Latest Truth Bombs from Tucker Carlson and Russell Brand
Tucker released a series of powerful interviews recently. Is the stranglehold on information and freedom of expression finally being revealed to the public at large?
Twenty years ago I was donating over a thousand dollars a year to NPR AND buying Winston Flowers as part of their fundraising campaigns around the holidays. This was during the depth of the Iraq war, the height of GW Bush’s popularity and the breadth of trickery employed by GOP reps to restructure voting districts in Texas.
Tucker Carlson and his views were anathema. Things have changed. I no longer find him repugnant. Putting aside his politics (whatever they may be right now) and only regarding the quality and depth of his content of late, he and I are on the same page. A page that is not part of the “Uniparty” book.
His recent interview with Russian President Vladimir Putin got, some say, over 200 million views. The most interesting aspect of that conversation was not what was said, but how our media portrayed the event.
Type “Tucker Carlson Vladimir Putin” into Google and see what comes up. Not a single report that acknowledges that the public was served by hearing what the leader of our enemy had to say about a conflict that we are paying for with our money and our lives. Here’s a hint: when there is no mention of any contrary opinion, you are not being informed, you are being indoctrinated.
Obviously it’s best to keep pouring hundreds of billions of dollars into an unwinnable war with another nuclear superpower using conventional weapons while the Ukrainian people get decimated. If Americans and Western Europeans heard Putin’s historical and strategic perspective it might soften our support for the war, and then where would we be?
Two weeks ago Carlson interviewed entertainer/comedian/podcast host, Russell Brand, who has been the target of an intense smear campaign around allegations of sexual misconduct/assault which took place over a decade ago. Brand categorically denies that he assaulted anyone while still admitting that he did enjoy an overly promiscuous lifestyle for some time, a period he is not proud of.
Why were these allegations being publicized recently? Although he has been critical of the pandemic response on his very popular podcast, Brand suspects it was due to his critique of the war in Ukraine in early 2022.
In the intro to the conversation, Tucker posits that Brand was particularly dangerous to bigger interests because Brand has a unique capacity “to win people over from the other side”.
It’s an interesting observation to say the least. What kinds of interests would be threatened by people coming together?
In this powerful 45 minute interview where Brand gets to tell his side of the story, we see two big influencers from opposite sides of the political spectrum come together and state what has been obvious to those who can unplug from corporate media.
Brand has often been criticized for his over-the-top effusiveness, but in this unscripted interview he was measured and incredibly articulate.
Brand (at approximately 19:00):
“It seems to me that authoritarianism now is being deliberately veiled in an insidious language of care, concern, safety and convenience. It seems to me that we are in a time where we lurch from one crisis to another, that the crisis is always used to legitimize certain solutions, and a docile or terrified public is willing to participate in the proposed solutions that usually involve giving up their freedom. We are continually being invited to give up our freedom in exchange for safety or convenience, and it seems that this process is radically escalating. And I feel that this is something that we will see yet more of in the coming year.
I feel like we're potentially on the precipice of serious, and to use your term, a hot war with Russia, and that's being reported in my country right now. It's like we're being prepped, groomed, primed for a war which is coming, that we're being kept in a state of constant anxiety in order to induce compliance, that the ongoing stoking of cultural tension is to ensure that people don't begin to recognize that actually we have far more in common with one another than we do with these curious sets of establishment interests that seem to be transcendent of national democracy.”
Here is the whole interview:
Of course not everyone will agree with me. Author Daniel Pinchbeck believes Russell Brand has lost his mind. He wrote recently:
“Meanwhile, my former celebrity friend, Russell Brand… What happened to him?! I am still in shock. I’ve never seen such utter moral degeneration. Even physically, he looks different… like a tinplate huckster, staring out at his 6.75 million “awakening wonders” with a guilty addict’s false-messianic grifter intensity.
Russell, if you are reading this: I am here for you. I still care about you. Please reach out any time. We can still go to the Amazon together and drink ayahuasca, as we discussed long ago (you were too scared back then). You can purge whatever diabolical critters have infested your mind and soul. You do not have to be a seven-day-a-week shill for MAGA, Putin, (sic) Tucker Carlsen — an Alex Jones in training. You don’t need to trawl the bottom of the Internet ocean just to increase your “likes” and “subs.”
Hmmm. What are “tinplate hucksters” and what exactly do they look like?
Pinchbeck seems to still cling to a thread of hope to save his “former celebrity friend”. I don’t have your literary chops, Daniel, but I don’t think he will “come to his senses” at your behest after you accused him of trawling the bottom of the internet ocean to gain popularity. Perhaps I need a few trips to the Amazon to see things clearly like the way you do.
Is it really so far fetched to think there are some big conspiracies around the flow of information in play? Does one have to be a shill for MAGA to point out that certain opinions get actively suppressed, and when they escape the censorship net personal attacks follow?
More recently, Tucker interviewed Mike Benz, a former State Department official with responsibilities in formulating and negotiating US foreign policy on international communications and information technology matters. Benz founded Foundation for Freedom Online.
Benz gives us a rare look at the history and relationship of our National Security State and Tech companies like Google had with internet free speech. Originally protecting and championing it when it permitted people to congregate and overthrow adversarial governments, things changed in 2014 when the people of Crimea and the Donbas regions unexpectedly voted to remain with the Russian Federation. Freedom of expression can be a double-edged sword to those who wish to rule in anonymity.
Links to this extremely important interview, transcript and additional notes can be found here in this article by Dr. Robert Malone:
Are we watching the world devolve into “utter moral degeneration” as Pinchbeck fears? Or are we finally witnessing a species snapping out of a trance engineered by decades of thought manipulation and control by efforts like Operation Mockingbird and the Trusted News Initiative?
Do we need to be certain that Carlson and Brand aren’t part of another ruse before we can listen to what they claim to have finally understood for themselves?
What do you think?
What do I think? Thanks for asking.
Starting with the Dems, since I was one for so long, I was surprised at how many of my leftwing friends never Questioned Authority when the CDC said a terrible Covid pandemic had arrived and, later, how indignant they were about people who refused the mRNA shots. Their denial was impervious to information about our marvelous natural immunity that, nevertheless, needs some tending (i.e. very good nutrition, making sure to be much more replete in vitamin D than the FDA feeble standards, etc). And currently, their denial is even greater than ever about the irrefutable, incredibly high rate of All Cause Deaths, as if they think it’s a character flaw to admit they were conned. Of course they were conned! By expert manipulators! (A big reason I could see it was that I’ve been a health nut for decades and had long ago learned to see through the claims of government agencies that are controlled by Big Ag and Big Junk Food and Big Pharma.)
Similarly, but with different excuses for their huffy anger, my Republican friends easily blame BLM, gay marriage, critical race theory, Pro Choice “baby murderers,” and/or immigrants for the ills of society. Really?! Black people or LGBTQ people have no legitimate complaints about structural bias and opportunities denied based on racist, sexist, or snobby stereotypes? A lima-bean size ball of cells matters more than a low-paid single mother of 4 or a college student whose birth control failed? We documented citizens don’t have any immigrants in our family tree? (These are why I couldn't just switch parties, hence I'm a Decline to State voter.)
Both “sides” have been fired up by canny newsmakers as being true patriots while the other side is heartless. Could fomenting strife be party leaders’ universal strategy for getting more campaign donation$ whenever their respective base$ are furiou$ at their opponent$?
Doesn’t that fury close the door to civil debates about how to cooperate in solving the many problems we face today?
Both sides are shooting themselves in the foot if they listen to their “leaders” (whether it’s the DNC or MAGA groups) because neither group has a clear majority. We need each other. Two MINORITIES can become one MAJORITY and get the changes that the 1% so effectively (and invisibly) blocks at every turn.
We need to listen to uncomfortable ideas with open minds, assuming the good intentions of our neighbors and relatives who disagree with us.
Step one: let’s quit the name-calling and put downs.
As a long time subscriber, this is one of your best pieces. We have all been had, it appears. The more voices that see that, one hopes the better for us all. Thanks for writing this.