspiration.
	I mean, that's the same thing that's said in North Korea.
	There's one channel on TV.
	There is a single source of truth in Korea.
	But, you know, that was said by a leader of a democratic country.
	You can only do that if you're God.
	And you can only make those declarations if you want to replace God.
	There should be a single source of truth and it should not be human.
	Dr. Peter McCulloch's book, Vaccines, Mythology, Ideology, and Reality, is available now.
	You can simply use this QR code on the screen now to purchase a copy of this book.
	Please do that.
	Thank you so much, doctor, for joining us today.
	Thank you for your time and your attention and your bravery and for this excellent research and fantastic work.
	Thank you.
	God bless you, sir.
	Well, I hope you enjoyed that conversation.
	Please do get Peter McCulloch's book by clicking on the QR code or the link in the description underneath and support our guests and then we'll get back guests.
	No, he's not a great guest.
	I mean, who do you want on here?
	Diana Ross.
	I don't know.
	She's still alive.
	Who cares, man?
	Hey, do you watch Russell Brand Unpack?
	That's where we pre-tape and organize brilliantly lovely content like this.
	My conscious won't let me go shoot my brother or some darker people or some poor, hungry people in the mud for big powerful America and shoot them for what?
	They never call me nigga.
	They never lynch me.
	They didn't put no dogs on me.
	They didn't rob me of my nationality.
	Rape and kill my mother and father.
	Well, I'm going to shoot them for what?
	How are I going to shoot them?
	Them little pool of black people, little babies and children, women.
	How can I shoot them poor people?
	Just take me to jail.
	I'm not going to help nobody.
	Give fuck my Negroes don't have.
	If I'm going to die, I'll die now right here fighting you.
	Oh my God.
	I fucking love him.
	I love him.
	That's greatness.
	That's true greatness.
	The truly great are mystics inso much as they operate in the present.
	They operate in the present.
	Muhammad Ali, as he demonstrated, become a great boxer, but he could have become almost a great anything.
	I suppose, like that other more contemporaneous great athlete, Michael Jordan.
	You get the idea that guy could have just sort of done anything.
	And I suppose why it's doubly exciting with Muhammad Ali is he stepped in to the public arena and was willing, I'll die here right now fighting you.
	What are you gonna say?
	Come on, then, let's go.
	My God.
	If I want to die, you're my enemy.
	My enemies are white people, not Vietnam or Chinese or Japanese.
	I mean, you're my opponent when I want freedom.
	You're my opponent when I want justice.
	In a way, what Muhammad Ali demonstrated there, although it might be difficult and uncomfortable to hear some of the racialized language and a racialized dispute broadcast in that way, was demonstrated the qualities of heroism which are inseparable from the qualities of Christianity, i.e., willing to die for what you believe in.
	He did go to jail.
	He has that conversation live, present with an opponent, someone criticizing him.
	He's willing to stand up in front of people he disagrees with and confront them with the truth of who he is.
	And the truth is that we're all capable of that.
	You're capable of it.
	I'm capable of it.
	And when you see Muhammad Ali doing it, you remember.
	You're reminded: hold on, we can be glorious.
	How have I allowed myself to be thresholded and curtailed by the low ceilings of a lowly culture?
	Malcolm X returned from Mecca transformed, breaking with rigid ideologies that previously defined him.
	And this is what I had to become aware of on my pilgrimage to Mecca.
	I could see then that there are many white people in this country who will side with the Negro in whatever he has to do to protect himself.
	But that's a considerable change of opinion in Malcolm X.
	No, today I'm speaking for myself.
	Formerly, I spoke for Elijah Muhammad, and everything I said was, Elijah Muhammad teaches us thus and so.
	I'm speaking now from what I think, from what I have seen, from what I have analyzed, and the conclusions that I have reached.
	Then the white man is no longer the devil and he is no longer bound to be evil.
	If I judge a man by his conscious behavior, I am not a racist.
	I don't subscribe to any of the tenets of racism.
	Then there are good whites and good blacks and bad whites and blacks.
	It's not a case of being good and bad, good or bad, blacks and whites.
	It's a case of being good or bad human beings.
	When you watch Muhammad Ali and Malcolm X, it's striking that this country has chosen to follow the wrong leaders and to follow the wrong ideas.
	That we had a chance.
	We had a chance then to support brilliant people, brilliant men of a variety of hues and shades, whether it was the Kennedys or these men.
	And to recognize that it's that, you know, Malcolm X ain't perfect.
	You know, we all know that he had a pretty crazy past.
	Muhammad Ali's not perfect.
	Crazy past.
	Robert Kennedy and John Kennedy were not perfect men.
	All of them, actually, it seems like there was pretty, you know, some interesting appetites went on with those guys.
	But what we've replaced greatness with is a kind of mass market of mediocrity, a kind of a deliberate, bureaucratized kind of ordinariness, ordinariness.
	If you kill the great people, I don't know, I don't know what you're going to get as a society.
	Bobby Kennedy, Sr., after the murder of his brother, recalibrated toward a moral clarity that made political calculation secondary.
	The whole of whether we are lowering the barriers with communism and on one side of the world, we're signing a proliferation treaty of control of atomic weapons in one part of the world and in another part of the world we're killing people because they're commonly.
	Sounds inconsistent and it is inconsistent.
	Or the whole question of, for instance, of drug.
	We commit math.
	Cigarettes, which kill far more people every year than marijuana, for instance.
	That's right.
	And it's been available.
	The information is available.
	Who are the people, systems and interests that prevent the information from reaching us and being popularized?
	Let me know in the comments and chat.
	There is tremendous economic power behind those people, and so that we don't pass laws to deal with that, even though our Department of Health had said that they're so dangerous.
	Chill, what, 350,000 people a year?
	Although there is this great wealth that I talked about, and yet there's great poverty.
	There are speeches made about the fact we're going to treat everybody equally, and yet we don't treat everybody equally.
	There's talks given and pronouncements made and laws written that everybody's going to have an opportunity to have a job and have decent housing.
	And yet 43% of the people that live in the city of New York and live in this city live in dilapidated and rundown housing and are bitten by that.
	17,000 people bitten by rat.
	And the poverty in rural areas is worse.
	So if we weren't sanctimonious about it, if we weren't hypocritical about it, and we didn't perhaps tell untruths about ourselves, then I think that's an safe to reality.
	Then I think our country would be much better off and our people would have much more confidence in those of us who are public officials and in our government as a whole.
	These moments share a common thread.
	The individual breaking free from imposed scripts, refusing to play the role assigned by power structures.
	Green's move echoes that dangerous impulse, but in the hyper-mediated post-ideological terrain of modern politics, such departures are rarer and more destabilizing than ever.
	The modern moment amplifies the threat of such awakenings.
	Political labels are no longer merely slippery.
	They're instruments of conditioning, shaping not just what people think, but how they experience reality.
	The public consumes outrage as if it were sustenance, reinforcing the system's boundaries while the elite manipulate outcomes with impunity.
	Greens, stepping outside that system, is akin to the red pill in the matrix, a confrontation with the hidden forces of control, a refusal to participate in the illusion, a destabilization of narrative.
	In a world where obedience is rewarded and insight punished, such departures carry ominous potential.
	They remind us that the machinery is not only pervasive, it is fragile if challenged from within.
	Did you have a good Thanksgiving?
	Did you give thanks?
	What are you thankful for?
	I'm thankful that I don't have to suck on the teeth of institutionalized media.
	We are free.
	You are free by the holy grace of God.
	God, don't worship God.
	That's like Gog Magog stuff.
	Don't get into that dark shit.
	Praise the Lord.
	See you soon.
	Not for more of the same, but for more of the different.

▲