It's Already Live. You're In It. | Fitts, Dixon, Davis

Trump was installed, um, with significant funding from Elon Musk and the technical industrial complex, significant funding from the Mellon Banking family and the, and the, the financial industrial complex. And then the third largest was Mariam Madston, the connection to Israel and the military-industrial complex.

Three of the sharpest minds in finance, intelligence, and surveillance research in one room for the first time. And what they laid out should terrify every single person watching.

From 1998 to 2015, that we know of, there were 21 trillion of what's called undocumentable adjustments. And there's no way to know without auditing the New York Fed accounts for the US government how much money is missing. And that's Katherine Austin Fitz, former assistant secretary of housing under George H.W. Bush. Then offered a seat at the Federal Reserve Board, and she turned it down. She's the woman the Feds tried to bury for asking where the money went. Besides her, Simon Dixon, the banker who called the FTX, Celsius, and Luna collapses before they happened.

Don't listen to anything anyone says. Let's look at what they do. Um, so whatever Elon says is rubbish. Whatever Trump says is rubbish. And Ian Davis, the British investigative journalist documenting the public-private partnerships nobody else will touch. They mapped the control grid, the trillion-dollar print they say is coming, the crypto bill they call a Trojan horse, and the one move you have left before BlackRock owns your entire neighborhood.

Um, they're deliberately trying to manufacture civil unrest.

Catherine calls it the Mr. Global system. Simon calls it the worst crisis we've ever seen. Ian calls it the dark enlightenment. By the end of this, you'll know what to call it. And most importantly, very, very importantly, you will know what to do about it. And again, remember, nothing in this video is financial advice. It's for educational purposes only. Guys, without further ado, let's bring these three titans to the stage. All right, Ian, Katherine, Simon, everyone, thank you guys so much for taking the time to be here. Really appreciate it. It was hard to coordinate all three of your busy schedules, but really appreciate you being here. And, um, without further ado, let's, let's get into it.

So, uh, Palantir, they decided a $300 million deal with the US Department of Agriculture. They're now involved in food systems, healthcare, weapons, immigration enforcement, and Space Force. When one private company starts doing this many government jobs without voters having a say, are we already living under a corporate government?

So, I just have to jump on this because when I was assistant secretary in 1989, I used to have massive fights with the defense contractors to give me the data that I needed to run my operation, and they would refuse to. And we used to call it the data beast and the war with the data beast. And that was in 1989. So at that time, there were 24 covered agencies, and in fact, all of their bank accounts were consolidated into a few banks, and all of their data providers and payment systems were, you know, consolidated into a few corporate entities. So, so Palantir is a new phase of something that's been building for a long time. If you look at, so, so many years ago, Amazon put together a cloud for the CIA, but integrating all 17 intelligence agencies, and now DoD has done a similar sort of cloud contract using Amazon, Oracle, Microsoft, and a few others. So if you look at the integration of the federal government through corporate cloud contractors and IT payment contractors, that process has been going on for a long time, and of course, Palantir is just taking it to a whole new level because you're connecting it up to the satellites, the Wi-Fi, and integrated with the surveillance system and the AI data centers. So this is a new phase of something that's been going on for a long, long time.

Yeah, absolutely. I, I'll jump in. This whole, um, public-private partnership, um, we're really hitting the, the critical mass here where effectively, you know, central banking dumps the bill on the people. Um, and then that's rerouted through the bond markets and stock markets into these private-public partnerships. Um, and Palantir really is the chosen one, as it were, particularly in collaboration with the other members of the PayPal Mafia. Um, so we seem to be getting our artificial intelligence, police, and surveillance state. Um, and it's going through a bit of a recognizable pattern. Um, so some of the early beta tests on were done through the Palestinian laboratory. So we had surveillance as a service in, um, West Bank. We had genocide as a service in, um, the, uh, in, um, Gaza. Uh, and then it tends to come around and you beta test it on the UK. So in the UK, there was a lot of social media scraping data, pre-crime arrests, um, classification of resistance and any protests as domestic terrorists, um, and open borders, closed borders. Um, and then a desire to tackle, uh, for example, ensuring that you are of the correct age to be consuming adult content online. Um, at the moment, the latest one that we're getting in the UK is, um, tenancy protection acts, um, which are in the middle of a manufactured crisis that we're seeing with the closure of the Strait of Hormuz. Um, you're starting to see that now, all of a sudden, Palantir is moving deeper into the US infrastructure, um, through agriculture and food in the middle of manufacturing food insecurity. Um, so Palantir is really aggressively, um, moving, um, to effectively a privatized version of the US government police and surveillance state, training ICE agents, um, classifying groups, any resistance as domestic terrorism. Um, and, uh, it's, it's getting incredibly noticeable and aggressive right now.

Yeah, that, I, I would echo both, uh, both of what's just been said because, um, another way of looking at this is, uh, there was, uh, some research that was done by a couple of political scientists in 2014 called Gilens and Page, and they looked at 1,800 policy decisions or policy initiatives over a 30-year period in the US. So they published in 2014. So they were going back to the '80s, the late '70s, early '80s. Uh, and they concluded that what the way that the the government was functioning in the US at that time was what they called a functional oligarchy. So there were there were different models, different models of potential, uh, democratic models. One of them is elite domination. And another one is, I can't remember the different, the different models, but their analysis of how policy functioned, um, was that it effectively amounted to what they called a functional oligarchy. I think MIT put a study out as well in 2021 where they were just considering, um, what they were, they were just essentially considering foreign policy. So they were looking at how foreign policy, whose interest does foreign policy reflect, and they consistently found that it was reflecting whatever the agenda was of the corporate lobby at the time. So, and this, this was again, this was US foreign policy, but we see exactly the same everywhere else in the world where we look, um, you know, and going back to the idea that public-private partnership is very much, um, driving policy agendas everywhere. And I mean, a classic example of that is if we look at how sustainable development has developed over the years with the, the significant input, input of globalist think tanks, which let's face it, represent corporate interests, often represent corporate interests, then what we are seeing is a move away, progressively a move away, and, and you know, in my opinion, that is that the speed of that, of that transition away from what we might call, and I, you know, I, a, a traditional view of what we might consider to be political government decision-making being driven, driven by political concerns, moving towards what are the pressing concerns of the private sector. I think that's accelerated notably since the probably the 1990s, and now, as you know, as we're saying, Palantir is really representative, I would say, of that system. And one of the, one of the really interesting things, observation that that Simon made actually, and something that I've discussed in, in my book, is how bold they are now. It's, it's almost as if, well, we don't care anymore. We don't, we don't care. The gloves are off now. We are, we are quite, and in, and in a sense, there is a, there is an agenda there. What they, but that Palantir often talk about representatives of Palantir often talk about this notion of the agentic state where government itself is eroded and replaced by private governance of some kind. So I guess at some point, some corporation has to stand up and say, "Well, we can run things better than government." And maybe, I think, I think we're starting to see Palantir move into that, that role at least.

Yeah, we'll get into the, uh, the those kind of CEO-government, uh, CEO-ran states in a bit, but Ian, uh, you briefly just mentioned agentic kind of, uh, sovereign agentic cities or states or whatever, but you specifically talk about sovereign AI cities being built right now. Nigeria, I guess, has one already, potentially Gaza. The pitch essentially is that residents get everything taken care of for them, food, water, shelter, necessities, but the catch is that they have to sign away all their assets and their rights essentially, um, to live in this kind of society. So maybe you can just, uh, because I, I had never heard of that before, and it's pretty wild, especially considering the fact that I don't, as someone who uses AI frequently, I don't think that AI is quite there yet in this, in the, you know, in the capabilities of being, you know, it's coming, you know, it is coming, the AGI, ASI, you know, I mean, I'm sure we can do an entire show on how we're birthing this new species that probably makes everything we're talking about obsolete in the future because it will be an apex species, that's my opinion. But, but curious to get your thoughts, Ian, if you can elaborate a little bit more on how far along are we in these kind of, uh, AI sovereign states or cities being built?

Well, just to, just to start off by saying, I, there's a lot of flim-flam in the talk around AI. In my view, um, as you rightly said, it's not, it's not as close to being the thing that they say it is yet. In my view, there's a lot of catastrophic forgetting and all these kind of technical technological problems that need to be overcome first before it is even close to being theory of mind AI in, in a, in a workable sense. So I think there's a lot of sales pitch around AI. Um, but yeah, I mean, so if you look at somewhere like, um, Atana, started in 2020. So it, this very much tied up with these economic free zones or special economic zones, cities, or, and there's a, and there's a, there's a model of economic zones, or, or rather, there's a, there's a range of economic zones. At one end, you've just got the sort of very kind of basic free port, uh, which is, you know, a zone where warehousing costs might be subsidized, or you might get sort of, uh, relief on, on, on import and export duty, all the way up to the charter city and the smart city state. So at one end, you've got kind of the free ports that are currently being constructed in the UK. For example, BlackRock have got an investment with, with the British government to develop 12 free ports in the UK, all the way up to Shenzhen, for example, in China, which is a, a smart city of, in a special economic zone of 17 million people. So, Atana at the moment, I think there's, um, uh, it's currently got, I think, I think they say that it's currently got about, um, a thousand or so, or or more than that, companies registered in Atana for the regulatory relief that they get by by doing so. So, it's very much to attract, in this case, foreign investment. There, there is a proposal that there'll be about 1 to 2,000 people living in it, in Atana. Um, if you look at what the UN says about the deployment of special economic zones around the world, it is currently saying that there are more than 5,000, um, that are that are actively being, um, installed. So they're at various stages of development. If we look at what is proposed for Gaza, for example, the, or the new Gaza, um, that is obviously, I mean, if you, if you're charging people a billion dollars, or charging corporations a billion dollars to buy into your new city-state project, which is what it's proposed to be, then obviously that buy-in comes with, you know, there has to be value there, and that value is going to be the deregulation that comes with it. And if we think about Israel's, uh, very prominent role in kind of the tech industry, you can see that that being extended to Palestine, or the, I, you know, I, hate even saying it, but the, but the new Gaza. Um, and, but interestingly, when you look at the development plans that they've got for Gaza, they're splitting it up into four zones, and, and the industrial and retail and the, and the kind of urban sort of spaces for development, spaces, um, for, for leisure activities are far, there's something like 75% of what's left. So the, the, there's not much scope for, for human habitation to, to be in that new plan. Um, so unfortunately, you know, we are in a situation at the moment where, and one of the, one of the things that I, you know, that I, one of the reasons that I recently wrote the book, um, about that, is that, um, you know, these plans aren't progressing in front of our eyes. They are a bit like when we were just talking about Palantir. Um, all the, all the kind of things that we might think are theoretical, they're actually, we can actually see them. They're, they're actually doing it now.

Yeah. Thanks, Ian. Uh, and do you think, just real quick before we go to the next question, do you think these are being set up kind of as like test beds and then, uh, to, because it sounds like big players are involved?

Yeah. No. Yeah. I mean, if you've got, uh, for example, you've got, uh, Prospera in Honduras, which I think the current population of that's about 2,000.

So, uh, or 1,000 to 2,000 people. So that's that's combining development, or special economic zones attracting foreign investment with, in this case, some residential spaces. So they're looking to to bring the two, bring the things together, as I said, all the way. You know, you can, you can look at the progress of special economic zones in China since the, since the, you know, the late '70s to today. I mean, that is a mass, that's been a massive experiment in smart city design and, and the potential for smart city kind of be achieved.

Yeah, these things are all like, you know, from what I understand, my perspective has always been like things like Prospera and charter cities, uh, you know, especially when you guys got guys like Patrick Freriedman in there who you're kind of taking the charge. Um, my, my understanding, because I was a fan of the Sea Setting Institute long ago, what they were doing, I like the idea of, you know, sovereign governments being set up all around the world with, you know, kind of competing for citizens and residents. I thought that would be a complete paradigm shift. Um, so everything that, that you've said so far sounds to me, uh, pretty utopian, but I'm curious, like your whole thought on this, and why you wrote the book on this. Is this like a good thing that's happening, or is this, you know, is there something that you haven't told us yet that this is actually?

I think, I think like any, the use of any technology, it's not the technology itself, or it's not even the necessarily the idea itself which is which is bad, you know? So the, the potential for, for governance as a service, obviously that appeals to libertarian-minded people, and there'll be a lot of people that are libertarian-minded that are very interested in what's happening in places like Prospera.

And rightly so, and why wouldn't they be?

But if you start getting down into the nitty-gritty of something like the network state, which is the basis for the, the model that they're trying in, for example, Prospera, that is a, that is a, one of the things that I noticed in the network state written by Balaji Sinazan is there's no clarity in there about what kind of unified ledger he's talking about. There's no mention in there whether it's whether it's permissioned or permissionless. It is a, it is a subject which isn't touched. Why? Because, because you, because you change the nature of the project depending on what model you're, you're you've got in mind. Now, in Serifazan's case, he says all value goes digital and nothing exists unless it's on chain.

Yeah. Now he, and now if you look at what other people like people like Lewis Mosley in the UK, who's a representative of Palantir, when they're talking about all value going digital, they literally mean all, or Larry Fink, another good example, they literally mean everything.

Yeah.

Everything going digital. Now, if that includes our rights, our, you know, even the functional things like the licenses that we use, everything only existing in a, in a functional capacity on a ledger of some kind, and therefore controlling access to that centralizes power. It doesn't decentralize it, which is the, which is the antithesis of the libertarian ethos, if you like.

Yeah, my, my guess with Balaji is that, uh, you know, he built a framework, and the intention was for for people to deploy their own network states, and, you know, maybe build those into charter cities. And so maybe leaving some things ambiguous was intentional, allowing, you know, these, whoever is heading up these projects to, uh, to decide on their own. And I guess that's, that's that's part of the interesting thing about it. But I want to get to the next question because, uh, my audience is, uh, mostly a crypto audience, and there's a lot of people trying to, you know, rooting for the Clarity Act right now. We had the Gensler Act passed last year, Clarity Act right now. And, you know, it hasn't seem to gone through right now, but a lot of people that are going to watch us, uh, are rooting for the Clarity Act because they believe it'll make their bags appreciate in value, right? Their holdings go up because we'll get all kinds of, you know, more buying and things like that. But from my understanding is that I think all three of you guys believe that there's a lot of, uh, that that act would do more harm than good. If any of you guys would like to step in and elaborate, please, please go ahead.

Well, I, I guess I could give a, a quick summary of where we're at. I think it's important to understand, um, you know, the, the background and like, you know, originally you had Bitcoin, this project. Um, you know, uh, I personally believe, I've always said Satoshi was Hal Finney, um, and Len Sassaman, uh, both who were connected via David Chaum in Netherlands, um, through their, you know, cryptography work. Um, and that, um, led to what I think was a, if you think about, um, what the project was and, uh, David Chaum's project DigiCash, it was effectively a mechanism for creating private transactions on top of a banking layer, um, and it was shut down because, um, they did private transactions and the choke point was the banking layer. Um, and so from there, you had Bitcoin. Bitcoin took out the banking layer, and then you had an open-source project that was effectively funded by, um, providing electricity into miners, um, and then rules were enforced by nodes, um, and then new code was suggested in an open-source way, uh, by developers. Um, but if you look back, what we've seen like through the Epstein files, um, that there was interest around about this was 2009, in 2011, Jeffrey Epstein tried to contact some of the early developers like Amir Taaki and Gavin Andresen. Um, Gavin Andresen, if you look back at it, um, he left the project, sorry, Satoshi left the project when Gavin Andresen said that he was going to meet the CIA. Also, Len Sassaman, after one month after that, was, um, allegedly, you know, hung himself. Um, and also later, you had, you know, an accident with Hal Finney as well. Um, and so that's kind of like the, the history. Um, and the early infiltration attempts with Jeffrey Epstein were Gavin Andresen, Amir Taaki. Um, and what were the projects that Amir Taaki was working on? Um, well, it was coin joints and private transactions. Um, so how you can obfuscate your transactions by using a wallet that joins all the different dots together. Um, so there was the privacy layer, the open-source layer, the decentralized layer. Um, and then you had Peter Thiel kind of come along in the Epstein files. Um, and he was saying, you know, how is our, I forget the word right now. Um, how is our infilt, you know, our destabilization project going, um, in Bitcoin? And it was talking about unit of account, median of exchange. The Bitcoin community are confused. They don't know whether it's money or store of value. Um, but this is when Brock Pierce came on the scene. Um, and Brock Pierce was the one that paid for some developers to create stablecoins. Um, and stablecoins, uh, later, um, became the precursor for central bank digital currencies, and Brock Pierce on multiple occasions was facilitating investments for Jeffrey Epstein into various companies. Some were like Blockstream, um, which employed a bunch of the developers, and various other things. So, we had, we had this whole background, but clearly, um, one thing I've always said, uh, Brock Pierce, I remember from the early Bitcoin conferences, he was the one that tried to tell me that Dr. Craig Wright was Satoshi Nakamoto. Um, and that was obviously the hard fork into a more centralized version of Bitcoin called Bitcoin Cash. So when you look back at all these things, you can see that the real project was a gateway drug into a stablecoin, which is the precursor for

Just real quick, just to make sure I heard you, um, because I always associate Craig Wright with, uh, Bitcoin SV.

I know he started Bitcoin Cash, and then he forked off of Bitcoin Cash with Bitcoin SV.

So, so Craig Wright, I didn't know this. So Craig Wright and, uh, and, um, uh, Roger Ver were working together.

Yeah. So if you look, if you look right back in the early Bitcoin days, uh, the big advocates for Bitcoin Cash were Jihan Wu, um, which was the creator of Bitcoin Cash, Bitcoin ABC, it was called then. Um, and then, um, he was funded by Sequoia Capital via Beijing, um, his company in Beijing, which was doing ASIC miners. Uh, then you had Roger Ver, who was an early investor.

Yeah.

Um, and then you also had Dr. Craig Wright, who was supported by John Matonis. John Matonis was from the Bitcoin Foundation. Um, and he was the one that introduced, uh, Dr. Craig Wright and said he's Satoshi Nakamoto. Uh, and then if you remember, Gavin Andresen, the developer, said, I've got unequivocal cryptographic proof that he is, he does control the Satoshi wallets, which then was proven false. So you had John Matonis.

Wow.

You had Gavin Andresen, you had Dr. Craig Wright, and then later Roger Ver said, I think he's Satoshi, and he's part of Bitcoin Cash, which was created by Jihan Wu, um, out of China. Um, and so that was like, that, that kind of fork-off project. Um, but really, then there was the other project, which was the Brock Pierce side. So he came in, um, started facilitating investments into Coinbase and Blockstream, um, via some of the Garage Band different funds that Jeffrey Epstein was involved with. Um, and, and then you had obviously his contact with Gary Gensler, the head of the SEC, that then came from MIT, and MIT was the one that when the Bitcoin Foundation went bust, and they tried to take over some of the funding, and their project became forks, stablecoins, and central bank digital currencies.

Um, so now if you forward to where we are now, Trump was installed, um, with significant funding from Elon Musk and the technical industrial complex, significant funding from the Mellon Banking family and the, and the, the financial industrial complex. Um, so those were like his three funding. And the first thing he said is he infiltrated the Bitcoin conference and said, "We're going to turn America into crypto capital." Then he started making significant wealth by launching memecoins, by launching World Liberty Financial, by selling off presidential pardons to CZ, Justin Sun. Um, started engaging in probably $6 billion of fraud, um, alleged, you know, very questionable activities, tripled his net worth just through his crypto investments.

Um, and didn't do anything for Bitcoin. Uh, but what was the first thing we got? We got the Genius Act. Genius Act effectively was stablecoin legislation that tilted the favor for a covert central bank digital currency to JP Morgan, uh, because in order to launch a stablecoin and pay yield, you had to get a banking license. Um, now there were then lots of controversy around, could stablecoins pay yield? Um, and then you had the Clarity Act, in order to give clarity. Are you regulated by the OCC, the, the currency commission? Are you regulated by the SEC as a security, or are you regulated by CFTC as a commodity? Um, and right now, we got a markup, which was from the banking lobby, which effectively made it where the only way to pay straight up yield is to have a banking license. Um, but the crypto lobby, um, through the Trump administration, got it where you could connect stablecoin yield to a rewards program or a loyalty program. Um, but at the same time, he started issuing banking licenses for the various crypto stablecoin issuers. Um, so really, these are the covert, um, favorable terms to get a banking license. Um, and obviously, the end goal of all of this is the precursor, um, to what Larry Fink, what the World Economic Forum want, which is the tokenization and the programmability of that. And we started to see lots of, um, um, freeze functions in DeFi contracts, freeze functions in stablecoins. Um, but, uh, you know, the Bitcoin in self-custody via, you know, has not been able to be frozen. And so we started to see new infiltration attempts into new implementations of Bitcoin. Um, and you can start to see some of the core developers, there's been a lot of controversy where people have been chucked out, fired. Um, and people are starting to really re-look, uh, who, you know, which members of the Bitcoin core developers, uh, might have alternative agendas. Um, and we've had competing implementations. So, um, all of that to say is that stablecoins combined with social credit scores, which is Elon Musk's part of the play in X, and the reason that we're starting things are starting to become more obvious right now is because they want us talking. Um, they're deliberately trying to manufacture civil unrest. They're drawing us into our most radical version of ourselves through content, um, and control of algorithms. Um, and then they want the unrest to implement the police and surveillance state, you know, which has been a long-term project through Patriot Act, through Genius Act, and now Clarity Act, in order to essentially replace the Constitution, um, with this programmable 1984 Orwellian state. And Palantir is the other part. AI, social credits, stablecoins, you've got the complete control grid.

Hey guys, if you made it this far and you're enjoying this interview and the content that I make, it would mean the world to me if you guys hit that like button. And if you're not subscribed to the channel already, it would also mean the world to me and my team if you guys would subscribe to the channel. It really, really, really helps us. It helps spread the channel to new viewers and help grow the channel and get more guests to bring you guys more information. So, if you're not subscribed, it would really mean the world to me. Thank you.

I want to ask Simon on that note because it might be a little confusing for some of the viewers who haven't maybe watched our previous, uh, interviews, but you did, you did say that folks like Peter Thiel and Elon Musk and others essentially kind of, uh, controlling Trump, are, you know, funded the campaign and have a lot of influence over there. And then it would seem that when we look at, like, a central bank digital currency and, uh, and social credit scoring systems and a control state, that that would be the wish of the, the government, would be the, the first thing that most people look at. But,

So, can I, can I jump in and just describe this from the consumer standpoint?

Yeah, let me, let me just finish the question, Katherine, and then you or Simon can answer. Um, but just, just so it's clear for the audience. Um, but Simon, in the past, you had said that, uh, even guys like Elon Musk have been vasilized or or taken over because of, uh, you know, by, by the essentially the financial industrial complex or the proof of weapons system. So, uh, so I guess the question is here is that if Elon has more power than Trump or the government in some degree, and Elon has been so vocal about, you know, freedom and censorship resistance and was a, you know, was building X money originally before Bitcoin to try to build a permissionless or like a peer-to-peer system that can circum, you know, circumvent the banks and stuff. It doesn't, it doesn't seem like Elon's nature to want to believe something like a, uh, a credit scoring system, right? A social credit scoring system. But I was wondering if, if you guys can clear this up so people understand what's what's being talked about here.

Yeah, I'll say stuff and then let's have, let's hear from Katherine because she's got some brilliant stuff to say on this as well. Um, it's, it's important a few things you have to understand. Don't listen to anything anyone says. Let's look at what they do. Um, so whatever Elon says is rubbish. Whatever Trump says is rubbish. You just got to follow their money and understand what they're what they're investing in and what they're doing. Um, and you'll realize they're doing the exact opposite of what they're saying. And so, it's not correct to say Elon controls Trump. It's correct to say that the political system is a pay-to-play system. And if you want policy, you write policy, um, as Ian talked about earlier, via NGOs and think tanks. Um, and then they look like government policy, but they're actually privately, uh, funded. Um, and then your policy becomes an auction, and various Congress members, Senate members, and presidents will say, "How much are you willing to pay me to do this?"

Um, and so then it becomes a monetary auction. Um, and the job of the president is to make it look like it's in support of the American people or an American first agenda or to make America great again. But that's just narrative to put something acceptable. So politicians play a couple of roles. They're a battering ram to take the blame for all the things that happen as a result of corporations using us as collateralized debt obligations. Uh, but also, um, they're there to just spin, spin narratives, uh, to make you think something else is happening. Um, and again, Elon is an entrepreneur. An entrepreneur is subordinate to capital, and so his net worth is tied to his share option program. You know, the, this Elon being the richest person in the world doesn't mean he can write a check for a trillion dollars. You know, a Saudi prince can write a check for a trillion dollars. Um, somebody that's got a billion dollars in Bitcoin can send a billion dollars in Bitcoin. Um, net worth in the American system means that you have options programs, you have debt, you have leverage, and your net worth is very much paper for compliance with a blackmail operation, um, and a capital requirement structure. So he works for financial capital, but he also gets money from Pentagon and government budgets. Um, and then so if you look at the top of it, it is really is the what I call the financial industrial, um, complex.

Now, just on the CBDC, then we'll go over to Katherine. CBDC is a goal for China. It's a goal for Europe. It's a Bank for International Settlements, European Union project. America is where you extract all the privatized value, um, via the stock market. Um, but everywhere else, they get centralized states that plug in, and the project for central bank digital currencies, it started with Embridge at the Bank for International Settlements. It moved over to UAE, and it's plugging UAE, Saudi Arabia, uh, Thailand, China, and Hong Kong together, which are all the big nodes for a lot of the drug cartels and drug trafficking routes as well. Um, and so if you look at the Iran operation right now, all of the laundering and, and circumvention of sanctions for Iran, for Russia, happen via UAE. Um, so UAE is kind of becoming a new node in this control grid as well.

Wow. Katherine, sorry. Go ahead.

So, yeah, so I agree with everything that Ian and Simon have said so far. I just want to make sure that the individual, you know, the citizen or consumer can understand it from their point of view.

Thank you. So let's look at some models. The US government spends 6 to 7 trillion a year and it receives four, approximately $4 trillion in revenues and taxes and tariffs and fees, and that means it goes to the bond market for $2 to $3 trillion a year, and that's what controls the White House. And the president are not in control. And I would say that Trump was put in, you know, as Simon described, the president does the marketing. Trump was put in to market the control grid using election fraud, immigration, child safety, some of these other things. And that's what he's been doing. So day one of the administration was data centers because if you're going to do that social credit system, you're going to collect and manage and analyze in real time enormous amounts of data. The, the way you can see where this started to go immediately in the administration was what they did with Doge. And that describes Elon Musk's role in Palantir. What did Doge do? If I was going to stop financial fraud, uh, or lower the deficit in the government, there are certain places I would automatically go. I would automatically go to the government accounts at the New York Fed, particularly for DoD and HUD, where 20 plus trillion dollars is missing. Um, you know, there are certain places I would go to stop the fraud and to stop the drain on the deficit. That's not where Doge went. If you wanted to build, um, uh, AI with a high-quality payment system for the purpose of building, whether it's social credit systems or control systems, you would go exactly where Doge went. And what was interesting is the moment that Doge got the first three or four immediate downloads of of agency data, it did a deal with Palantir, and Palantir's stock just went to the moon.

Wow.

And, and that, that deal was Doge AI and Palantir AI. And from then on, now that, that gives them tremendous amounts of data. Managing that data takes, takes equipment, it takes people, it takes machinery, and that's when the Department of Defense and other agencies started doing enormous high-margin contracts with Palantir, u presumably to help manage that data and integrate it with other things. Okay, now let me take the next step. The important thing to understand about public-private partnerships, and if you read Ian's book, he's written a lot about this, public-private partnerships are designed to use public money to transfer technology, authority, and other things to private companies where they couldn't possibly do it on an economic basis in the market. And the problem with that system is it's evolved over the, you know, decades and decades, is it's highly uneconomic. So, I have an online book called Dylan Reed and the Aristocracy of Stock Profits, and it talks about how you use taxpayers' money to fund private companies, drive their stocks up, they generate capital gains, that money goes back to Congress's capital gains. And so that's part of the machinery that we're seeing. And the problem ultimately for a society is if you're doing and growing these public-private partnerships, and we are exploding them as we speak, you need to subsidize them. The reserve currency can help subsidize. But one of the reasons we're seeing so much more violence happening globally and abrogation of sort of our global cop obligations is it's taking more and more plunder to keep a highly uneconomic series of public partnerships going. So there's a fundamental economics here that is driving you one towards the competition over cost of capital and energy with China, but also driving you into this control grid because that's going to facilitate the ultimate plunder, uh, particularly in the western world. So let's look at this from a consumer's point of view. What you're doing with stablecoins and the Genius Act is it's sort of a, a phase to get in ultimately to a pure CBDC system, but what you're doing is you're moving the consumer from what I call, and it was the Escape Key, uh, Substack that first described it this way, from two-lock money to three-lock money. So very simply, if I'm banking and I'm a consumer, um, there are two people who get to agree to a transaction. One is the buyer and the other is the seller. That's the two locks. The financial institution can intercede, you know, as they did with the Canadian truckers, for know your money or sanctions or other things, but generally, it's a two-lock system. The power of moving everything onto the distributed ledger, whether it's through the Genius Act with stablecoins or digital tokens with the Clarity Act and the rules on yield for stablecoins. So those two acts are trying to get the consumer to move out of two-lock money to three-lock money. What is three-lock money? Three-lock money is between the buyer and the seller is literally a third lock, which is is being engineered with AI up to real-time. It can not only have highly complex algorithms and rules, but those rules can change dynamically in response to our behavior, and it can be done on a custom basis, one-on-one. This is why we need the explosion of data centers to manage the data. So, we're talking about a very highly customized system. Now, what does that system do? That system can literally give the bankers, um, not just control of monetary policy, but now they can not only control fiscal policy but implement fiscal policy and strip all legislators and executive branch of all their power. That doesn't mean they'll go away. They may continue to use them as theater, as they now do. But we're looking at a system, if it goes live and we go to an all-digital system, means that the consumer's every transaction is subject to, let's call that third lock, Mr. Global. Mr. Global has a say in every transaction, you know, in the system. But, but now we're talking about a world where there's absolutely no representative government. They can decide what the taxes are and just take them out of your account, including stripping you of all your assets. So what do we see in Gaza? Because I think Gaza is a perfect example of the prototype. Gaza is a method. And what they're saying is we take your land and we give you a token, and that token, you know, what will it be? It will be literally the equivalent of your governance system. It will come with your governance system. And so from a consumer standpoint, you, you do not want to go into a three-lock system. In other words, and so if you go to salary, right now, we just published a date, we filed comment to the OCC on Friday, who are taking comments on the Genius Act, um, because there's a rulemaking process. And so there is still time at the state legislators and with the regulators to put up guardrails against that third lock. And that's the question. If you're a consumer or you know anyone, how do you stop that third lock from going into effect and literally plundering all your assets to keep the system going?

Yeah. Toward toward the end of this in a little bit, I want to ask all of you guys about, you know, what this world looks like that we're building and how to how to opt out of it if anyone wants to. But,

Um, what Katherine said, the, just so there's some action on the Clarity Act right now. It's currently had all of its reviews. The bank lobby have just put forward their draft, um, which is the, the bankers association. But what's going to enter now is a political process because Trump has committed so much fraud with World Liberty Financial, the Democrats are going to push back because of the ethics clause, and the ethics is going to be about politicians engaging in crypto and doing what? And so that's the next phase of any type of delay or political process for anybody that wants to involve themself in it.

Thanks. Um, Katherine, uh, one of the things that, um, I, I, I mean, sure stood out what you were just talking about, uh, I'm sure the viewer will too, is you talked about $20 trillion of money missing. Um, and I know that you've been speaking about the fact that there's parallel societies being built out right now that most people don't aren't aware of. Can you elaborate a little bit more on that?

Yeah. So, um, if you come to Solari, we have a website called missingmoney.solari.com. And we have seven,

How are you spelling that? Solari, just so people know.

S O L A R I. So, it's Solari with an I at the end.

Okay. Okay. And we have seven briefing papers that describe the financial and monetary laws related to financial management in the federal government. A process began in fiscal 1998 where the federal government started to massively ignore the laws related to both the constitutional laws and the legislative laws and regulations as to how money is supposed to be managed from the federal government. And from 1998 to 2015, that we know of, there were 21 trillion of what's called undocumentable adjustments. And there's no way to know without auditing the New York Fed accounts for the US government how much money is missing in terms of credit and cash. Um, I suspect it could be more than that. Um, now, that 21 trillion of undocumentable adjustments can be money coming in and going out. So, for example, when we went to Iraq, we changed the rules so Iraqi oil revenues are deposited in the New York Fed. So that could be incoming as well. Um, what happened was there was a major blow-up after 2015, which was the largest amount that went missing, um, and, uh, uh, pressure on the government to obey the audit laws of the government. And the resolution of that in the first Trump administration was to adopt a policy called Federal Accounting Standards Advisory Board 56, which basically said the government can keep secret books. And when you combine that with the, the classification laws and the national security laws, it also means that large contractors and banks doing business with the federal government can also keep secret books. Now, what that means is if you and I look at the large-cap stock market or the equivalent in the bond market, the disclosure is meaningless. If you're an investment advisor, you have no idea what the actual finances are. It's one of the reasons I, I love listening to Simon and Ian because you'll get a better sense of what the financials are from listening to them describe what's happening than reading the financial statements. Anyway, so, so from then on, we, we've sort of been in Never Neverland where, um, the federal government is completely out of control. Now, it's not just that there was 21 trillion in undocumentable adjustments. We know during the bailouts, according to the Levy Institute, 29 trillion got loaned or or given, um, the TARP investor, uh, inspector general said it was $23 trillion, but suffice that when you add that to the 5 trillion injected during the going direct reset during the pandemic, not even counting quantitative easing, you're talking about $55 trillion. So, you know, the question is, where is that money gone and what has it done? And my theory is, um, and you would hear this during the '90s, the bankers would say, you know, democracy, the republic form of government no longer works. We, the bankers need to control monetary policy centrally. And I think what they started to do is implement a financial coup where literally you move, uh, money out of the existing entities and you move it into other entities. We know the offshore havens, you know, ballooned tremendously during this period as the money went missing, and then you use that money to build a

new system. And what is that new system? That new system is a system where the bankers control fiscal policy as well as monetary policy. How do you implement that? You implement that with very expensive and very luxurious public private partnerships that lead you into the what Simon was describing with the social credit system.

Now, there was tremendous pushback against CBDC and the the Fed chairman has said clearly we need authorizing legislation in the United States to do CBC. The weakness of the central bank from the banker's point of view in the US is it's a creature of Congress and Congress has the power to pull the rug on it. And so I think what they've decided to do is go with the stable coin digital token construct at some point, you know, they will reach the point where they can then implement straight a straight CBDC if they want to. They may not need to, but they've been very coy about making sure no legislation would pass in the United States that would prevent a CBDC after 2030. So, I'm assuming that the fight they've been making to stop legislation against CBDC is to protect ultimately that ability to do it.

And the important thing to understand is, you know, as we've described, this is a global process. What you're watching, you know, the the constructs of how the EU will do it is different than how the Chinese will do it. But what we seem to have is a global agreement on using an all digital system to implement a frightening level of central control of all citizens. And that's why it's very very important that anybody listening to this understand what they can do to to shift us from going into a state of what's really to me a slavery system.

So when you talk about parallel societies uh and how what you just explained, you know, really benefits the folks at the top, are you talking about something just more like a K-shaped economy or you talking talking about like literally this money's going missing and people at the top are building some other sort of their escape hatch or some way for them or what's what does that mean? So I I think I think you're literally talking about a financial coup where you shift the resources. So So I think that 21 and 29 trillion was shifting as much as you could shift through financial assets. The big play is if you look at the balance sheet of the United States, our real assets on the balance sheet of the United States are much greater than the money's been shifted out. So when people say we have $39 trillion of debt, we have hundreds of trillions of dollars of real assets on that balance sheet and the I think the big play is how do you get that shifted into private hands? We've shifted money. If you look at the technology we've shifted since World War II into corporate and private hands, it's the value is astronomical. I don't even begin to know how to totally value it. Um, but there's still plenty of real assets to be moved, particularly the national lands, you know, and and all the minerals and other resources on it. So, you know, the coup is far from over.

Now, where have they shifted it? I don't feel like they've shifted it necessarily to another place. It's in account separate from the government. So, it's a, you know, it's literally a financial coup. You move it out. I always said the pandemic was that money breaking back in. Um, what we saw during the pandemic was an effort to shut down Main Street and consolidate massive market share upstairs into the publicly traded stocks. So this is a process and it's ongoing and it's far far from over.

>> Yeah.

>> Yeah.

>> Carl, as you as you point out, you got the K-shaped side which is all the on balance sheet stuff. you know, that's perpetuated by the fact that all currency is debt and therefore it's a Ponzi scheme because the money to pay the interest on the debt doesn't exist and therefore you always have to roll over the government, individual and corporate debt. Um, which creates that K-shaped economy which is the concentration of all legitimate reported assets.

>> But then you have the black ops economy. This is >> call it the remnants of the Dutch East India Company, the British East India Company, all of those drug trafficking, weapons trafficking, human trafficking, um sex trafficking routes, those are all off balance sheet. Um and so the amount of fraud that happens off balance sheet via the deep state intelligence networks um you know that that is run by um shadow governments you know you could think of it as massive centralized concentration and centralization of power at the state level. Um then you get the deconstruction of the state into private interest through private public partnerships and then through the black ops you have this one world government agenda.

>> So Simon I've always wanted to ask you if you thought they were going to run a a two database system all the covert stuff on an open database and all the overt stuff on the distributed ledger cuz I just don't see them putting that stuff on a distributed ledger. It it's why I know that um privacy and self custody and the two-tiered system they're building in Bitcoin right now will exist because it's it's a bit like you have the UK and then you have the the islands. The islands exist because elites want them to exist >> in Bitcoin for the for everyone. They want Bitcoin in custody through a BlackRock ETF via strategy in a treasury company and they want you to leverage against it, borrow against it, so you mine fiat currency using your crypto in a Wall Street wrapper. Uh but then the elites, they want the exit, you know, they want to be able to um take their wealth and they want to coin join it um and they want it in self-custody where they can transport it wherever they want to go. Um so it's kind of that two-tier system. I had a great laugh uh thinking that you were right when the US Marshals and and BlackRock decided to use the same custodian.

>> Yes.

>> Very Bitcoin. Okay, now I see it.

>> Yeah. Then obviously they turned like Coinbase into a public company and then under the Trump administration you had all of these companies going public and then that's leading into Clarity Act, Genius Act right >> and then bringing it all under bank secrecy act and various other things. I mean, one thing I'm going back to what Katherine was saying about, you know, we we we can look at kind of where budgets uh and where money has gone missing in budgets and we can try and work out where it might be now if we knew. But if you even if you just step back and just look at the nature of what the global economy is supposed to be you know if if if we if we think about you know the average and I'm not don't want to get into the weeds of talking about whether GDP is a realistic thing at all but but nonetheless if we just look at the numbers so GDP supposedly globally is about 100 trillionish then you take into assets you you know maybe 500 trillion in total or you know on an annual basis in terms of money slloshing around. Then you start looking at things like the derivatives market and then you look at the debt and on its face it's absurd. On its face you know on it on its face there isn't enough money on the planet to cover any of those debt obligations.

>> Yeah but the debt obligations are contrive. We could have just issued greenbacks and we didn't need to have any debt. So, but let me just bring up one thing which is to me the little secret here and that is in the 90s um when I was first discovered relational databases I downloaded all the federal US federal data on spending and credit and taxation and I started to look at it by place and I took I had we had this program with MIT so I took my smartest MIT PhD and I asked him over the weekend please figure out if we could just re-engineer all this money to make things as wonderful as possible. You know what's possible? So, we were stimulating what was possible if we re-engineer all the money. And he kept coming back to me and I kept saying it's impossible. That's too, you know, I mean, the pie was growing so I mean, he was just creating massive amounts of wealth. And I just said, "That can't be true." Finally said, "Look, you got to take some days off and go look in my numbers and get into it." And what I discovered, and it's much worse now, words cannot express to you how financially expensive tyranny is because you not only encourage enormous waste, but you you pay people to become progressively more unproductive, which they do. You know, everybody develops bad habits, both the low and middle and upper, you know, everybody develops bad habits because you can just go plunder and get more money, especially if you had the reserve currency in a big military. But words cannot express to you how much wealth could be theoretically created if we reduce steadily reduce tyranny. Tyranny is unbelievably expensive. And that's the little piece of, you know, good news in all of this is that in theory, you know, we could have a pretty amazing world.

>> Yeah. the thing on the um absolutely agree with that like um you know just an incredibly inefficient use and and the human capital cost the psychological cost like these psychological operations they are they are really dehumanizing like um and and we I can see that in the relationship the breakdown of the family um birth rates like suicide rates drug addictions um career choices like in in every matrix you can see the human cost of this system. Um I wanted to point out as well one one other thing in the the derivative market. It's important to understand that the west like the collective west um via London and New York is has significantly more paper contracts on gold and silver and even Bitcoin now um than there is gold, silver and Bitcoin in in existence. And structurally that's playing into a lot of the changes that we're seeing right now. Um so China by definition in Shanghai is accumulating as much real gold as possible without having paper derivative contracts on top of it while the west is losing gold and losing silver and losing real commodities while increasing the number of paper contracts. That creates a structural instability in the western financial system that China is very aware of. And so if you look at like the legacy history, um UAE is becoming the new Switzerland. Um it's pulling a it's kind of forming every relationship on the front end. It looks like UAE is a proxy of Israel, but at the same time, it does all of the money laundering operations for Iran while normalizing with Israel. It hosts COP like um climate change conferences while being a the third largest oil producer. It's come out of OPEC now at the same time as being creating new energy markets with bricks and it hosts Russian oligarchs as well as American kernels. And so in the western side you kind of see one side of it but they're they're being formed. But if you look at UAE um it's where a lot of these the the ones with the largest gold markets are the ones where the legacy black operations to gold markets exist. So, you know, for example, if you've got dollars, um you can buy um gold with your dollars and then you can go to UAE and then you're able to buy discounted oil in um in the sanctioned countries and then that the gold ends up through this transfer in the Shanghai market which makes sure that it doesn't get out because it's got capital controls and so more and more derivatives contracts are being constructed. And if you look at for example Hong Kong's another one you know that was the remnants of the opium wars and the drug trafficking routes um and all the and effectively those gold to drug and black op markets. They still exist in these in these havens and all of that gold is going eastwards and the paper contracts are going westwards which kind of it creates a structural rug pull on the entire economy the moment China wants to use it.

>> So Tom when you say that UAE runs Embridge what does that mean? What's their role in Embridge? Yeah, it's interesting because it is framed as um a federated network of nodes where every country effectively runs a node. Um but there was this really weird handover from being a bank for international settlements project to kind of UAE being like the one that was leading the project.

>> And it kind of reminds me of like the European Union. It was like it was always like the bank for international settlements always wanted to centralize Europe into a single currency and then suddenly it became the European Union and these unelected officials and it's just a very weird handover that doesn't quite mean anything. Um and so UAE effect um all of the different countries they're running these federated nodes. They have their own central bank digital currencies. Um and it requires this network of federated nodes um to you know verify transactions um in a more centralized way but with a decentralized infrastructure so that not one of the countries has more more power than the others.

>> Okay. I mean, I I was I was interested that I mean I was when we consider about you know what the the underlying kind of technology that is kind of pushing all this the development of AI if we I think Deepseek V4 has just come out hasn't it? So Deepseek V4 is kind of the kind of agentic the the longchain kind of agentic AI that that people have been sort of anticipating and waiting for. And if you look at the development of that, that couldn't have happened without western well basically Nvidia GPUs. It couldn't it the the development of it couldn't have happened without that that sharing of technology or transfer of technology. Now when the Trump administration I mean going back to what you we were mentioning earlier about how and what's something Simon said about how the narratives we are given are meaningless. They are well they're not meaningless. There there's an intent to them. there's a propaganda intent to them invariably, but they're not. If we believe what we're told, we are barking up the wrong tree completely because Trump Trump said at the time um that you know they that they had to do something about uh specifically uh Deep Seek using Nvidia GPUs. We can't have that anymore. That's not happening anymore. We're we're stopping all that immediately. Uh and but what he didn't mention and what what people didn't know perhaps was that he he just signed an agreement a supply contract agreement with the AI development hub in the United Arab Emirates that he called I think he called it the the US UAE AI accelerator and and the agreement was that these G that these Nvidia GPUs would be sent on mass to the UAE for AI development and that is outside of China. That is China's primary hub for AI development uh you know outside of China. So so so the development was ongoing. they've moved to Hawaii chips now and um uh I think it's the accent is it the accent chip they've moved to or GPU they've moved to but but nonetheless that development and one of one of the things that that we're another narrative that we're given is this notion that there's this competition at a global level between you know ad what appear to be adversarial nation states blocks even or ad and and when you start looking into how things such as AI development play out. It's collaboration is far more common than than adversarial confrontations. There's there's far more collaboration that goes on especially when we're talking about something that has such a an enormous global impact. So for example, Embridge you know looking at the future of the international monetary and financial system how is how is this how is this system going to work? So you get international collaboration between you know nations more or governments more often than not than you see the any kind of confrontation and we are laboring under the or given the given to believe in these narratives that are based on confrontation. But mo most of the time when you look at it, the confrontation's not there.

>> Ian, I wanted to

>> completely agree with that. Um, sorry Carl, we're just conversating off. I hope you're okay with this.

>> No, good. Go ahead. Yeah.

>> But, um, a couple of points. Um, the precursor to the UAE um, Nvidia chip deal as well um, was that Trump launched World Liberty Financial in his new stable coin.

>> Um, and they invested $2 billion which went into the stable coin. the stable coin is investing in treasuries that kicks off 60 to $80 million worth of yield and then they invested it into Binance and Binance was then regulated within the UAE. Um, and remember what was the precursor to Binance under the Biden administration? Um, well, it was taken out in operation choke. 2.0 and the condition of the settlement was CZ only got 4 months in prison. Um and uh but the US Department of Justice had to take over the compliance department. Now that's 285 million accounts. And one of the first thing they did during the Gaza genocide is they started to say that Palestinian accounts are frozen, Lebanese accounts are frozen, Turkish accounts are frozen. Um and that was on request of the you know Israel Israel um for Israeli forces and so and then you had CZ come out. Then you had World Liberty Financial. Uh then you had that investment in Binance. Binance gets a license in UAE. UAE invests $2 billion in Trump stable coin. And then CZ gets a presidential pardon. Um and Justin Sun comes along um who's uh you know who basically revamped um the ICO that was failed. Um and then the Trump administration engage in all these um interesting investments that are deeply connected to fusion and energy and all sorts of stuff um and energy plays. Um and then if you think about it, what's happening in Iran? Well, Iran, UAE, and Russia are the largest sovereign Bitcoin miners in the world. Um and and it's believed that Iran was powering its Bitcoin mining with nuclear energy, you know, hence the whole nuclear complication. And then Trump's public company suddenly becomes a nuclear fusion company. Um, and starts becoming a Bitcoin strategic reserve company. Um, and then you know, you just see all these because I know all the different relationships in terms of the companies that they partnered with. Um, you can see all the corruption there. Um, and then one more to your point on collaboration. Um, I talked about the structural rug pull that China has with the derivative market. Um, there is uh also you know another one on the AI market. So what I think's happening here, this is my my theory is that we've just manufactured a pricing and energy and food crisis. Um this is going to be the worst crisis we've ever seen. Um it's not factored into the market right now. Uh food insecurity. This is pricing people out of the market in a major major way. We have to have structural higher prices. those that are on the bread line, they'll have to sell their assets to meet their living costs. Um, this is you will own nothing and be happy World Economic Forum, you know, agenda like to the highest degree. But the interesting thing is what does it actually lead to? Well, the stock markets are at new all-time highs.

>> Um, and what are we getting? What is the narrative now? China's about to win the AI race. Energy is national security. Um, and so therefore, energy and AI is the justification for the ginormous money printing bailout. Yields are going through the roof. That's infecting mortgages. That's pushing higher bankruptcies. We got Palantir integrated with the US Department of Agriculture. Like you've got all of these mass bankruptcies of businesses just like COVID, just like tariffs, just like this one. So you know this is massive concentration of wealth upwards, massive merger and acquisition activity, massive bankruptcies. You engineer that civil unrest and then eventually the yields go out and so the Fed needs to start buying the yields. So you have regime change at the Fed, which we've got now. Um and regime change at the Fed is that you need to probably increase the Fed's balance sheet. What's the narrative and justification? uh national security for artificial intelligence. Um we need to bail out the AI companies because they can't afford these energy costs. And so the all of the jobs are coming from building out data centers. So then you get that narrative, you get your big print, you get your 7 to10 trillion dollars, whatever um it's required. But what have we already seen? Anyone that's engaging or doing anything with AI right now knows that China has figured out how to do what America's doing at one/5 the cost >> and they're using they're using completely different infrastructure. Um and uh America's using this bailed out incredibly expensive ginormous data center grids that we're building. Um, and so when you want to when you want to do the another rug pull, you just say, "By the way, all of that all of that was wasted, but we might as well repurpose it and use it right now because China's got, you know, they're doing all the alternative energy. Um, we're going to get obviously the big um renewable energy investment across Europe. We're going to be doing windmills, nuclear, we're going to be doing hydro type of energy. So that picks up again. BlackRock's making record profits on the final parts of oil and energy, record profits on renewable energy. Um, and then it's going to have a massive concentration of power into BlackRock portfolio companies with each rug pull.

>> Right. But you're you're back to this dynamic of the plunder model is getting less and less economic, requiring more and more plunder, and the question is, can they hold that together with the programmable money? Sorry, Ian. Go ahead. Well, no, but but war is the gift that keeps on giving, isn't it? If that's what you want to do. I mean, war is fantastic for that. I mean, we saw that the uh crystal leader uh George AA from the IMF as pretty much as soon or about a couple of weeks after the conflict with Iran started, she gave a speech in which she said uh going back to what you were saying earlier, Katherine, that obviously what this means is that the tight fiscal space that governments have got has got to be more clo more closely coordinated with monetary policy. So we better put the central banks in charge of government policy uh and government spending commitments. That has to happen in order I mean I this speech was unbelievable in in order that we can ensure that sustainable development goals are met that our new partnership with the international energy agency which is means that basically we're going to ration energy on a on a global scale through a centralized mechanism with the bank for international settlements. Well, if you look at programmable money, it's very much designed to, >> you know, to do one-on-one resource and energy allocation with the programmable money rules. I mean, that's at the very heart of social credit.

>> And it's the and it's the heart of technocracy because when you think about it, I mean, no, for in my my view, technocracy is the is the it's the control of the distribution and allocation of all resources right down to the individual level. It's it's and that is how and when we think about how programmability would work within the kind of monetary system that essentially is what it would achieve. I think as Simon was alluding to earlier as well that you know we it would enable I mean I don't think and I think one of the problems that sometimes that people like us have in trying to articulate this is that it's almost beyond imagination for people to kind of to realize what can be achieved with the system that they're creating. Mhm.

>> I mean the the the notion as you said in real world in in real time that a decision can be taken as an instant that a transaction is made about whether or not that transaction will be allowed in your case and that would be based upon the that you know the AI's reading of your basically social credit data that you've accumulated that's building your digital twin of you that's going to run parallel with your life I mean it is I mean dystopian doesn't even really start to start to explain it and and I think that is one of the problems that we've got in trying to get people to I mean we're going to go on I know later we're going to talk about potentially talk about potential solutions.

>> Yes.

>> But even getting people to wrap their heads around the nature of the problem >> because because it is almost it is almost beyond comprehension. But it, you know, the the fact that, you know, you've got systems like, for example, Palantir Gotham that that governments around the world have bought, I think the the US government's bought it, the UK, the British government's bought it, the German government's bought it, that enables the unification of disparate databases. So, when you've got something like um Trump's EO saying that they're going to eliminate information silos, how is that going to be done in a in a technological sense? And people think, you know, if you're imagining teams of bureaucrats sitting around, you know, which people probably do thinking that this is some sort of bureaucratic exercise. It isn't. AI changes all that. So systems like Gotham can take all the data from, you know, the the the Department of Justice, all the data from the IRS, all the can take it and unify it into a single searchable database that can then when a token is applied to you as a representative within that within that that effectively unified system, every single aspect of your every single part of your data can be pulled out of that in real time by systems like Palantir Gotham. That's what that's what it what they're building that infrastructure that's being rolled out and governments are just adopting it. Most people don't even know that their governments have got this stuff and the and the objective is quite clearly, you know, the thing that we that we've all been kind of trying to warn people about for a while, which is this totally unbelievable control system. And it is happening. you know, it doesn't really matter where you look.

>> So, Ian, I just have to tell you, so, you know, we've been working with state legislators to try and put up guard rails on programmable money, but we have three one minute videos that show three central bankers telling you they're going to do this. And what's remarkable is with those three one minute videos, we can take a legislator who doesn't even know that this exists, and you know, within within 3 minutes, they can say, "Oh my god, this is real." because they are telling you what they're going to do.

>> Yeah. I mean, that's one of the things that I often point out is that, you know, nothing that I, you know, nothing in our work then and you know, I'm sure nothing in Simon's work as well. I mean, when nothing that we're saying is hidden. It's all public domain information,

>> right? It's all it's all you know you've got people that you know bankers and you know people like Georg she just stood up and gave a speech where she said we're basically going to control the planet right I mean so so you just you just kind of think well this people are saying this stuff they're not joking they're not joking that's serious

>> uh Ian I I think I just want to get this across because I think it's important um you you talk about the dark. You're talking about dystopian and you talk about the dark enlightenment and then you've got this kind of it's this political philosophy being run out of Silicon Valley and you've got guys like Peter Thiel, JD Vance and Dres behind this. Can you just elaborate on that a little bit?

>> Yeah, I mean I I mean I think an interesting way to look at that is so Marc Andreessen is the head of Andreessen Horowitz partner at Andreessen Horowitz. He wrote a thing in 2023 called the techno optimist manifesto

>> within and within it he said we are accelerationists and we use the plural we so he said we are accelerationists and he's now uh he then subsequently uh ended up being you know largely in charge of appointments to the Trump administration from all accounts uh and now you know the the the group of people so we might think about him the Andreessen uh Larry Ellison, Palmer Lucky, you know, Sam Altman, these guys uh that that have got an outsized influence obviously over the current Trump, over the current US government. So So what when he said we are accelerationists, it's important. What does that mean? Well, accelerationism really is a an aggressive investment strategy in disruptive technology in startups. So you you aggressively invest in a startup, you know, more or less to see what would happen. But the but the but the point is that that it that you focus particularly on disruptive technology. So for example um Sequoia Capital invests in robot dogs um and then they you know because they can then be weaponized and and you know change the face of armored warfare. So, so that that so you you that's the point of accelerationism and that comes from this idea of the dark enlightenment which was a treatise that was written by uh a guy in the U in the UK called Nick Land just based upon the ideas of this of a of another group of people uh who might loosely refer to themselves as neo-reactionary thinkers people like Curtis Yarvin very close to Peter the um and they and they believe in this notion of using disruptive technology to it. It it it kind of stems from Joseph Schumpeter's argument of creative destruction is that you can use that to shape markets and because markets have got a uh an an associated socio-political power goes with that. You can also use it to disrupt socio-political structures, governments. You can start shaping things through this aggressive use of venture capitalism. So can I Ian can I just jump in and and part of that is if you're going to operationalize disruptive things in government if you can bring in a group as Ian is describing who will ignore the laws and the regulations. So part of the Doge operation was bringing in teams of people who can shift the government operations out of line control where they uh will not implement things that are in violation of the laws and and regulations and shift them into private you know contractors who will then just simply ignore the laws and regulations. So that's part of the acceleration.

>> Yeah certainly. Yeah. I mean if you can I mean I explored thinking about whether or not personally I don't think that there is much of any kind of what you might call a philosophical underpinning to the way these these guys and they are mainly guys the way they think. I I think it's more expediency whatever suits our agenda because the agenda is the same as we were just talking about globally you know it's this is it's the imposition of technocratic control on population that's what they want how they get there you know and I think basically they've just pounced on the ideas that have come out of the dark enlightenment because that works that's oh well let's use that that's a good idea we we'll give that a But they but they have extensively put it into practice and they're you know and they're clearly doing that at the moment with you know for you know a good example might be the use of so Mark Zuckerberg very close to the same group um I think uh Facebook when it was still Facebook before it became Meta or it might have been when it was Meta I think it's it's um sort of kind of uh PR sphere was move fast and break things which is which is the which is the epitome of the kind of accelerationist view view of things. They release Libra coin knowing full well it's not going to fly that you know the their filings that they filed with the SEC where they more or less admit we know this isn't going to work but they invested a lot of money in it. So why did they do that if they know it's not going to work? Because that's what creative destruction does. Creative destruction is to create a threat in this case of unregula of the unregulated issuance of effectively money which then causes the the result that you're actually looking for which is the creation of a regulatory framework for the future of digital currency which is we end up with you end up with the genius act. So, so that is they are have applied this and they are applying it consistently to change and shape not just markets as I said but you know the the the wider implications of of of shifting global markets as they can. Musk quite obviously uses social media and one thing going back to what you were saying earlier when we were talking about these people like Thiel and Musk and Andreessen and all these different people to my view they're characters they're they're not they're not fictional cartoons.

>> Yeah. They're just they're they're just personas that are fronting

>> idol worship like they're there for idol worship.

>> Yeah. They're personas that are fronting networks for whatever agenda.

>> Their goal is to make control look fashionable.

>> Yeah. Yeah. Well, I mean, one of the things that Musk has done this politically, but he he did this with the Dogecoin as well, is is, you know, the the kind of experiments that would be of particular interest to this gaggle of pe oligarchs is is that, you know, if you just make off-hand comments on on social media, if you're Elon Musk and you say, "Oh, the Dogecoin is the best kind best thing since sliced bread." What market impact will that have? and they're constantly hoovering up this data and analyzing it and and looking at what you know how they can manipulate things. So he took that coin from a joke to I don't know what the market cap ended up being $14 million or whatever it ended up being.

>> But but it but but it's it's not that the that they're particularly interested in in this case the the value of the of the joke memecoin. It's it's the effect of manipulating information. How can how can we manipulate that to get what we want, which is to is to aggressively alter alter the trajectory of things as they currently stand. That

>> and you're doing that with um you're seeing that with Musk in um on X like um at many of the attempted color revolution and regime change operations. So

>> you know he was pushing Tommy Robinson in UK to manufacture civil unrest for social media scraping and pre-crime arrests.

>> Um he was involved in Maduro with Venezuela. Um he was involved in Lulu, Brazil like you know if you look through uh the neo- regime change has been create a narrative use algorithm in order to create a radicalized version of the narrative and then platform various characters. Um and you know if anyone has done any studying like just in terms of um you know Tommy Robinson and his connection to Israel and various other um civil unrest campaigns those are obvious but um also if you look at the final part that you were asking about Kyle is JD Vance for those that don't know just for completion um I'm sure everyone on here knows um but JD Vance is not JD Vance's name um he claims he's a veteran but I think he was like marketing or something like that. He was a young venture capitalist that was groomed by Peter Thiel with no experience in investing. Um and then suddenly he becomes the the vice president of United States. Um you know after a uh being groomed by Peter Thiel and Palantir.

>> Wow. Uh Simon, I want to circle back to something you said earlier because I think it might be useful for viewers. Um you you talked about the fact that we've had you know the military-industrial complex and the and has had it's uh stimulus check essentially next is that in the tech and you start talking about the bailouts and that the only way is for kind of the Fed to print their way out of this and we have the new Fed installed. Uh what is that going to mean and look like uh and when and what does that do to assets people watching this? What should they be aware of? I mean is there a way that they can you know, position themselves for this and and you did say it would be bigger than that that printing would be bigger than COVID.

>> Yeah. The the whole point here is that we're in the fiscal dominant stage. What that means is that you create justification to print as much money as possible. Um, which is creating an affordability crisis. that affordability crisis is sending small to mediumsiz uh private businesses, farmers, you know, those types of low margin business. It's either driving them into capital, distress, sell or bankruptcy. Um but the real value is concentrating up into the magnificent seven um technology companies, the S&P 500. There is also a global um multi-polar world operation. Prior to the Iran war, most foreign um, stock markets were outperforming the S&P and most foreign currencies with the exception of a few um, were outperforming the dollar. Um, and so that was creating massive capital outflow. Now, as soon as the Iran war started, we kind of reversed that trend. we started getting a strengthening of the dollar again uh because there was all of these new budgets, these new stimulus into you know increase the military budget from a trillion to a trillion and a half. Um the you know um we also looked at the the massive profits that the energy um companies are are creating. Now you're getting a lot of the price gouging. Um but also we started to get a bit of a blowout from foreign countries and central banks selling their US treasuries. Um, but that led to an op a real reform within the system like again UAE UAE it we were it was like framed in the media that UAE is in distress. Um, but all of the retail they were selling their houses. all of the local population, they were selling their gold for Bitcoin to flee. We had a big correction in the price of the assets. Um, but it was massive increase in institutional ownership of UAE assets in the UAE ETF. And so UAE was like this engineered disaster. Um, the financial industrial complex took over um more and more of those assets. And then even though they got $270 billion dollars of um US dollars and $1.4 trillion dollars of assets and US equities and various other things, uh we were told that they might need a uh an FX swap line. What that means essentially is you're doing what happened to Japan where FX swap lines is how you get the hedge funds that have this Japan carry trade >> uh where effectively you can borrow you the UAE can now create dollars like Euro dollars um like the European bank that's a very exclusive club the ones that get FX swap lines currently right now are the Swiss central bank the Canadian central bank the European Central Bank the Japanese central bank and the bank of Japan Now, it went over to UAE. Why did it go over to UAE? Well, UAE was saying, "Look, we could sell our bonds cuz they're a big part of the bond vigilante group, or we could sell our equity. We could crash your stock market, or we could pump the yields on your on your bond market that would then kill your mortgage market, your auto loan market, your credit card market." And so, they said, "Well, you can't sell them. Uh, so we have to give you an FX swap line." Now UAE can create dollars just by printing their own currency, depositing at the Fed. Um, and then new dollars are created and handed over to UAE. This is >> new rails.

>> You you also have a marvelous way to toggle back and forth east to west on the covert side in very free liquid forms quietly.

>> Absolutely. And then at the same time they come out of OPEC. Um, but OPEC and now effectively prior to this there was the announcement of the new energy market cooperation via BRICS >> and so they were coming out of OPEC anyway but they used the disaster to do it. They framed that even right now we're getting escalation between UAE and Iran and yet the largest trading partner for Iran number one is China is UAE. So, you know, there's such a theatrical element to the headline um that this is an engineered and manufactured crisis. Look, when you follow the money, if right now the China was genuinely in a war with America, they just say, "Your military-industrial complex is over. We'll stop exports. It's done." And they can't manufacture another weapon without like China. Um that Russia could say we'll stop enriching uranium uranium for your nuclear program. Um UAE would say we'll stop trading with Iran. Um and you could go into nuc you know you and isn't it very convenient by the way that all of the targets that have been destroyed were US military-industrial complex targets in the Gulf countries that are now being renegotiated. energy contracts that force majeure. But what happened to Qatar's energy infrastructure? Oh, it just so happened that prior to this um there was a new company called Golden Pass. Golden Pass is getting all the LNG contracts from Texas. 70% owned by Qatar Energy, 30% owned by Exxon. Also, where does the Venezuelan oil refinement happening in Texas? There's only one company that can do it. It's a subsidiary of Saudi Aramco, 100% owned by Saudi Aramco. So if you look at this, the US military-industrial complex is a for rent militia to get resources for transnational global capital. And transnational global capital consists of the largest sovereign wealth fund, China, the largest manufacturing base. all of the sovereign wealth funds at the key strategic choke points uh whether it be UAE, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, Norway and Europe um and the privatized financial industrial complex BlackRock, State Street, Vanguard. Um and now the Federal Reserve is being opened up as we transition to this multi-polar world. Where what was OPEC? OPEC was there were two parts to the pro dollar. one part was the oil and pump controller pricing um and then the other side was the purchasing of US treasuries. And so if you break OPEC, you break the purchase of US treasuries. If you break the Euro dollar, you break the purchasing of US treasuries. If Japan starts increasing their interest rates, you break the Japan carry trade. And all of this creates financial stress that concentrates wealth upwards. BlackRock's assets under administration has gone from 12 trillion to 14 trillion.

>> Okay. So, so Simon, the institutional is rejecting treasuries. The whole goal of stable coin is to go globally and capture some of that market back with be successful.

>> Yeah. So, what what I think they're trying to do with stable coin, again, you're having a bit of a regional focus. So immediately you saw Iran um when they started saying okay the strait of Hormuz is closed but anyone can pay with bitcoin and that wasn't confiscated >> anyone can pay with stable coins those were a free function they called they called tether they got frozen um at the same time we had the DeFi hit from some of the hacks whenever you hear North Korea and Lazarus think Israel and when you see xbt recognize that he's an agent of Israel And so when Zach XBT is exposing something and they say it's North Korea Lazarus, that's the Israeli crypto hacking operations from which I couldn't prove it. Um there's lots of circumstantial evidence that I believe that to be true.

>> And then also in many of the chapter 11 bankruptcies, you had Mijinski and um his connection to um Israel and and all the people that got away with it. They're doing business with the prime minister's office of Israel. So cyber security hacking when you hear North Korea think Israel. Um, so that's uh you know um I forgot where else. Oh yeah. So stable coins um then you had the DeFi like freeze functions and Arbitrum and the layer 2 >> um as a result of these conversations. Um everything went into either Bitcoin and self-custody or a BlackRock Bitcoin ETF after that. Um and then you got the acceleration of um Clarity Act as well. And so you can see um that uh I think what they're doing with the stable coin is they're saying we'll dollarize lent central and Latin America will CBDC Europe America to a regional power um after this war after we price everyone out and manufacture a crisis. It will lead to a deal. uh it will be Pakistan which is essentially a front for China. The financial industrial complex might get a piece of the strait of Hormuz um but you'll get this new um opening up of Iran, opening up of the energy.

There'll be pipelines between the Gulf countries and Iran. Um, and suddenly, you know, the IRGC will be a a regionally integrated version. Um, and you've got UAE and Israel, Israel being the technical industrial complex, UAE being the financial industrial complex, and now they're just building military new contracts across transnational capital. So, you're getting all these regional agreements signed where US bases were destroyed. So, now you got Saudi, Turkey, um, Egypt, um, and Pakistan forming a defense corridor. And then you got UAE, Israel, India forming an alternative defense corridor, right?

And you can see the strategic tension set up for the next multipolar world order. Um, as we speak. Simon, just just to be just to kind of bring it back to the what does this money printing look like, you know, more than co? Just so it's crystal clear, are we going to see markets, Bitcoin, stocks, things like that look like 2021 postco? So for the viewer watching this, are are you basically yeah, is that uh like positioning in Bitcoin for example? Would you expect a big kind of rally coming soon?

Yeah. Um, look, the idea here is that for the average person, you're not going to be able to get on the right side of these trends. The market manipulation is insane. Like we've seen this with Jane Street with ETFs, all all sorts of stuff. The average person, if the only way you can defeat this financially is to own assets, and the only way to beat the market manipulators is to dollar cost average. So you just have to pick your assets, and there's different things you can do there. Um, but it's the only way you're going to financially survive this. So whenever they're crashing markets, you're dollar cost averaging into cheaper prices. Um, and you're just not picking the you're not trying to guess these geopolitical market manipulations. Markets have no bearing on reality right now. Look at Palunteer. Palunteer is the highest performing stock because it's geopolitically strategically important and it's chosen to be the new surveillance state government. Um,

and so there's no reality in markets right now. It's all geopolitical strategic importance. It's all ETF passive flow via Black Rock and managing all the money, and it's all media narratives, right? But the the individual person can't solve. We're going into we've been in an environment where you could solve your problems by having money. We're going into a into a bifurcation with hard assets where, you know, money helps, but uh, if you don't take action locally, particularly with respect to food and health, you you are going to find yourself dependent on a food system which is poisoning you and a health system which is poisoning you. So you've got to start to organ or organize locally. It's a much longer conversation, but you can't solve that problem with food. You're going to have to solve that problem with local organization, and it's going to be critical because um, you can have all the money in the world, but if you're poisoned, you're going to lose. So so you have got to deal with what I call the great poisoning, and that's going to take local organizations. So get get off the couch and start building independent systems you need to be successful.

Yeah. Connecting those two dots, I've looked around my local community, and I've looked at every supply chain and I've asked people, "What investment do you need for us to work together and build our local parallel systems?" So, if we've got farmers that are struggling, I'm investing in farmers. We need the food, right? And and you know, I'm I'm getting to know my neighbors and my local community and I'm saying, "Right, what what what parallel systems can we build together?" Um, you know, what are under this scenario? What are we all going to do collectively? Because on my island, we already ran out of um diesel. There are a lot of farmers going bankrupt, and they are an opportunity. They are absolutely an investment opportunity for many people, particularly if they're willing to switch to much healthier food.

I agree because Black Rock's either going to own them or your community is going to own them. There's no in between.

Yeah. And one of the I would I would just say, you know, we often think that, you know, when we're talking about these subjects, people often accuse me, and I'm sure they accuse you as well, of being blackpilled, right? That you you're just talking about all the problems and you're not offering solutions. The only solutions that can come can come can only come from us. They can only come from us. So unless, as Katherine just rightly said, unless you are willing to act to do something to to to improve your lot, then then everything is black. Everything is blackpilled because the because as Simon just said, you got two choices. You either going to submit to what's coming down the road or not. And that mean and that means doing something, and that that does mean getting together with people in your local community, trying to maximize your independence from this thing that's coming towards us because that maybe the blackpilled element of it is that there is no choice in to that extent, but that doesn't mean by any stretch of the imagination that we have to succumb to a single aspect of it, not one. We can resist every single bit, but we must do something. You have to do something.

I think that uh I mean, this is something that I've been thinking about for a long time. I mean, without even knowing everything that you guys have talked about, because I learned from each of you and know Simon and I have had multiple conversations in the past where I learned a ton. But for anyone who's paying attention, doesn't really need to know necessarily all the depth of the things that we've covered uh to understand that it's probably pretty important that you start taking action to to protect yourself about what's coming. The world obviously is changing very fast, and it's for anyone who's paying attention, it's pretty easy to see that direction that we're moving in. Uh, Katherine, like you rightfully uh called out, it deserves a bigger conversation, and we don't have any more time today, but I would love to invite you guys back either together collectively if you if we can make it work or individually to see how we can individually uh take care of ourselves, our family, our loved ones, things like that. Because Ian, as you point out, we we we're see this conversation seems like a black pill conversation, but the intention is to help people. Intention is to learn what we can do about this. So, um, thank you for all the little tidbits each of you guys gave. Uh, but I think so important that we have a full conversation on the opt-out mechanisms and protecting ourselves in the future. So, I'd love to invite you guys back. Um, I really appreciate each of your time today. Thank you so much. It was an enlightening conversation, and I know you guys had more to say as well, but I'd love to do a part two.

Yeah, Carl, thanks for setting this up. It's great to have um all of us on one panel. You got a a star lineup, and I really enjoyed listening from um Katherine and Ian as well.

Same.

Yeah. Thank you.

Thank you.

Yeah, thanks very much. Anytime, mate. Yeah, invite us anytime.

Awesome. Ankas.