Stay Free - Russel Brand - The Data They Don’t Want to Talk About

Dec. 10, 2025 - Stay Free - Russel Brand

01:16:02

The Data They Don’t Want to Talk About | Dr John Campbell - SF661

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 for joining us today for Stay Free with Russell Brand.
	It's a brilliant episode.
	It's a conversation with Dr. John Campbell.
	Dr. John Campbell is a physician and medic and YouTuber who was so honest, but yet somehow articulate during the pandemic period that he managed to tell the truth and not get banned and kicked out.
	Now that we know that vaccines have killed kids, now that we know that vaccines likely contributed to heart disease, well, we know that that's actually a fact.
	Perhaps they are related to this spike of cancers, and that the British government won't release the data on the relationship between vaccines and excess deaths.
	Probably because if they did release that data on the connection between vaccines and excess deaths, we'd be so happy about it.
	It'll be such a lack of connection between vaccines and excess deaths that all of us would run giddily and crazily into the streets and maybe get run over by a truck driven by an illegal immigrant over there in the UK.
	I'm joking, of course, and whatever the reason is for mass migration, it's not to help them and it's not to help you.
	That I can tell you for a fact because I just know how these people work now.
	Hey, remember to try reborn.
	Yes, if you go to tryreborn.com, every dollar you spend gives you a certain number of opportunities to win this beautiful Jeep.
	And have a look at that.
	You can keep that shot somewhere, huh?
	Look at that shot of all of the either of the look at the shot of all these reborn products.
	Doesn't that look gorgeous?
	Magnificent stuff.
	If you want to win it, please go to tryreborn.com or simply just buy the stuff and certainly enter our competition.
	It really helps me, guys.
	And get Rumble Premium to get an ad-free.
	The irony experience.
	So, yeah, to support this company, Blackout Coffee, lovely, handcrafted, small batch.
	Good stuff.
	This is a good conversation with Dr. John.
	We talk about religion.
	We talk a little bit about my forthcoming court case in the UK with the UK getting rid of trial by jury, although it isn't for rape cases, and I am being unbelievably tried for rape.
	So, you know, we cover that in some degree.
	And we talk about Dr. John's anxiety, a touch a little bit.
	And we also talk a lot about Christ, abortion, euthanasia.
	So much, man.
	It's a good conversation.
	I hope you enjoy it.
	John Campbell, here we are together at last.
	How is your health?
	Yeah, I'm not too bad.
	I have the odd anxiety episode, but I'm basically okay 95% of the time.
	What about you?
	My health is good.
	I feel well, I suppose what I do get is highly adrenalized.
	I've probably taken a word like anxiety out of my vocabulary because of the vicissitudes of my life, doctor.
	There's been so much volatility, not even I'm not even particularly referring to the last couple of years, even though that is without question the most extreme and challenging period of my life, even beyond being an active drug addict and being poor and living on welfare and craziness of Hollywood, the craziness of my childhood, and the few incidents of abuse that were sort of,
	I guess, tent poles, as it were, of my childhood and the general sense of if deprivation seems like a hard word, but it was difficult.
	It was a difficult childhood.
	Doesn't sound like a hard word to me at all.
	Yeah, like my mum was sick a lot when I was a kid.
	I didn't grow up with my dad.
	You know, you know, I have a good relationship with my dad now, and I love him, you know, and he did his best.
	And I love him.
	I love him.
	And I'm really thinking of it.
	Actually, funny enough, it's funny this has come up because I'm really praying about forgiveness.
	And I don't, you know, like you feel like if your president's done work on yourself, you feel like, of course I've forgiven my parents for being human beings and flawed.
	Like, of course, my mum didn't want to be sick a lot, you know, and but like on some level, I realized since coming to Christ that my identity is on holding on to that pain, the pain of things just being the way they were, the reality of my life.
	Is your mum still alive?
	By God's grace, yes, she is.
	She's had cancer eight times, eight times, lymph, breast twice, or maybe three times, lymph twice or maybe three times, and then uteral and then, you know, I can't track them anymore.
	You know, but she's what's very strange, Doc, about my mum also is that when she's had cancer, it's like it's brought to the forefront this aspect of her nature that I have to say is very beautiful.
	And I probably get on better with her.
	I think our identity as a family, you know, like me and her, because I don't have siblings and I don't, you know, there was a stepdad around for part of my childhood.
	But like for a significant part of my childhood, actually, but I didn't get on with him.
	I had a bad relationship with him.
	Our relationship, when she was sick, it's sort of like she became sort of beautified by it, like sort of somewhat saintly.
	So I would say that her identity was somewhat, you know, formed around it, for good or for ill.
	And yeah.
	And yeah, so she, yeah, she's still with us.
	I'm sorry, I hijacked that a little.
	What about your anxiety?
	No, I'm okay most of the time.
	Just I've had it on and off all my life.
	It's just a bit of a nuisance.
	My wife's kind of got used to it now.
	Are you happy for this, Shui?
	Can this be the podcast?
	Oh, no, Go for it.
	I'm better when I work.
	Russell, there's one thing I'm concerned about.
	Will you get a trial by a jury next year?
	I suppose so.
	I mean, it's a rape trial.
	So I suppose so.
	I suppose so.
	Like, it says not for, I mean, unless the rape charges drop out, then, you know.
	But like, I don't, I don't see that.
	I mean, I don't know, whatever, whatever happens.
	Oh, my God.
	It's been so, it's absolutely transformative.
	And I've got to say, I'm already at the point where I'm grateful that it's happened and I accept it.
	That's not to say I'm not frightened.
	And that's not to say, you know, it's bought up a lot of stuff.
	It makes me recognize that in my years of promiscuity, I did not treat women very well, which I kind of knew anyway, you know, like I was sleeping around.
	I was not calling people back.
	I was having a lot of threesomes.
	I was, you know, all of those kind of behaviors that I was talking about explicitly at the time.
	Now, what I believe happened is after the documentary got made by like the, you know, the Times and a production company called Hard Cash Productions working together over a four-year period, apparently, interviewing over 400 people.
	And you will have seen that when that memo got leaked about Trump and them cutting Trump's capital speech, they pushed, the BBC pushed that story four times, like they did 12 pushes on stories related to me and only four on the subject of immigration, for example.
	To give you like a comparison.
	Now, obviously, what my hope is, is that in a trial, in a trial, it's like, where's the fucking proof?
	Where's the proof that this was a non-conceptual counter?
	I think there's law they'll have to prove you guilty, weren't they?
	Yeah, they'll have to have a majority verdict.
	They'll have to have, I think, 10 or 11 of 12 jurors saying yes, beyond reasonable doubt, in 1999 and in 2004, he committed these crimes beyond reasonable doubt.
	But that's where statute of limitations becomes relevant.
	I don't agree with statute of reputation of liberty.
	If someone raped someone I loved 20, 30 years ago, I'd want them brought to justice.
	But the challenge is, how do, like, if you said you raped me yesterday, I'd be going, well, hold on a minute.
	This is what I was doing yesterday.
	I can prove beyond all doubt that I didn't.
	And we can't even take it to trial.
	But with 21 years ago, 26 years ago, that's fucking difficult.
	It's difficult to prove beyond that I wasn't there or whatever.
	And the truth is, is probably in all of these cases, they were women that I'd slept with.
	I'm pretty, you know, pretty certain about that.
	So, yeah, it's an interesting, it's an interesting thing to go by.
	But I'm sure we're also thinking, John, I don't know what you think about this, the UK is going through such fluctuations and so many challenges.
	I just think it's going to be interesting.
	I think it's going to be interesting.
	The thing that struck me about your case really is there's so many other individuals and groups, for example, pop groups, for example, that we could mention, who were absolutely notorious for their activities.
	You know, we could run out of long lists between us.
	And I'm sure they weren't asking how old the girls were a lot of the time.
	Yeah.
	I mean, you know, I know a friend of mine told me about a mate of his who was abused by a rather famous pop star when they visited Carlisle when she was 15 years old, you know.
	And this, they seem to have picked you out.
	Yeah.
	No one's saying underage.
	And no one was saying non-consensual until the documentary, which is the documentary, I think.
	I also, by the way, John, I don't think these things work.
	I'm not sure how they work, but I don't think people that were conducting interviews, journalists at the times or the participants in the documentary are like, let's bring down Russell Brand.
	I think they are actually going, this is one of those cases of women have been exploited.
	But the fact that they think that, that don't mean anything.
	But that applies to a thousand men.
	Well, many more than that.
	No, I think you've been targeted for your political views.
	Yeah, I mean, what's difficult is getting coaching the lawyers in that direction ain't easy.
	Fortunately, in addition to a strong legal team, I am working with people that have a broader perspective on such matters.
	Well, you'd have to follow their advice.
	They're the people that know.
	Yeah, I mean, there's so many problems at the moment, you know, that the trying to get rid of trial by a jury for many offences is one of them.
	What is that?
	Well, they've increased crime or allowed crime to increase.
	You know, the 10,000 arrests a year for social media posts won't help.
	And so what they do is they generate a problem and then say, well, don't worry about it.
	We've got this problem.
	But don't, hey, we've got the answer for it.
	But the answer is always a further impinging of personal liberties, you know, identity cards, loss of trial by jury, non-crime hate incidents.
	They kind of make the problem and then they answer it themselves, but to our detriment.
	I don't even think the political participants are aware of what they're doing.
	I really don't.
	I think that the maneuvering happens beyond that.
	I don't know.
	I mean, the fact that you were demonetized on YouTube as a result of a letter from a parliamentary committee.
	So we're in a situation now where parliamentary committees decides who can make a living and who can't make a living.
	Yeah.
	It's amazing.
	Now, thankfully, you know, you've got deals with Rumble and stuff like that.
	But, you know, I mean, it's a big chunk of money.
	They basically said, you either said, they said to YouTube, stop paying this guy.
	And because they didn't want to get into trouble, they said, yes, all right, ma'am.
	And, you know, that to me was patent political interference.
	Of course, that, and she, Caroline Dynage, is married to Mark Lancaster, and Mark Lancaster is part of the 77th Brigade.
	It's very interesting.
	It's interesting.
	The whole thing's interesting.
	And incestuous.
	I interviewed Candice Owens yesterday.
	What was really fascinating about that is, you know, what she's doing, like what it says, and as I've been sort of saying in my content lately, is we in scripture, Doctor, it talks very plainly about the world is controlled by evil.
	Today I was just reading it in John 1, the letters.
	He just sort of says, we know the world is controlled by the evil one.
	We know that.
	And of course, that's what it says sort of markedly in Revelation.
	That's what it says.
	The letters of Paul talk about it, notably in Ephesians, of course.
	And what I feel like is, well, people that I, you know, actually kind of admire, in spite of the directly criticizes me and you, like David Icke, you know, I like David Icke.
	I like what he, a lot of the stuff he says, I like it.
	I'm interested in it.
	I think he's been very bold and sort of ridiculed.
	And like, you know, like in his latest book, he's like, you know, as I've been telling you for years, these institutions have been captured by demonic forces.
	I'm saying, well, that's in the Bible.
	And one thing I do wonder is why Christians aren't more explicit about the scriptural depiction of evil and how evil is practiced in the world.
	You know, I think British Christianity does not focus on it at all because I think and Roman Catholicism has obviously ultimately, you know, except for sects within it, which were sort of some of them, as I'm sure you know, very deeply mystical, committed, and pretty radical.
	You know, Roman Catholicism, no one's, I'll tell you where this came from.
	I went to Rome and I went to, I think it's called St. Luci's Church or Cathedral.
	It's pretty, you know, in the context of Rome.
	It's not particularly grand cathedral, magnificent anywhere else.
	But they've got three Caravaggios that were actually commissioned for that church, you know, obviously when Caravaggio was alive.
	And the first is St. Matthew.
	I think that's how it works.
	First is St. Matthew receiving the anointing.
	And the second is him writing the gospel.
	And the third is him being flayed alive and martyred.
	I don't think that's known for sure.
	I think there's some debate about the martyrdom of some of the apostles.
	Really?
	I think so.
	Joss McDowell did not Joss McDowell.
	Sean McDowell did a dissertation on it.
	It was quite interesting.
	About what the death of various apostles.
	He followed it up.
	I think there was only definite historical accounts that three were martyred.
	right but i mean the others the other the others may have been but it's um yeah peter's is sort of we're pretty happy on peter are we And like the upside down crucifixion.
	I can't remember.
	I don't think that's known for sure.
	I think he's one of the ones that was definitely martyred, though.
	Yeah.
	I can't remember the others, but it was quite an interesting, quite an interesting thing.
	Yeah, well, it's for sure.
	But what I would say is that aside from those kind of investigations that are difficult to conduct, as are all classical or history of that period, what is clear is to be a Christian then meant you're taking your life in your hands and you are opposed to Babylon or Rome.
	You're opposed to the system.
	And what I was struck by when looking at those paintings, knowing that the Vatican was just around the corner was, oh man, it's been co-opted.
	If the Vatican was what St. Matthew is in these depictions, then the Vatican would have, you know, it does have armed guards outside, but it wouldn't have a gift shop.
	It wouldn't have a gift shop.
	It would be like, we are at war.
	We are in a war and we are at war with these human institutions.
	Government, media, that's who we're at war with.
	And my sort of coming to faith has been about, you know, what's, I'm writing about this right now, in fact, has been about recognizing that what's in scripture is not at odds with what I felt and thought as a kind of what you might regard as a new age radical.
	That's true, but if we didn't have God does give us governments, even if they're bad governments, because most governments are preferable to total anarchy.
	You know, that's why Christians should obey the law of the land, for example.
	Unless it's at odds with the law of God.
	But yes, that is true.
	But I think we have to differentiate between critiquing government and pointing out evils in it, and there are massive evils in it, to saying that the whole thing is evil by definition.
	Well, what would you say then about this scripture?
	When John says in Epistles 1, let me just find, I mean, of course, maybe Ephesians is a better place to go.
	When Paul says in Ephesians, and I'm not in love with this Bible that I'm using here, I'm not sure what this translation is.
	Excuse me, in fact, maybe I'll do it on a phone because even though I like the feeling of a Bible in my hand, Doc.
	For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the cosmic powers over this present darkness, against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly places.
	Yes.
	Therefore take up the whole armor of God, you know.
	Now, how I see that is you're in a war.
	You are in a war.
	Now, like, you know, we could say that sort of, yeah, contemporary, but I'd say, you know, man, I would say that that's, I, that's what I feel.
	I feel that these institutions, both global corporate and bureaucratic, are tending towards evil.
	Now, and another example, what I'd like to say is, you know, it can be, but the specific examples there were talking about spiritual powers, not human powers.
	Well, in, okay, so then in John 1, 4, but those spiritual powers are being expressed, John, through human government.
	You know, that's where they're being.
	They can be, yes.
	Yeah, and in, you know, Revelation, we're going to get it.
	And like to your point about government earlier and anarchy, I would say prior to the Israelites being given a king, they were given judges.
	And I think that that's a model of decentralized power.
	I think that the beast, the beast of Revelation, is a behemoth of bureaucracy.
	And I don't think it's a coincidence that when C.S. Lewis makes depictions of demons into the screw tape letters, he houses them in bureaucracies.
	Well, I'm going to have to put you through to the department of this or that wormwood.
	Bureaucracy is where that is, that is the thing.
	What does globalism really want?
	Globalism wants to tell you there is no God so that it can be God.
	There is no God.
	We're on the way to the one world government controlled by the man who is the beast of revelation.
	Yeah.
	Look at this.
	So this is 1 John.
	We know that we are from God and the whole world lies in the power of the evil one.
	1 John 5, 19.
	We know that we are from God and the whole world lies in the power of the evil one.
	Okay, so like and so I would say that collectively from New Testament and it's like it comes off the back of when he's doing all that amazing stuff about love and God's love is in you and love one another.
	And indeed at the end of it he says, little children keep yourselves from idols.
	You know this like and I believe this now.
	This is what well this is what I have been given.
	This is what I've been given by our Lord since coming to Christ.
	I've been shown this.
	I've been shown this.
	Self is the nexus and antennae of all false idolatry.
	If you are in Christ, you cannot be in self.
	As it says in Galatians, we must, I die on the cross with him and it's he that is reborn in me.
	Now, none of us can maintain that state, that frequency, that field of awareness.
	We all lapse back into the flesh or the mentality or whatever spiritual disruption Luciferianism amounts to.
	I believe that the reason why in Luke 10, 18, he says, our Lord says to the hubristic returning disciples that have just been casting out demons, I saw Satan fall from heaven like lightning.
	You will do many great things, for your names are written in heaven.
	You will move among scorpions and you will cast out demons.
	But remember, it's because your names are written in him.
	And I believe that Eve's disobedience is the disconnect.
	And that Satan, when Satan, or Lucifer, perhaps better, when Lucifer says, I want my own domain, that is the sin that we all commit.
	I want to be Russell.
	I want Russell to be God.
	And why surrendering to Christ was so hard and seismic and strange for me, Dr. John, is that I didn't realize this.
	I wanted to be Jesus.
	I've always sort of believed in Jesus.
	I had this tattoo of Jesus.
	I knew the name of Jesus was powerful.
	But I want to be in charge.
	I want to be in charge.
	And I still suffer from that now.
	Today, I suffer from that.
	But when he came to me in the brokenness, in the brokenness of my son having the heart surgery and the rape charges and allegations, all happening at once, God showed me all this is bullshit.
	All of your fame and your sex, it's just total false idolatry.
	It's bullshit.
	Not only that, simultaneously, your boy is getting opened down the middle like Isaac or something.
	It was unbelievable having to hand him over to anesthetists.
	Like, because it was happening simultaneously, I had to sort of recognize that this, my boy, is somehow fundamentally different from all of the rape charges, which I know are not true, but also it's so weighty and awful and dark.
	But look, it's sort of meaningless.
	It's sort of meaningless.
	And that was such a kind of a disruption of who I was that it sort of shut me down.
	It's sort of like it broke the thread of what I thought I was.
	And now I am truly reborn.
	Not perfect, still flawed, still dumb, still self-interested, still an attention seeker, still sometimes even concupiscent.
	But I'm not like he's that guy's dead.
	Like that guy's dead already.
	And like, and how I know it is, how I know it's true, is like, I'm, I'm having, if I like, you know, maybe in 2026, I'm going to be watching the World Cup in, you know, in the United States and Mexico and Canada.
	Or maybe I'll be in jail ministering to other jailed men.
	But that's God's will, God's will.
	I'm dead already.
	I belong to him.
	I belong to him.
	So, you know, John, I'm ready to go.
	I'm ready to go.
	And like, the more people we have that are in this state, you can't, you know, the reason that the Muslim threat was so terrible for a while is like, oh my God, we've got people that are willing to fly planes into buildings, even though I'm sure there's some complications to that story.
	We've got people that are willing to die and cut off heads and desecrate stats.
	You know, like they don't want that.
	They want us locked into false idolatry of self, of like, oh, God, don't hurt me.
	Maybe you're a bit hard on yourself.
	I think you and me are probably more compulsive communicators, Russell.
	We just seem to have this need to communicate.
	Create community.
	Yeah, but the more you go on in the Christian life, the more you realize your own sinfulness and the more you realize that Christ is just like, you know, just so beyond comprehension.
	And the longer you go, the greater that gap becomes.
	And to feel, you know, to feel like you're nothing is becoming closer and closer to reality.
	You know, I can't remember who it was, but there was one missionary who said, I think it was one of the great missionaries on his tombstone he had written, a poor wretched worm on thy kind arms I fall.
	You know, we can't do anything.
	You know, you can't control your next breath any more than I can.
	You know, it's to the longer you live, the more humble you become because the weaker that you realize that you are.
	You know, we are not these great self-sufficient entities that maybe we thought we were for a period of time in our more complacent, arrogant youths.
	This sense of dependency and absolute dependency upon him is also another facsimile laying before us by the state.
	They want us dependent on them, dependent on them for information.
	They almost want us to come to them as little children, innocent and trusting.
	They make the demands of a God.
	They are the counterfeit.
	They are the beast.
	I see it.
	I understand it.
	I know that what they want is to desecrate and decimate and annihilate the image of God that is in us, the hallmark that we bear right down to every single cell in our body, his signature across every helix.
	They want to desecrate that so that they can become as God, a counterfeit God.
	I recognize it.
	I see it.
	And in the boldness of someone like Candace Owens, you know, what I recognize now is the technology has gotten out of hand.
	But that's a two-way street.
	Like early adapters say, like Alex Jones, what I recognized, Doctor, is that the culture didn't, and you and I, all of us have been subject to this.
	It doesn't know how, like, I mean online influencers, for want of a better term.
	They don't know how to categorize or cope.
	Like someone like Alex Jones, who one minute is saying untrue things about Sandy Hook, but another in the next minute saying things that are true.
	In fact, I said it just today.
	Infinite monkeys, it's happening now.
	Infinite number of monkeys with an infinite number of typewriters will eventually recreate the works of Shakespeare.
	Good choice using a secular book, the complete works, you know, one of the great heights of secularism.
	But they'll also, they'll recreate scripture.
	They'll recreate absolute truth.
	So you better get ready to decimate, smear, break down, shut down, because what you're getting now is Candice Owens is saying, well, if it says in the Bible that human institutions are captured by evil, and if I can work out that you're lying about the murderer of Charlie Kirk, then why don't we have a conversation?
	And one side saying, we don't want a conversation, shut it down.
	And the other side saying, give us all the facts, give us all the detail.
	They don't want to be transparent.
	So whether it's, you know, something relatively contemporaneous like the murder of Charlie Kirk or the assassination of JFK or the 9-11 attacks or the pandemic, about which you and I know a lot more, we know they were lying.
	And they maybe, you know, Boris Johnson or Rishi Sunak or whoever was, you know, sort of migrating through office might have not have known the degree to which they were participating.
	But it don't help that Rishi Sunak invested in the trust fund that set up Moderna and then while in government gives contracts to Moderna.
	It's all starting to unfurl.
	They're trying to see, can we kill this bloody machine before the machine kills us?
	And I think, you know, the tool, the weapon of mass communication, we're in a scrap for who's going to get the shot off first.
	Is it going to be the likes of us telling the truth so that it gets to a point where, you know, like where they can't maintain it anymore?
	Or are they going to legitimize, as you've said, total control?
	Oh, in order to stop, is it migration you care about?
	In order to stop migration, we need ID cards.
	In order to stop, you know, then we're not buying climate change no more.
	So they've stopped, they've, you know, they're trying, they can't keep ringing that bell.
	Oh, just control climate change.
	Every sandwich you buy is going to have to be marked with the number of the beast and you're going to have to have that on your hand and that on your forehead before you make any purchases.
	And that's 8% of your carbon allowance and you can't have a dog.
	We can't make this content without the support of our partners.
	There'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 Poole'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.
	That's all we can let you watch on YouTube.
	Come over, click the link, get on over to Rumble.
	It's a miracle you're watching on YouTube.
	We're shadow banners to within an inch of our lives.
	I mean, we're smothered in shadows over there.
	Thanks for finding it.
	Support us over on Rumble.
	Get Rumble Premium if you can.
	This part of the conversation with John Campbell, it's really worth watching.
	The guy gets deep.
	It's beautiful.
	And I give a really good rant.
	I'm very proud of the rant that I give.
	Here it is.
	Let's get back into it.
	Hey, this is what I want to ask you, Doc.
	It's like, we know in practice, euthanasia exists because any kind, compassionate healthcare professional, when it gets to a certain point, they up the opiates, organ failure, out.
	Euthanasia exists.
	So why do they need to change the law to make euthanasia more explicitly available?
	What do you think was going on there?
	I don't think we should be changing the law.
	When we are looking after patients in a terminal care situation, we have many strategies and methods that we can use to relieve their suffering and to relieve their pain.
	Now, if someone's still got pain in a terminal care situation, typically what we can do, and this is done commonly, is we'll double the amount of opiates.
	You know, if they've still got pain, we'll double them again.
	We'll put them on a syringe driver that might contain sort of midazolam.
	It might contain morphine, things to keep them calm, things to reduce the agitation.
	Now, if you keep doubling the dose of morphine, you don't need to be a professor of pharmacology to realize that sooner or later that's going to stop your breathing.
	But you know what I think the key thing is, is the motivation of the person giving it.
	This is what I believe.
	So if I give morphine and I'm doing that, or midazolam or whatever it is, if I'm doing that and the prime purpose in my mind is to end the life of that individual, to me that's euthanasia.
	And I would consider myself a murderer if I deliberately tried to end someone's life.
	But if I'm giving someone larger and larger doses of morphine via a syringe driver to keep them calm and to treat their pain, and as a result of those large doses, you get exactly the same effect in the brain that it switches off the respiratory center, then yes, that person will die.
	But to me, that's not euthanasia or more murder because of the motivation that I used to give it.
	And we've seen disasters of this going wrong in recent times, Russell.
	Just looking at a paper last week by Wilson Tsai, an Australian analyst, brilliant mathematician and statistician.
	And what he did was he looked at the amount of, you know, there is this change in the law in or change in the NICE guidelines.
	The National Institute for Health and Care excellence.
	It must be good.
	Must be.
	Sounds nice.
	Sounds nice.
	Yeah, they changed the guidelines in 2020 to give morphine and midazolam together.
	Now, midazolam is basically like strong diazepam or strong valium.
	It's a benzodiazepine.
	And in large doses, that can depress respiration.
	Morphine, everyone knows that can depress respiration.
	I mean, one of my colleagues actually gave an injection of morphine to someone once and they stopped breathing.
	You know, this really happens.
	It was okay.
	We got them started again.
	It wasn't a problem.
	They're in a proper care environment.
	But when you give the two together, so how did that who signed off on that guideline that we'll give these two things together that depress the respiratory, the respiratory center?
	And then people I've talked to who work not so much in hospitals, but in care home facilities, care facilities, old people facilities, chronic sick facilities in the community.
	When their patients were getting COVID in 2020, very often what was happening, the nurses were getting the mobile phones out because the doctors weren't going.
	They weren't allowed to go in in case they spread this dread lurgy all over the place.
	And the consultations were taking place on the phone.
	And as a result of that, doctors were often writing up end-of-life drugs.
	Now, end-of-life drugs are absolutely brilliant.
	When my dad was dying at home, the doctor came round and he wrote him up for a raft of end-of-life drugs.
	And then when the district nurse comes round to see my dad, if it was time, then she would give him those drugs.
	Now, thankfully, he didn't need them.
	He died, you know, of natural causes.
	The Lord just took him at the appropriate time.
	But end-of-life drugs are brilliant.
	But what was happening is people were getting COVID and they were being given end-of-life drugs.
	So you've got a respiratory infection.
	You've got morphine and you've got midazolam.
	Now, you can work out, Russell, as a non-medic, that that is a bad combination.
	All three of those are attacking the breathing, the oxygenation of the blood.
	And people were dying as a result of that.
	Now, what Wilson Tsai did, he tracked the amount of midazolam that was going out and he tracked the excess deaths.
	And he found out that a month after the midazolam was going out, the excess deaths were rising.
	But then when he put the excess deaths back a month to make them overlap, they were following each other like salt and pepper.
	Wow.
	That month delay.
	So the midazolam and morphine, he didn't look at the morphine, he just looked at the midazolam.
	The midazolam was going out a month later, especially in 2020, there was excess deaths.
	And that gave the impression that COVID had a case fatality rate or an infection fatality rate of about 23%.
	Now, later it turned out to be about 0.18%.
	So the majority of these patients, in my view, in care facilities that died in 2020, if they'd just been supported and not given morphine and midazolam, the vast majority of those would have made a full recovery.
	Now, I think there was a lot of national panic going on.
	I'm not blaming the doctors and the nurses.
	They were kind of following the procedure.
	And there were some patients that would have died who were given a more comfortable death as a result of the end-of-life drugs.
	But as well as that, as well as this, what is essentially euthanasia on a huge scale, that gave the impression that COVID was a particularly lethal infection.
	23% infection.
	Now, if COVID's this lethal infection, then we need to lock down society.
	We need to mass vaccinate in a panic with untested vaccines.
	You know, we need to start wearing masks all the time.
	All those COVID restrictions, you could argue that many of them came in as a result of this artificially inflated infection fatality rate, when in actual fact, the lockdowns and the vaccinations didn't work against midazolam overdose, which was a big part of the problem.
	So the fact that that is in the culture is really quite concerning.
	And in Parliament, we've got these moves to the assisted suicide bill, the assisted dying bill, the bump-off old persons bill, whatever you want to call it.
	I mean, the House of Lords are putting lots of amendments into it, but the current Parliament is minded to pass that.
	And obviously, they're going to put in lots and lots of safeguards and it will all be very carefully done and it will be lots of clever doctors and lots of clever judges.
	But of course, we heard all this in 1967 with David Steele's Abortion Act.
	You know, that it was only going to be done in particular circumstances.
	And now in the United Kingdom, we've had about 10 million abortions since 1967, 10 or 11 million, I think, over 11 million, which is a number that was never anticipated by the Act.
	And I think that is the reason the country is in the state it is.
	Because you either believe that the spiritual force is affecting a nation or you don't.
	And you and me know that the spiritual force is affecting a nation.
	You read the Old Testament.
	There's some things God absolutely hates, idolatry, but one of them is the shedding of innocent blood.
	Yeah, and in particular, the sacrifice of children.
	And as I'm saying, Nineveh.
	Jonah was sent to Nineveh and he preached against Nineveh and the people there repented in sackcloth and ashes, so God relented.
	But unfortunately, I don't see that sort of repentance in our country at the moment.
	And, you know, I think we're in this basically spiritual attack.
	Yes.
	As a result of what we've done.
	So, you know, the fact that we've got what in my view is the most appalling parliament in my lifetime, you could argue we've gotten what we deserve.
	Yes, a friend of mine remarked that an abortion does not stop you from being a mother.
	It makes you the mother of a dead baby.
	And that was a sort of a perspective that perhaps alludes to the level of suffering and despair that I mean, you know, if you mention this, people always say old men telling young women what to do with their bodies.
	It's not that.
	We have to decide at what point human life begins.
	And before that, it's not a human life.
	The point at which human life begins, it is a human life and therefore should have the protection that you and me have under the law.
	And as Christians, we believe that what makes someone a human is not a particular stage of cleverness, not a particular stage of development.
	It's that they bear the image of God.
	And there's nothing that I can read of that indicates that the image of God is given incrementally.
	You either have it or you don't.
	So people need to decide at which point that is.
	It's interesting.
	To my mind, it has to be at conception.
	I can't think of any other time to put it.
	Otherwise, you could say, well, what about the day after?
	What about 10 minutes before?
	Indeed.
	And when one considers the motivation, other than in the often listed cases that link so clearly to despair, it's, and, you know, I've been involved in abortions.
	Let me be honest about that.
	It's some form of false idolatry.
	No, there's something I worship more than this actual biochemical, animal, divine, natural fact of my being.
	And that is, I don't want to do this right now.
	It's not a good time for me.
	And we're not in a relationship.
	Like, you know, like it's false idolatry.
	And it begins, as I said earlier, with the self.
	Now, but Doc, I mean, we're doing euthanasia, we're doing abortion.
	But I'd love to do, I'd love to spend a bit of time, given that, in fact, our relationship, in a sense, begins with the fact that we were both somewhat high-profile commentators online during the COVID pandemic, who in different ways, I think, likely contributed to public opinion around these matters in real time.
	Now, Now, in the years since the sort of peak pandemic, there have been a lot of significant revelations.
	You've already touched upon one of them, the issue of end-of-life care to people that had a respiratory condition and the likelihood that that increased mortalities.
	I would like to ask you, in the sort of subsequent couple of years, people are talking about a cancer spike across all populations, heart diseases in the young, children dying after vaccines, sudden death syndrome, miscategorization of statistics and deaths from and with COVID at the height of the pandemic, as well as more peripheral subjects like the way that this whole pandemic was reported,
	the clandestine nature of drug companies and the data on the clinical trialing, the fact that there was never any trials for transmission.
	I wonder, what do you believe, doctor, will be the single piece of data that provides a kind of tipping point where the majority of people will say, wait a minute, on reflection, we were lied to.
	Something significant happened in that pandemic.
	What do you think it will be?
	Because at the moment, it's so diffuse and the kind of accumulative and incessant nature of ongoing despair, war here, migration there, means that it seems to me that the people of Britain and the people of America haven't significantly assessed what went on between 2019 and 2023.
	And I wonder if you can point to a set of data or an object that you would say that, that there is the bullseye of what's just gone on.
	The obvious one is correlating vaccination status against excess deaths.
	Now, the British government were given the opportunity to release this just last month and they actually decided not to.
	They closed that down.
	They said they weren't going to release it because we know there's excess deaths and we know that vaccines were given.
	What we don't know at what you call the participant level data is who had the vaccine and did they die?
	And the government has refused to release that data.
	Now, we believe that that data has been released to the pharmaceutical industry.
	Where bits of data has appeared, like in Japan, for example, and also in Italy, it doesn't look good.
	It looks like excess deaths were associated with vaccination.
	Now, just a couple of days ago, I interviewed a renowned Italian scientist.
	Let me get his name right.
	His name was Panagius Polycritus.
	Great name, Greek name.
	And he's done quite a bit of work on this.
	And what he found was that when someone was vaccinated for 15 days in Italy, and some places 21 days, but in Italy, it was 15 days.
	For 15 days after they were vaccinated, they were counted as being unvaccinated.
	It's a bit of a sly trick.
	And the reason people did that is, okay, it takes time for the immune response to develop.
	Now, if you're looking at the protective effect of vaccine, there's some rationale in doing that, that you wait till it works and then you look at how effective it's going to be.
	Now, you and me know it wasn't very effective.
	But the point is, a lot of the adverse reactions against vaccine occurred in that first few days after the vaccines were given.
	So if someone was vaccinated and they died, say, a week later of myopericarditis or blood clots, then that death would have gone into the unvaccinated country.
	Oh, my God.
	So vaccinated people that died would have been counted as unvaccinated.
	Now, what does that do to the death rate in the unvaccinated?
	It appears to put it up.
	Therefore, everyone needs a vaccine to protect them against dying in the unvaccinated status.
	But we could get rid of all this ambiguity of the government would just release who was vaccinated and the death data on a participant level.
	The reason, of course, they say that they don't do this is because it would breach confidentiality.
	But I've talked to a former science minister, David Davis, still an MP, great guy.
	And he assures me that there's ways to do this completely anonymously.
	But the government is not doing it.
	Now, I would hope that the Trump RFK set up in the States would start releasing that for the states.
	But where there's glimpses of it in Japan and one or two provinces in Italy, it's not looking good.
	So that is the key thing.
	Now, we've got brilliant statisticians standing by waiting for this data, but it's not released.
	So we don't know.
	So we're left trying to piece bits and bobs together.
	Why don't they release this data given that they've reduced it, released the pharmaceutical industry already?
	So we can assume that the government knows, we can assume that the pharmaceutical industry knows.
	But us hoiperloi, us plauditariat, us useless eaters, we're not given that information despite the fact that we have people with the expertise to analyze it within days and give us definitive answers.
	And my hunch is they're going to fight not to release this data, at least through the lifetime of this parliament.
	Now, if there's another government in the UK, if reform gets in, you would hope there's enough enlightened thinking there to release that data.
	But government bureaucracies do tend to move rather slowly.
	So the data's there, but we're not allowed it, which is a pity.
	For this week only, every dollar you spend on tryreborn.com gets you.
	I'm going to take the sunglasses off this.
	It's so serious.
	50 entries into the draw to win this Jeep.
	Man, I've been driving around this Jeep.
	If I wasn't a family man anymore, my word, me and my German Shepherd, we were going around, people was looking at us, sing hosannas, they were saying.
	But I suggested there was a strong sexual undercurrent.
	If you are a person that's lonely, perhaps you're an incel, perhaps Perhaps you're staring down at your own glazed belly day after day, pixelated ghost sucking the very life force out of you.
	Well, them days are behind you.
	Tryreborn.com.
	Stop masturbating and win this cheat.
	One of the things I sort of understood somewhat instinctively as an adolescent is that the categories of top secret exist, I would happily say.
	primarily to protect these institutions from a population that if they understood the depth and degree of deception to which they've been exposed would become non-compliant and quickly radicalized.
	And I must say that I've learned very little in the subsequent 30, 40 years to suggest that that perception needs adjusting.
	In fact, everything I've learned since then has been, yes, of course, while they're claiming protection either, because, well, if the Russians were ever to find out this or the Chinese, my heaven help us.
	That seems less and less likely every day.
	And indeed, I use this now to, Helmet, now that I know what happened in the pandemic, is that we were told we were being protected when in fact we were being controlled, I can apply it nearly ubiquitously with a kind of a spirit of non-separation to any issue.
	So whatever the reason is for mass migration into the UK, and by the way, as a Christian, I believe we are one family under God and that is our duty to love and care for one another.
	But whatever the reason is, it ain't because they're fleeing some war-torn land and we want to offer them safe harbor.
	That I know.
	And the same with abortion or euthanasia.
	It ain't to protect women and their bodily autonomy.
	It isn't to provide a safe and happy harbour and passage to the next world.
	Whatever the reason is, it isn't what they're telling you.
	It will at some point interface with, superficially, profit and dominion and control materially and measurably.
	But again, to refer to an earlier part of our conversation, I believe ultimately we're dealing with a kind of prima materia of spirit that's difficult to discern.
	And now where these things start to glom together, in my view, doctor, is we have people that are not gatekept entering into the public space like you.
	And the job that you were able to do, and the reason my admiration for you began, was because of the type of man you are and the manner of your communication.
	I.e., unlike me, you're not hyperbolic.
	You're not aggressive when it comes to confrontation.
	You're not evangelical or zealous in the ways that I am.
	I know what my role is.
	I know that my job is to generate some...
	I'm in the generation business.
	I want to direct the spirit that he has given me.
	But I know that there's some people who are just going to look at him and say, oh, you know, he's become Christian since he's been charged with rape.
	Look at him.
	He's crazy.
	Just a bunch of long words, methylene blue on his fingers.
	He's a lunatic.
	But with you, when you're sort of breaking, oh, that's interesting that they won't release that data.
	Oh, that's peculiar that they were, those deaths are counted as unvaccinated.
	Oh, how interesting that if you give people with a respiratory condition strong opioids, that shuts down respiratory function.
	Like you're reaching people that would find me appalling, perhaps.
	But the truth is this, is that we're in this environment now where whether it's Candice Owens, you know, like, you know, a cynic would say, perhaps, and I'll use myself because then it's less offensive, you know, that even a stopped clock is right twice a day.
	And I like the idea of the infinite number of monkeys typing out endless truths.
	But the fact is, is look, taken collectively, you, Neil Oliver, you know, like the UK, the lad Robert Winston out of, you know, out of Mumford and son, there's a lot of people, our car, the people that, you know, trigonometry from across, you know, different political perspectives.
	Not everyone's, you know, like a right wing, not everyone's Christian.
	But collectively, there's this sense that, well, we just can't bloody trust the media.
	We can't trust the government.
	And it's obvious why you can't trust the media.
	They're either funded by the state or funded by commercial interests or ultimately owned by ulterior or ultimate interests that mean that they can't tell people the truth.
	Because all, you know, as George Collin said, where interests converge, no conspiracy is necessary.
	But I believe there is a conspiracy.
	And the conspiracy is to ensure that a significant number of people don't wake up to the reality that the technology now exists for us to have a greater influence in our own lives and our own politics.
	There is no reason to stick with political models of 400 years ago where you need to send one guy on horseback to Westminster to represent your village.
	There's no reason to have political ideologies that were a response to industrialization like communism or fascism.
	We need political ideologies and movements that reflect the reality of our time.
	Now, personally, I don't want to be cynical about it because I think there's a lot of good stuff with reform, say for example, but I don't, I think what it seems to me, even from a distance, Doc, is it's like, oh, I can see that what's happening now is Nigel Farage, people have got, shit, it's too late.
	He is going to win something.
	Get hold of that guy quick.
	In the same way with Trump.
	The Republican Party didn't want Trump in control.
	First, they were like, oh, he's a maniac.
	Then it's like, oh, my God, he's going to win.
	How do we deal with this?
	How do we morph around him?
	How can we mitigate this loss?
	You know, the person that fascinates me most, and I'm sure you must be fascinated too, is Secretary Kennedy, because I know him some, I love him, and I believe that he's some of a pedigree of fighting big corporations.
	He's a human being.
	He's flawed.
	Of course he is.
	But the way that he's been treated is like a litmus test of, oh, wow, now we've got someone that would come out and say, control big pharma, control big food, control big agriculture.
	He's a person that I bet if he was in absolute charge would say localized food production.
	Human beings should eat whole food grown or reared where it's being eaten.
	Pharmaceutical industry can't regulate itself.
	It needs to change radically.
	But you also see that once these people are within these institutions, and it's a near miracle in the case of Kennedy in particular that he is, that once they're in that, you know, they are subject to a lot of, there's a lot of control in that area.
	It's clear and obvious.
	I'm not saying I don't know anything that other people don't know.
	It's just bloody obvious.
	So do you think and feel, Doc?
	I know you'll be answering questions that you want to answer because I saw you take notes.
	But I also want to ask, do you think that we're at a time where people might start looking at what we agree with each other about and being ready to advocate for actual systemic change rather than cutaneous alteration of the cut of the pigmentation of the party?
	Well, people are going to go, it doesn't matter if it's reform or bloody labor.
	You can see when someone matters enters the frame because they'll try and kill them or destroy them.
	Jeremy Corbyn, clearly, one way or another, mattered.
	He was clearly a volatile entity.
	Or maybe Tommy Robinson.
	It doesn't need to be left or right.
	But when someone comes in that's actually creating polarity, it's energy.
	And they don't want that.
	Yep.
	So just maybe the reason I took a few notes there is you go from one topic to the other, which is fine.
	You've got a good collection of ideas.
	The first one there was, I'm mentally ill.
	Yeah, yeah, yeah.
	Aren't we?
	All Russell.
	Yeah, it's interesting.
	We have similar aims, but I think it's fair to say we have different styles, both of presentation.
	You know, your hairstyle could do with a bit of improvement, you know, your dress sense could do with a bit of improvement.
	You know, we're all different, but that's fine.
	No, seriously, the media that you mentioned there is a big part of the problem.
	Now, the BBC, for example, I kind of grieved for the BBC because the BBC of my youth, you know, you come home from school and you watch Blue Peter.
	It was the height of, you know, it was the, you know, Valerie Singleton and John Noakes and Peter Purvis is the height of your day, you know.
	And when I was abroad, you know, working on the on the in Thailand and Cambodia in the early 80s, you know, there was no internet then.
	You tuned up this crummy old, well, I actually had quite a good one.
	I had a nice Sony one.
	Other brands are available.
	Shortwave radio.
	And on a good day, you would get DDD D D And this really serious voice would go, this is London.
	And then you thought, you're going to get, and you got the BBC news and it was great.
	You know, so why has it gone so far off?
	Well, I think particular people have taken senior positions in the BBC and other organisations.
	And the reason I don't think they are redeemable now is the fact that particular people with particular views are the only ones that have been appointed for the last 20 or 30 years, you know, for a generation of workers.
	So, you know, the people that work for these organizations now, by definition, have particular views.
	I think we're actually seeing the same in, for example, the judiciary.
	You know, you need particular views now to be appointed to the judiciary.
	And that is, you know, that is really concerning.
	We've already got political appointments in the Crown Prosecution Service.
	So the law, of course, you know, judges are brilliant people and there's lots of really good ones, but has there been a bias in the way that these people have been appointed that precludes people with a particular point of view?
	I think is a question we need to talk about.
	And you mentioned food there as well.
	Control of food is, of course, everything.
	Food should be produced as locally as possible.
	And food should look like food.
	It shouldn't really come out of a packet.
	It shouldn't be ultra-processed.
	And I'll just give you one example of that.
	I've been working with a couple of scientists in the UK.
	Well, I want to say I've been working with them.
	I've been listening to them talk.
	They did all the work.
	And they've been looking at food additives, particularly folic acid.
	So folic acid is put in everything.
	And you'll talk to loads of people from the States.
	You know, Joe Rogan, for example, says, you know, if he eats pizza in, I think is he in Florida now, wherever he, Texas, if he eats pizza in Texas, he says he feels ill afterwards, but he goes to Italy and he can pig out on pizza and he feels fine.
	You know, is this because we're adding folic acid to all the flour in the United States?
	Because these scientists have been working with, one's called Claire Craig, one's called Tim Kelly, but both great doctors.
	They've worked out that folic acid is actually not a natural molecule.
	Folic acid doesn't occur in nature.
	And what folic acid does, it sits on cell receptors and it can actually block them up.
	And that means the natural form, the folate, doesn't get into the cells.
	So, the fact that we're giving all this extra folic acid to give what is actually B9 means that the cells are actually short of B9 in a substantial proportion of the population.
	So, we've got this great irony where we are giving something to get rid of a deficiency, and that's actually causing a deficiency because we're jiggling around with all the food supply and all the additives and things like that.
	You know, that is a real problem, and it's partly under political control.
	The idea about systemically changing the political system, I agree with that to a large extent, but we need some form of governance.
	And I'm kind of with Churchill on this.
	You know, liberal democracy and the democratic government is an appalling, ridiculous form of government, but it's probably the best option we've got.
	So, you know, I do believe in the principles of democracy.
	It's a case of how those are exercised.
	And we need to get rid of the vested interest that is controlling this.
	If we had proper democracy at the most local level possible, in my view, this principle of subsidiarity, where decisions are taken as locally as possible, is the kind of change I would like to see.
	And yeah, I agree with you completely.
	I'm not saying that, yeah, okay, we've got a particularly bad parliament, a particularly bad government at the moment.
	That's not a party-political saying, really.
	It's just, I think anyone can see that.
	You know, things are going pretty belly up in this country at the moment.
	And I'm not saying a new government would necessarily change that because they're not going to change human nature.
	No, of course not.
	But it is going to be a human nature.
	God can work through governments.
	Yes, and it can be done.
	Only with godly people, though.
	And even the myth of secularism, I think, must be addressed.
	You can't separate churches and state.
	All you end up is a church of Satan deeply embedded in institutions of government, i.e., where is the ideology of current national government and global bureaucracies that have the power of government seated?
	And where is it derived?
	I'm talking about the influence of, say, NATO, WHO, WEF.
	I know that's lesser, but it's still somewhat significant.
	And whatever ulterior channels of power they're communicating through and expressing that power from.
	And what I believe, when you say about subsidiarity there, that's precisely the, I think, where we agree.
	And that's probably a better term than anarcho-syndicalism, certainly less incendiary.
	And like, you know, I would say that what we have to do is explicitly declare that, you know, we already have the art of somewhat the infrastructure and architecture, local councils, mayoralty.
	In this country where I am, we have states and we have governors.
	And I would say that if the principle, the principle, the system must be formed around a principle.
	If the principle were maximum subsidiarity, if the principle were maximum democracy, not minimum, not the maximum porous machine through which all sorts of influence can be exerted.
	In this country, you could make clear changes overnight by saying, we're not accepting any political donations and we're not having lobbying anymore.
	That's gone.
	That's over.
	Then you would start to see all sorts of crazy fluctuations.
	And then I would say, wherever possible, maximally empower states to pass their own laws.
	And in our country, the UK, we could have empowered mayors, empowered councils.
	And what about, by the way, Doc, referenda?
	For example, if we held a referendum on do you want those figures released, yes or no, as you said, David Davis said, maximally and not anonymized.
	Do you want that?
	Yes or no?
	We're pretty sure you're going to get yes back.
	Right.
	Oh, yeah.
	Do it like you know, and what they do is they prevent those democratic principles.
	If you've got the technology by which Uber and Airbnb can ultimately aggregate centralized but simultaneously decentralized taxi cabs and the rental of a hotel room, why can't you use that same technology to empower a community to say, right, this is your budget?
	I'm your leader, so I would suggest we send this much on sewage, this much on roads, this much on ULES cameras or the removal of ULES cameras, and this much on XYZ.
	But you guys, you vote.
	You might have different concerns.
	And of course, you can have a degree of representation because I've participated in some organizations that are somewhat based on, you know, through my anonymous, what do I want to say, address of my personal problems around drugs and alcohol.
	These groups are run fully democratically.
	And my God, it's slow.
	It's boring.
	You have to listen to everyone's opinion.
	It doesn't matter if you're charismatic and can talk quick.
	They'll shut you right down.
	My opinion's no more important than anybody else's.
	And that's why I believe it should be.
	And then what do you have to change?
	The idea, you have to get rid of the myth of progress, that false idol of progress.
	Yes, there's been progress in technology.
	Yes, there's been progress in medicine, but who's benefiting from it?
	What is the principle that really underlies progress in both of those areas?
	Profit.
	Maximum profit in medicine.
	Maximum profit in technology.
	The idea that this has become a disposable artifact is bloody ridiculous.
	You should have one cell phone, should last you for the rest of your life.
	That's your cell phone done.
	And like, you know, if people want to buy stuff, but the bewildering advent of total consumerism, it has to be stemmed.
	Gandhi said this, you know, at the point when our country left India, he said there's no point kicking out the British and then replicating their systems.
	India is a country of 70,000 villages.
	Each one should be fully autonomous where possible, trading only where necessary.
	And what happened?
	When Britain did get kicked out of India, Nehru gave the speech about India's independence.
	We're a free country now.
	Guess what language he gave that speech in?
	English.
	Nothing changed.
	They just got Nehru jackets instead of bowler hats.
	And the same thing's happening again and again and again everywhere.
	But now we have the technology to communicate and the technology to implement.
	And if we do our jobs as Christians, as servants of Christ, knowing we're only here for fleetingly, we're dying anyway, and are willing to love one another as he loved us, which means to the point of death, if necessary, lay down our lives for our friends, then the change will happen.
	But I don't think it can happen when all you believe in is maximum number of blowjobs and sugar.
	I've tried both those methods.
	The idea that progress is inevitable does seem really quite ridiculous.
	You know, people say in this day and age, as if human beings are any different, you know, they're exactly the same.
	We just have more things, more gizmos.
	But just now, what we've got in terms of that technology is we've got an exponential increase in what it can do.
	The classic example is artificial intelligence, isn't it?
	You know, when artificial intelligence is teaching itself, you get exponential increase.
	And technology, in my view, is being used as a modality of control.
	So at the moment in the UK, they are trying to, well, they are rolling out facial recognition cameras in every city, town, and perhaps village in the United Kingdom.
	Now, this is good if you want to catch criminals and you can trust the government.
	That's good.
	But of course, that's predicated on the idea that you can trust the government.
	And to tell you the truth, I don't.
	No.
	You know, you know, if if they roll out social recogn facial recognition software, that'll be good because it will pick up a few criminals, like DNA testing did.
	You know, that that's good and it will deter some crimes.
	But the government, it's like a it's like a cog, you know, once it's clicked round and it sort of jams into place, you know, it won't go back again.
	So once it's been rolled out, it won't go back again.
	And we could end up with a government that's even more totalitarian than we are now.
	And the modality of control is there.
	Combine that with the control of finances.
	So, you know, there's a lot of movements to get rid of cash.
	I think we've talked about this before.
	You know, people want to get rid of cash.
	So you use credit cards.
	So what's the problem?
	Well, stupid people like me, Russell, you know, I'm always losing my wallet.
	I don't know about you.
	I drive my wife mad.
	It was in my wallet.
	I can't find my wallet.
	You know, I should have one of them air tag things in it.
	So really, wouldn't it be more convenient for stupid people like me, instead of having a credit card in your wallet, just put a little one under there or under there?
	You know, just planning, it will be only the size of a grain of rice.
	And then I could just scan everything.
	And of course, the interesting thing about that is once you get to that level of technology, it'd be like these buses that we have, these Chinese buses that can be switched off.
	So someone could say, well, you know, I saw John Campbell there on that facial recognition software.
	And he was talking to that scallywag, Russell Brand.
	You know, he needs punishment for that.
	Tell you what I'm going to do.
	I know where he is now.
	He wants to go to that pub for a pub lunch.
	I'll tell you what I'm going to do.
	I'm going to switch off his credit card.
	And then you go to donk yourself.
	And the barmaid says, well, sorry, John, that's not working.
	And, you know, if you have no cash, so we're in that situation where that prophecy could be fulfilled.
	No man may buy or sell.
	He has the number of the beast.
	And I bet the barmaid will be an AI robot.
	She'll probably shoot you with sort of a two-ronny style bullet gun out of the boobies like my wife Katie Perry had in numerous pop videos.
	Hey, do you know this?
	I do hope not.
	That's the way it's going, John.
	Like that.
	In Forbidden Facts by my dear great friend Gavin DeBecker, he talks about, and if you don't know him, you should.
	You should meet him.
	I know he's a fan of yours.
	He says, but this is sort of terrifying, is that, of course, by then it would be centralized digital currencies anyway.
	So they'd be able to change the value of your money.
	They'd be able to shut down your finances.
	They'd be able to social credit score you into being able to travel or not travel.
	Total, total control.
	The aim is total, total control.
	He said also that once they've normalized vaccines for everything, that they would just, you would just receive a notification saying you are to attend, go to your local pharmacy to receive an injection.
	And we don't know that you and me would be even getting the same injection.
	They might say that Russell Brand, he's a bit caffeinated and a bit methylene blued up.
	He's talking too quickly.
	Shut him down.
	Dr. John Campbell, he's too reasonable.
	He could do with a good dose of adrenochrome or adrenaline or something.
	So the next time you're matter, when you're on your show, you'll be all like frantic and you'd sound like me.
	Lose your audience.
	Yeah.
	I think that I think there is a tendency towards more centralized control.
	You know, I think the book of Revelation is talking about a one world government eventually, or at least, you know, global control.
	And we're moving towards that.
	Because I actually do believe in the concept of the nation state.
	And I think that's what's being I think that's what's being attacked at the moment.
	It's being undermined.
	You know, Keir Starmer famously was asked, you know, what's more important?
	Is it Westminster or Davos?
	without hesitation said Davos.
	You know, these people seem to be more internationalists than national leaders.
	And that's moving towards something.
	I mean, it may not be in our lifetimes, but it's moving in that direction.
	And you could argue that it's inevitable, but it's also quite concerning.
	No, we're at war, Doc, and we will win.
	Thank you so much for staying up.
	When I come to our country again, I would love to see you.
	Oh, heck, yeah.
	Yeah, come.
	Yeah.
	It's supposed to be going toe walking sometime.
	I would love that.
	When I saw you and I think your son in Kagul's, I thought, oh, bliss.
	Dr. John's got the balance.
	Walking the dog out on a country lane.
	What could be better?
	What could be better?
	I wish I did have the balance, Russell.
	Really?
	Yeah.
	No, I wouldn't say I've arrived.
	No, no, maybe not.
	Maybe not.
	I suppose not.
	Well, I love you.
	Thank you.
	Don't suppose we ever will.
	No, maybe in the next one.
	Hey, thanks, Doc.
	I love you.
	Thanks for making time.
	Stay in touch with me, won't you?
	Oh, absolutely.
	Yeah.
	Yeah, we've all got the WhatsApp thing.
	That's right, darling.
	Yeah.
	You lovely old granddad.
	I am a granddad.
	Three of them now, yeah.
	When you say things like bits and bobs and what's happy thing, people know that they're dealing with, and even barmaid in this day and age, we know we're dealing very much with a granddad.
	Yeah, you're giving your, yeah.
	Yeah, yeah, I use all that sort of what's the word?
	I don't know, descriptive descriptive terms, onomatopoeic terms or something.
	Yes, yes.
	Anytime you can't quite think of the technology or the correct, the correct name for it.
	I love you, Doc.
	I've got to jump off and do something.
	Sure, man.
	Praise the Lord.
	Yep.
	Absolutely.
	Thank you.
	Take care.
	See you, Russell.
	Right.
	Bye.
	Thank you.
	Bye.
	All right, guys.
	Thanks for joining us.
	Remember, get Rumble Premium if you can.
	I'd love that.
	And hey, read this book.
	This is a good book.
	And be nice to people.
	You know, try that.
	Try being nice to people.
	Be nice to them and at them, but also be yourself.
	So you've got to make yourself nice.
	Otherwise, the niceness will be hypocritical.
	That'd be no good.
	All right.
	Praise the Lord.
	Praise Jesus.
	Thanks for watching this.
	We're back with another show on Friday.
	It's going to be pretty brilliant, I think.
	And this is what I look like.
	Praise the Lord.

▲