TFTC: A Bitcoin Podcast - #524: Precrime and the Global Panopticon with Whitney Webb & Mark Goodwin

Episode Date: July 19, 2024

Marty sits down with Whitney Webb and Mark Goodwin to discuss the partnership of the private tech sector with the surveillance state. Whitney on Twitter: https://x.com/_whitneywebb Mark on Twitter: https://x.com/markgoodw_in 0:00 - Intro 1:34 - Trump shooting and media aftermath 10:10 - River & Unchained 11:26 - JD Vance and Palantir 24:10 - Gradually, Then Suddenly & Zaprite 25:48 - Trump’s image & public/private partnership 49:19 - Controlled media 1:04:42 - Using Bitcoin for evil 1:09:58 - Nostr, ecash & stables 1:27:13- Framing bitcoin as money 1:36:27 - All things are used to justify surveillance 1:54:59 - Law enforcement 2:01:00 - Stop complying, solve from the ground up 2:12:50 - Keep calm against the emotional manipulation Shoutout to our sponsors: River https://river.com/tftc Unchained https://unchained.com/concierge/ Zaprite https://zaprite.com/tftc Gradually, Then Suddenly https://thesaifhouse.com/gradually TFTC Merch is Available Shop Now: https://merch.tftc.io Join the TFTC Movement: Main YT Channel https://www.youtube.com/c/TFTC21/videos Clips YT Channel https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCUQcW3jxfQfEUS8kqR5pJtQ Website https://tftc.io/ Twitter https://twitter.com/tftc21 Instagram https://www.instagram.com/tftc.io/ Follow Marty Bent: Twitter https://twitter.com/martybent Newsletter https://tftc.io/martys-bent/ Podcast https://tftc.io/podcasts/

When you look at, you know, what it's building toward and if we have that kind of system or like, you know, peace through surveillance, mass surveillance and like peace through a police state and all of that stuff. Like, yeah, I mean, you can have an extremely authoritarian, totalitarian government impose order, but that's not really what most people think of when they see the flowery description that they give of SGG-16. But when you read what it's actually about, you know, a very different picture emerges and they can't do it without digital ID. They can't do it without implementing this whole, you know, surveillance panopticon. And they're relying hugely on the on private sector partners to build that. This rip of TFTC was brought to you by River. It's the best place to buy Bitcoin. Go to river.com slash TFTC and enjoy this episode.

world of fiat currencies bitcoin is the victor i mean that's part of the bull case for bitcoin if you're not paying attention you probably should be woo doggie what an interesting week whitney and mark we uh yeah to say the least i think we scheduled this a couple of weeks ago but uh considering everything that's happened over the last four or five days i think uh the conversation's gonna start in a different direction so obviously we had the attempted assassination on donald trump over the weekend at a at a an event in pennsylvania uh and since then a lot has happened we've had the announcement of his vice presidential candidate jd vance out of ohio and we're a

week away from the bitcoin 2024 conference and in nashville and there's a big lead up so there's a a lot of intersecting themes here as we as we meet to talk about all this today what uh i think just starting with that the assassination attempt and everything that's unfolded since then what are your shoot from the hip responses to to what's been going on um well you know in my case i didn't really look too much into the aftermath of the assassination i know people have been assassination attempt i know people have been saying a lot of things um you know i think it's it's rather odd that so so there's very little known about the shooter um you know he basically exists in a 2022 black rock commercial and like there's very little on him like no manifesto i

mean if you think about some of the big name or you know the the mass shooters or shootings that got like you know bigger attention in recent years uh there's a lot more on them either scrub from the internet or their social media posts or all sorts of things seems like this one's kind of uh i don't know not a lot of info on him which is is kind of interesting but you know again a lot of people um are more focused on on that than perhaps his vp pic or any of the other things that he's come out and said since that, such as his willingness to consider putting Jamie Dimon in charge of the Treasury Department, you know, things like that. So, you know, I honestly don't know exactly what happened there. And I haven't, again, looked at it too closely. And I don't want

to get in trouble by commenting on things that I haven't studied, you know. But generally, you know, when these things happen, regardless of whether it was organic or not, the responses, especially people's emotional responses are always manipulated by the powers that be. And, you know, I think that's something people should perhaps keep in mind, because, you know, the federal government, intelligence agencies, and also, you know, in the private sector, it's pretty well known that people tend to make decisions based on how they feel rather than, you know, what they're, rather than critical thought or rational thought. So, you know, uh, when people are very emotional and very emotionally wound up, um, you know, they tend to try and, um, uh, move people, uh, more

than perhaps they would otherwise. And I guess that's all I really have to say about it. I don't know if I said anything. Well, totally. Well, I think it's, you know, it's interesting. I think everything that you kind of just said is totally spot on. It's interesting that like the main guy that's kind of come out and been like false flag was like reid hoffman who was like a huge part of this piece that we just that we just dropped honestly huge part of it but um you know he's kind of a social network like data baron uh you know uh you know founded linkedin but you know it's super important and paypal and he's on the microsoft board and he's really heavily connected with this endeavor group um but i think it's really interesting when you look at you know

kind of what Whitney just said, like this idea that, you know, they're basically trying to manufacture consent and simulate reaction using social networks as sort of the main, you know, way that we intake information. And these social networks are all run by, you know, this kind of, you know, data broker, social network cabal, basically, you know, this like Facebook group that, you know, Whitney's written a lot about coming out of, you know, DARPA and kind of military origins of, of, of social networks. And, uh, you know, they now have it, they have a so dialed in now that they can basically use these networks and use, you know, stimulus, uh, you know, to very specifically directed at certain bands of demographics.

Um, and they can basically kind of simulate and stimulate, uh, a reaction of, of very specific groups. You know, they can look at far right groups that can look at, uh, you know, people with interest in anti-government, you know, ideals, they can look at people that just totally line up to, you know, eat up the slop of the, you know, the CNN narrative or whatever. And they can kind of exactly pick these people and feed them very specific data points using these network tools that are just really great for, yeah, you know, taking data, scraping data, but also their data distribution networks as well. And so now we're seeing, you know, this just totally hyper real. They're going to do whatever they want to do. We're going to go wherever they want us to

go anyway. A lot of this election stuff every four years, people just forget that they're pushing us wherever they want to go. And they use social networks and they use this sort of data distribution to manufacture consent for where it's going. And I think that's kind of just where we're at with this. I haven't really looked too much into it. I've been trying to stay off uh so these social networks there's a lot of other work to be done in in you know this line of work i guess uh you know plenty of other people are covering uh you know the the weekends events um and on to sort of piggyback on what mark was saying you know one of the big uh efforts of the people sort of guiding ai policy in the united states uh they've talked about how um ai can

will be leading us into divergent realities based on what information is shown to people, what the algorithm shown to people. And so like, you know, if you look at the events over the weekend, a lot of people like on the left, right, where it was being said more over there that this was like a stage thing, or also stuff like, you know, very different data points. And then if you look at what was in the, you know, in more right leaning circles on social media, like a completely different uh narrative and ultimately you have these people being like uh cognitively divided in a sense like essentially living in separate realities um and because they just perceive the these events so differently right so anyway something to keep in mind as we go forward

because i'm sure there's going to be a lot more uh crazy stuff happening during this election season uh going forward yeah somebody's been very online over the last five days it's uh it is and that's what i'm trying to figure out like to me at this point based on what i've consumed from an information perspective and i've seen what you described on both sides the left saying it was staged by trump trump saying it or people i don't think trump said anything explicitly but people on the right saying that it was uh an attempt at assassination in the lead up so that the incumbents could keep power but i also think there's like a possibility that the incumbent republicans tried to do something um to keep their power because that's

i mean the aftermath of all this like i think at this point i do believe somebody tried to kill him unsuccessfully it's obvious to me that there was a lapse in security that is either negligent to the point of uh like just the worst incompetence that you could ever see or it was intentional to um create the next jfk event if you will but the aftermath is such that where it seems like the upcoming tech forward conservative faction in this country is seeing it as a massive power grab and obviously i think jd vance being inserted as the vice president is is evidence to that to to sort of take over at least the Republican Party and put forward a new plan of where this country's going if Trump gets in. It's wild times. This episode was presented by River. River is the

best, most secure place to buy Bitcoin in the United States. Go to river.com slash TFTC, set up an account today. You'll be able to DCA into Bitcoin without paying any fees. You'll be able to give people Bitcoin via River links. You'll be able to send and receive Bitcoin over the Lightning Network, and you'll be able to set limit orders. If you want to buy Bitcoin at a particular price below or above where it is now, you can set orders to buy Bitcoin when it hits that price. Go to river.com slash TFTC and set up your account today. This rep was also brought to you by our good friends at Unchained. Unchained is building a financial services platform for a Bitcoin standard. They have over 7,000 clients that are securing over 90,000 Bitcoin with 12,000 keys on

their platform. Their platform leverages Bitcoin's native multi-sig properties. Their cornerstone product is their Volt product, a two or three multi-sig Volt, which allows you to hold two of three keys in a multi-sig quorum. That gives you full control over your Bitcoin. They also have an IRA product, a lending desk, and they're rolling out a bunch of other products, including an inheritance protocol and sound advisory. So go to unchained.com, set up a call with their concierge onboarding team today, tell them that TFTC sent you and use the promo code TFTC at check out unchained.com yeah well on that note i think it's interesting that in the past few days um you know there's been reports of an alleged iranian assassination plan targeting trump

uh after his base is very yeah while his base is very wound up right yeah being like it was the iranians you know and then jd vance is uh named and then he goes uh just a few hours after talks about you know the need to punch iran hard and all this stuff um interesting um when you consider that there's been a long-standing effort to sort of get us get the united states embroiled in in war with iran going on you know probably over two decades now so um and obviously you know his base isn't really into the whole you know more wars thing not that really any americans are at this point, except people that directly benefit from them. Um, so I don't know. I think that's an interesting development, but as far as JD, JD Vance is concerned, you know, he's an Ohio

guy. Uh, he used to do, he's, uh, you know, been involved in at least one, uh, fundraiser at Leslie Wexner's house, who again is the richest man in Ohio and, uh, a pretty important figure in the, in the Epstein scandal. And I mean, that's the reality of people that come to power in Ohio, Just like in Chicago, if you want to be crowned political royalty in Chicago, you have to make good with the Pritzkers and the crowns and families like that. I mean, in the state of Ohio, it's kind of similar, if not with Wexner himself, with his kind of broader network. He's dominated politics in that state for a very, very long time. But really, the name that's most important as it relates to Vance is going to be Peter Thiel, as people have noted. Yeah, Vance worked at Mithril Capital where he, Mithril, by the way, a big investor in the stable coin issuer Paxos, which plays a pretty big role in the piece we'll be discussing later.

And Mithril, from Mithril, he went on to be involved with some of these other VC funds, one tied to an AOL co-founder, one of them receiving a lot of money. This Rise of the Rest Fund, it was heavily funded by people like Jeff Bezos and the Walton family from Walmart, who, if you're familiar with the Waltons, are very tied up historically with the Clintons, specifically Hillary. And then from there, his political career, a lot of Thiel involvement, once again, a lot of donations from Thiel and other members of the so-called PayPal mafia, like David Sachs and Elon Musk, of course, being a big part of the fundraising apparatus, as are some other companies that Thiel helped create, like Palantir, which is now part of the super PAC with the Winklevoss twins and Elon Musk. And then you also have Joe Lonsdale, who's a Palantir co-founder with Peter Thiel joining that. So why is this bad? I could probably go on a rant for a very long time about Peter Thiel, so I'm just going to try and condense it. I've been reporting on him and specifically on Palantir for a very long time. And I would encourage people to look at those reports because it's very clear that Palantir was expressly created by Peter Thiel and Alex Karp to be the privatization of this program that they tried to launch after 9-11 at DARPA that was called Total Information Awareness. Pretty sure, Marty, we've discussed it before. And total information awareness was basically to create a giant data mining operation that would be combined with artificial intelligence for the purpose of basically creating a pre-crime society, not just predictive policing, but also predicting pandemics before they happen and bioterror attacks and terror attacks before they happen.

And since then, it's been, you know, privatized as Palantir. Palantir's done all of those things. During COVID, they were trying to predict COVID outbreaks before they happened by surveilling wastewater in conjunction with the HHS. They've done predictive policing programs all throughout the United States. They're a contractor with pretty much every intelligence agency. Their only client until 2008 was the CIA. Palantir engineers in the early years of the company made over 200 visits to CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia. Alex Karpis said on record the CIA was always the intended client of Palantir. And the TIA program, though it was housed at DARPA, was created in conjunction with the close involvement of the CIA, particularly the CIA's then chief information officer, Alan Wade, who was also a business partner of Christine Maxwell, Ghislaine Maxwell's sister, in a company called Kiliad that was very similar. The software program it produced was similar in many ways to Palantir as well. So, you know, Palantir, for all intents and purposes, is the panopticon software that TIA was meant to be. And it's important to keep in mind where TIA originally came from. The person that ran TIA was a man named John Poindexter, who was one of the actually the top figure in the Reagan administration to be charged as part of the Iran-Contra scandal. And in direct relation with the Iran-Contra scandal, Poindexter and also Oliver North and other figures involved in Iran-Contra created a database using the PROMIS software, which again involved Robert Maxwell and Christine Maxwell specifically, and really the CIA and Israeli intelligence. And so the PROMIS software was basically a sort of a proto-palantir, you could say, a way to sort of like data mine and, you know, generate intelligence from these masses of data. And Maine Corps was described as a list of Americans that could be rounded up in a vaguely defined national crisis, which could be something like nonviolent protests against U.S. military intervention abroad, right?

So a big protest against an invasion of Iran or an invasion of Iraq or whatever could trigger it, something like that. And it was very vaguely defined once again. And it was active well past Iran-Contra, but actually when it was asked about during the Iran-Contra hearings, the hearings were just shut down. Oliver North, like, didn't answer the question. They just shut down the hearing for him, so he didn't have to. And it was operating on 9-11. The last time it was reported on by, like, a mainstream outlet, it was, like, 2008. And at that point, it was estimated to have 3 million Americans on it. Palantir basically decides who's on that list today. They label people as subversives for the CIA.

and they've been doing it for a very long time. And if you look at a lot of the other Thiel companies that have come up since he created Palantir, companies like Clearview AI, for example, and also Facebook, which wouldn't exist without Peter Thiel. He was the earliest outside investor in Peter Thiel. Sorry, the earliest outside investor in Facebook. Facebook was also a resurrected DARPA program called LifeLog.

Facebook was launched on the same day that DARPA had to shutter LifeLog. It was very related to total information awareness. And at the same time that, you know, Peter Thiel and Alex Karp were expressly trying to privatize these DARPA programs, DARPA surveillance programs that were being shut down. And Clearview AI, for example, has boasted about going after Trump supporters on January 6th. They've developed this very advanced facial recognition software. by taking photos off of Facebook, another Thiel-invested company, and they claim to be able to identify everyone in the world now, have been, you know, very involved with the Ukrainian military during the conflict there since 2022. But on January 6th, they brag about having been

used by law enforcement and then subsequently, you know, other law enforcement agencies after the actual day to identify people who were there, some of whom have gone to prison. So for people that want to, you know, claim this is a great victory that, you know, a Peter Thiel protege is a VP, and that Palantir Technologies itself and another Palantir co-founder Joe Lonsdale are donating so much money to Trump, you know, I would consider people to think about that, especially in the fact that Palantir CEO Alex Karp is very overt about saying that um he thinks uh you know christian nationalists or the far right in the united states is going to like murder him it like keeps him up at night he thinks they're going to push

him out of a high-rise window and stuff and has like openly has expressed these like paranoid delusions of that kind of stuff and that's what palantir is focused on on targeting i mean it just seems like a big honeypot at the end of the day um for all these people that you know care about the Constitution and care about all these values that these guys certainly, in my opinion, don't because, I mean, they're CIA contractors at the end of the day, you know, and maybe Peter Thiel's framed himself as a libertarian. But would you if you were a free market libertarian, would you create something like Palantir for the federal government? You know, it just seems kind of a hard sell, if you ask me. Yeah. And I think the celebration in general of Vance is sort of just

kind of is a general misunderstanding of how intelligence and venture capital has sort of merged. Specifically looking at Palantir, I mean, it, correct me if I'm wrong, but it started at PayPal. Yeah. Spun out of PayPal. It's technically a PayPal spinoff. Right. And, you know, who was funding Palantir at the very beginning? Again, Whitney mentioned, you know, its early contractors were all CIA, but also the CIA's venture capital firm itself, In-Q-Tel, was one of the main funders of Palantir. And so there's been this kind of big push from public sector programs. You could look at something like an Oracle that started as the Oracle project within the CIA. Larry Ellison was working on them, the CIA. And then, okay, well, actually, it's much better for us to

contain all of this data and do all the things that we want to do being data brokers if we move into the private sector. We actually reserve a lot more rights to sell data, to do things with data if we're not stuck with all of the bureaucratic tape of being in the public sector. So let's go into the private sector. And it was an active thing kind of done with the formation of In-Q-Tel. And I'm sure Wendy can talk more about it. But, you know, basically they were like, if we want to compete with Silicon Valley, we have to kind of become Silicon Valley. And there was an infiltration in the late 90s into a lot of these information brokers and especially a lot of information banking. We see a lot of ties with like a city group or something, you know, kind

of having revolving door with the CIA and then, you know, something like a PayPal being funded. It has all of these really heavy connections with Microsoft and In-Q-Tel. And so now we're seeing Palantir, which is sort of just the modern version of it, you know, and so why, you know, people will champion, hey, well, the free market's so great. You know, this is so badass. We have a VCVP. Well, no, this is crony capitalism again. And the reason why they're moving into the private sector is not because, you know, this is some champion of, you know, Austrian economics or some free market wonderfulness happening. It's because it gives them a lot more ability to play around with our data. Having a private company in charge of the sensors on your cop cars and

scanning your license plates and doing facial recognition software and the people feeding these LLMs and all of these things, it being a private sector company is extremely beneficial for the data brokers that are incredibly intelligence linked, and they feed off government contracts, but then allow, you know, to, you know, to sell to private data, to sell your data to private companies, they can sell it to public companies as well, or rather to public governments, there's nothing that says a private company can't sell data to the government, they just can also sell it to advertisers and people that focus again, that stuff I kind of talked about the beginning, you know, attacking certain bands of, you know, demographics. Now they have all of this

data that they can play with that's coming out of the private sector and they can distribute it around and, you know, basically manipulate consent and manufacture consent using all of this private sector free market data. Quick break here, freaks. This rip is brought to you by Gradually Then Suddenly, a framework for understanding Bitcoin as money by Parker Lewis. I wrote the forward to the book. I'm honored to have done so because it's the best zero-to-one primer if you're looking for a logical explanation of why Bitcoin obsoletes all other money. Buy one for yourself and maybe a few for your friends. Go to thesafehouse.com slash gradually. That's thesafehouse.com, safe spelled S-A-I-F, thesafehouse.com slash gradually.

Use the promo code TFTC for $5 off at checkout. Buy it now, freaks. The price of Bitcoin is going up. You need to understand it. This is the best zero to one primer. This rip was also brought to you by good friends at ZapRite. If you're a Bitcoiner and run a business or an independent contractor, you should be accepting Bitcoin as payment. If not you, then who? If we believe that fiat is systemically fragile and is a risk, the rails that that currency runs on are risk as well. You need to begin accepting Bitcoin as soon as possible. Invest in the future of your business. Create a redundant rail by accepting Bitcoin as payment using ZapRite and reduce risk for your business. I've done this for my business here at TFTC. We use ZapRite. It allows you to easily

create invoices, payment links, or connect e-commerce stores, connect your wallets or custodial accounts, and be set up in minutes. We can also connect our bank accounts, our Stripe accounts, or Square accounts to accept fiat as well. The time is now, freaks. The fiat system is fragile. Invest in the infrastructure that de-risks the future. Invest in yourself, bitcoin payments with zap rate go to zap rate.com slash tftc to get 40 off their annual subscription zap rate.com slash tftc 40 off when particularly in the last section of um i want to call it a ramp at the monologue there yeah that's i can't stop thinking about like perverse incentives right like because um talking about like the free market like providing something good that doesn't

equip the cia with surveillance technology like if the cia didn't have like a a black box budget and they weren't able to issue debt and print money like would the incentives be to actually go do something good in the world um but as it stands today it seems like again going back to what i said earlier it seems like they're after the failed assassination attempt there is a power vacuum particularly on the republican side and it's been a push by these tech forward conservative thinkers like all right it's our time to take the power and get in um and then like and i can see why people are getting behind it too because it's objectively like looking at the economy over the last eight years um and everything that's happened people are not happy

what's the direction where where the country's going and i think that that visual of trump standing on the stage like we're gonna fight like really fucking lit a fire in a lot of people's um bellies that has them like all right we're gonna go in a new direction and they're really taking well if they're not happy about the economy i'm sure they'll enjoy jamie diamond in charge of the president i think good statement on the i think you nailed it there on that like that image right? I mean, there's such an iconic image already instantly of Trump bleeding with his hand up or whatever. And I think people forget it's like he's an actor. He's a reality TV star. This is kind of what Trump has been. He's a debt baron, of course, casino guy, real estate mogul

guy, heavily connected with the mega group and all this, yada, yada. But I mean, he's really, he's a media figure. And that's really what his forte is. And so he's built this persona as being this like tech grandpa who, you know, gets his emails printed out to him. He doesn't own a computer. He wakes up every day and some assistant is reading Twitter to him or whatever. And he's not really touching, you know, these things. And he, you know, he doesn't know what's going on. He's not this tech forward guy, but he's completely surrounded by all of these, you know, tech ghouls. I mean, Teal was a part of his transition team. And then a lot of this like, you know kind of rhetoric that trump put out specifically about bitcoin i think was very

obvious at the time you know a few of us called it out in real time that it was it was a total misdirection of rhetoric when you actually look at what his actions are so he's out there tweeting about how bitcoin is bad and you know it competes with the dollar and the only world reserve currency is the dollar but meanwhile he's appointing brian brooks the occ that's like making banks be able to hold crypto um and and now i mean literally he's picking uh a vp that's you know investing in uh you know cryptocurrency and infrastructure providers while at mithril capital um and i think that you know that a lot of people have been really fooled i think by what you know the persona that trump is you know especially in 2016 you know he was funny you know it was like funny to have a

guy go out there and make fun of clinton and do all this stuff and be very entertaining but then again what did he actually do what actually happened uh you know he pushed operation warp speed which is probably one of the biggest human rights violations of all time he locked down the country he printed trillions of dollars this idea that he's this anti-establishment candidate when really he set the policy for the globe uh you know to you know use data uh brokers like a palantir to run a lot of the covid response and and um you know he really pushed the whole covid response Palantir was in charge of like deciding who gets the vaccine first. They held all of the COVID data, not just for the U.S., but also the United Kingdom, and then started surveilling like, you know, sewage systems throughout the United States, literally resurrecting an old like total information awareness program from 2003 called biosurveillance. Same thing. I mean honestly it's pretty insane when you consider how involved Palantir was but it hasn't

really gotten a lot of coverage and I think also yeah like Mark said Trump has definitely gotten a pass about a lot of the warp speed stuff and I know that a lot of people who like Trump try and dismiss it as like oh he had bad people last time or he listened to the wrong people but I mean I don't know if you can really have it both ways I mean it what's going on right now sort of reminds me a lot of what happened with lefties during the Obama era. Everyone's energized during the first campaign, hope and change. And then he's a complete disappointment when he's actually in office. And then when it comes to the second campaign before the second term, all these people on the left being like, oh, well, it was the Republicans or he didn't have the right people

or these people weren't helping him. Meanwhile, we find out later that his entire cabinet from the off was chosen by Citigroup in the immediate aftermath of the 2008 financial crisis, right? Among all these other things that we know since then, right? So it's sort of like that same type of wishful thinking, you know, either, you know, Trump is the guy that's going to fight the deep state and win, or he's this guy that like, you know, is beholden to the people he surrounds himself with and has no agency. It's kind of hard to argue both, in my opinion. And I mean, if you're talking about you know having all you know peter extreme peter thiel influence in the next trump administration and then you know people like jamie dimon are being floated it's like oh

he's going to surround himself with better people this time they're also like floating eric prince's head of the pentagon the blackwater founder who's been going on this like pr tour all over the place trying to like frame himself as like something else you know um he's a cia asset it's a documented thing guys so yeah i don't know and he also was like super involved with the chinese government through frontier services group print so i don't know how does that grok with the the china bad stuff from the you know the trump rhetoric i don't know you tell me yeah the private sector coup is here and i think we're agreeing to it passively through uh unread user agreements on all of these data broker sites uh and also just passiveness to you know the the ghouls that are getting let

into the administration i mean i think there's just you know people are so focused on on trump and you know how his rhetoric and how he's so funny and he owns the the libtards and all this stuff but like you know he's surrounding himself with some of the worst people that are that are quite literally part of the privatized cia now kind of coming back um and using the government to basically use regulation to king make and make a ton of money by allowing the services that they provide, the infrastructures that they provide, whether it's data, whether it's stable coins, whether it's whatever, to be king made via regulation, to basically, again, do the Teal thing and find a market and dominate it and become a monopoly. I mean, literally, Teal says this. I

I mean, he writes this in his book, you know, competition is bad for profits. Go find the thing that no one is dominating and dominate it and become a monopoly and then move on to the next one. Competition's bad. So that's not free market. You know, that's not this, you know, badass Austrian economic whatever hoo-ha-ra-that shit that they're selling us. It's not that. This is literally how do we build monopolies under the guise of the free market and then actually use the government to, you know, give us a bunch of contracts to feed on government contracts and expand their power and keep them

monopolies, right? Government sanctioned monopolies, essentially. And I think it's useful to frame this sort of as the public private partnership, which is, you know, directly related to what a lot of people have known about US politics for a long time, the revolving door. A lot of these people and interests are in public sector when convenient, then they move to the private sector when convenient and i think um you know what the setup here is and what it has been you know we've been talking about it probably for most of this year especially with like a lot of the larry fink stuff and in bitcoin that happened earlier um this year is the idea of sort of uh trying to move now that you know the public sector is unpopular move it back to the private sector and frame um you know

that's i i'm sure a big reason why eric prince is you know being considered for the pentagon because he's been on a, during Trump's first administration, was pushing to essentially privatize the entire national security state, both the intelligence and military communities. So is it, you know, better? Will all our problems go away if the official CIA is dissolved, but we have a private CIA led by former CIA assets like Eric Prince and stuff? You know, I don't necessarily think that's true. And is it really, you know, again, it's not free market, you know, private sector. You know, the U.S. has essentially been a crony capitalist, you know, economy for a very long time. And, you know, and people have argued, too, that a lot of famous American capitalists

have direct relationships with, you know, the Chinese government and rave about China. Everyone from, you know, the Rockefeller family to Larry Fink. And if you honestly look at how China has developed as an economy, it's focused on creating a, you know, using government control to have a centralized control economy. And that's why you have people like Larry Fink saying markets love totalitarian governments because it like reduces risk for them, right? And makes it easier to trade when you know what's going to happen. And that's part of the utility of something like Palantir as well, that's supposed to predict everything before it happens. You know, there's a a lot of, you know, they view that as sort of like a market intelligence thing, I would assume

anyway. So I think we're, you know, sort of being pushed in that direction. I think Malay is part of it as well. And if you look at someone, some of the recent policies Malay has floated, it's things like, yeah, we're going to get rid of the education ministry, but we're going to put Facebook in charge of educating the youth. Facebook, the same, you know, company that has been, you know, hated by conservatives for, you know, censoring them and censoring speech. That's the one, you know, that's the company you want to put in charge of like molding young minds. But I guess it makes sense if you look at it from like, you know, the Peter Thiel perspective and why he was interested in putting Facebook on the map and having it become, you know, what at least at one point was

the dominant social network. It may not be in the U.S. anymore, but it certainly is in Latin America and I'm sure a lot of other places as well. So, you know, I would consider people to be kind of wary of what we're being sold. And I think also, you know, a lot of the arguments that have come around is like, oh, well, you know, the other choice is so bad. Yes, of course, the Democrats are terrible. They're terrible on purpose. In my opinion, they've kept Biden there this whole time because he's completely unsellable. The only reason he was like a lot of Democrats even took him the first time is because he promised to be a one term president. And obviously, you know, that hasn't happened. Disastrous debate performances and all of this, all these top

Democrats saying he needs to go and he's insisting on staying in. I mean, I would argue it looks like they're trying to lose. And if you consider the funding sources of the Democrats and other things that I've like discussed in my book, like in terms of like these power networks of like intelligence and in banks and stuff that are behind, you know, pretty much our entire political system, it's a uniparty. The two-party system only exists really as a paradigm and, you know, as a divide and conquer strategy for the oligarchs of the United States. So why would they, you know, if they want a particular person in power, I mean, it would make sense that they do a controlled demolition of the other side. And that's essentially, I think, what we're witnessing

right now. And I think a lot of people, at least after COVID, sort of got the two-party paradigm stuff in some of this. But, you know, election fever can make people forget the stuff. It's very easy to get caught up in, you know, the the emotions and, you know, the images and the speeches and the rallies. Right. But I, you know, I think, you know, again, campaigns are a sales pitch. I think people should focus more instead of on campaigns on especially considering that Trump's been in office before on what he did last time he was in office. And in keeping with the whole discussion of pre-crime and Palantir, one of the things Trump did when he was in office is that he called on big tech to create software

to surveil Americans to prevent mass shootings before they could happen. And then piggybacking off of that, his attorney general, William Barr, legalized pre-crime in the United States while also attempting to eliminate encryption. And by that, I mean, trying to guarantee back doors for the federal government into consumer apps and devices

that promise to, that market themselves as encrypted. you know, like WhatsApp, for example, among numerous others, I'm sure. So and then he was also considering a program, or the creation of this health focused DARPA equivalent called HARPA, the first program of which was going to be called safe homes, which is an acronym for something I can't remember. But basically, the idea of it was to data mine American social media posts and data from consumer devices like Fitbits and, you know, all these like the Alexa thing and all that stuff, the Google equivalent of it, like Apple TVs and stuff to determine if Americans were showing early warning signs of neuropsychiatric violence and may become violent at some point and might

commit mass shootings and may be mentally unwell and all of this stuff using AI and, you know, and all of this stuff. And Trump was apparently sold on the program by his daughter, Ivanka, who was the biggest lobbyist for it in the Trump administration. And actually, even though HARPA wasn't made under Trump, it was made under Biden. It's called ARPA-H. They just moved the H to the end, but it's the same people. So, you know, unfortunately, a lot of this that we've seen in terms of the construction of the surveillance state, I mean, if you look at it, it's a bipartisan agenda and every president has advanced it. And if you look at some of the people backing Trump and some of the things he said, like the idea of the virtual border wall,

which is being built by a company called Anduril. And Palmer, Palmer Luckey is the person behind that who sold, you know, his VR company, Oculus Rift, to Facebook with Thiel's help. And his current outfit, Anduril, not only is backed by Thiel, but is, you know, a major contractor now to the US government, a relationship I believe started during the Trump administration. They're building the virtual border wall. And when Trump was in office the first time, he said he rejected what he'd campaigned on, the idea of a physical barrier on the U.S.-Mexico border, and went full in on this biometric virtual border wall, which is actually what the Democrats had been lobbying for. And that was their answer to border security, you know, in the post-9-11 era, was actually having

this virtual border wall. So it's something that has bipartisan approval. And on recent campaign stops. Trump has been supporting the idea of a biometric entry-exit system on all U.S. borders and ports of entry. So, you know, that's like digital ID scanning your face in order to, you know, enter the U.S. And all of that, framing it as a way to, you know, tackle immigration and all of this stuff. One of his campaign lawyers was suggesting the same system for voting. Scan your face in order to be able to vote. Isn't it interesting that one of Peter Thiel's other proteges, uh, beside JD Vance is Sam Altman, who's behind WorldCoin, which is, you know, the biometric face scanning gives you a unique digital ID. Um, hopefully, uh, I don't know,

we'll see the limits of Peter Thiel's influence on Trump's second term, because obviously he's going to win. I don't think that's any question anymore, or if it really was a question, um, if he was going to win or not. Um, so yeah, I've been ranting for a while, so I'll. Well, I think so much of what you just said, I think is a lot about, you know, kind of simulating these phase shift dialectics via like controlled demolition of talking points going from, you know, public sector bad to private sector good. And, you know, looking at the surveillance state, I think that's very clear, everything you just said that they're doing that. But also, they've been doing that with, you know, monetary policy and private capital creation. And so we

got guys up there like Malay running around, you know, saying Afuera and, you know, printing money is bad and the central bank is bad while he is opening the door for uh you know the people that really caused you know the global financial crisis uh these huge banks that became too big to fail via their agents going into the public sector and deregulating the derivatives market you know repealing glass steagle and allowing these you know groups to you know these banking groups to just become literally too big to fail taking our you know retirement money our mortgage money you know uh and and speculating with it and then blowing up these huge bubbles and causing the government you know via the the public banks to have to print trillions of dollars worth of

treasuries to then to then back uh you know this private capital creation speculation and so we've kind of come to that point now where everyone is very upset at you know the fed and they're upset at uh you know what uh public banks central banks have done across the world in creating this hyperinflationary environment but who controls the fed but who controls the fed i mean like jamie diamond is not the answer i mean he is you you could you could criticize him so much for the role of how the monetary stimulus happened uh yeah i mean isn't it wasn't jp morgan like everything the biggest like owner of the federal reserve bank of new york the most influential bank in the federal reserve system right well i don't know if you saw my tweet a couple weeks ago but

Elizabeth Warren was kvetching on Twitter. Like, look, Jerome Powell's had private meetings with Jamie Dimon this year. I'm like, yeah, like JP Morgan. Didn't she give Jamie Dimon a super softball interview recently that one was like, well, Jamie, I fancy seeing you here. I forget what she was asking about. It was about Bitcoin and about cryptocurrency.

And she was like, I can't believe I'll ever side with Jamie. But I guess if it's the takedown Bitcoin and crypto and it's like, well, Jamie Dimon is running like TCN with with blackrock i mean they're doing the jpm coin they're doing onyx they're doing this huge you know trillion dollar volumes yeah he may not like bitcoin but he's all in on blockchain and all sorts of yeah you know deposit tokenized deposits and surveillable programmable money yeah ultimately that's why people right right but that's why people don't like cbdc's right it's programmable and surveillable and a threat to your freedom but it doesn't have to be issued

by the Fed to be programmable and surveillable. It can be issued by JP Morgan. It can be issued by Citigroup. It can be issued by whatever bank, Bank of America. And those banks have shown time and again that they're willing to cooperate with the federal government, even if it's unconstitutional. Just look at Bank of America giving banking records to the federal government for people that were in the vicinity of the Capitol on January 6, 2001. Totally. Good example. And whenever there's any sort of dissonant movement happening, you know, the banks are

the first people to get pressured by the public sector to shut it down. You know, we look at the trucker movement in Canada. I mean, that whole thing happened because banking services, whether, you know, they were like they were private, right? I mean, GoFundMe, the private banks, you know, they were they were forced and coerced by the U.S. government to shut down or the Canadian government to shut down and to stop servicing these people. And I think that's a really important part of the private bank digital currency angle

here that I think we're attacking with stablecoins. Everyone's afraid of CBDCs. It's kind of a red herring. Private capital has always been in the hands of the private banks, private capital creation. And that's not going to change. They don't want to lose that racket. But there's innately a king-making axiom where stablecoin providers or these private banks that want to make digital dollars, the dollar's been digital for a long time, but they want to make digital dollars now using blockchain technology, tokenized dollar instruments, they have to buy treasuries. So they have to have some sort of regulatory connection, king made connection with the powers that be that actually allow them to buy these treasuries from the treasury. So we're looking at who are the

hungriest people now buying up US debt? It's stable coin providers. They're like the biggest source of demand for the government to service their debt. I mean, it's just absurd what we're seeing tethers, you know, specifically as, you know, is like a 10th of the debt already that Japan and China hold each, you know, and that's going to continue to grow. And we're going to see, you know, more people be king made in the stable coin issuer, you know, consortium. And I think, you know, we're seeing someone like a PayPal really stepping up and getting ready, especially with someone like a JD Vance coming in, who literally his the company that he worked at his former firm that he was a principal at, you know, was an investor and not not not only Palantir,

but Paxos, which is the stablecoin issuer that used to do Binance's BUSD, but is now doing PYUSD, which is PayPal stablecoin. PayPal with a flip of a switch can turn all of their, you know, Venmo, which has integrated PYUSD, all of their email, you know, kind of eBay, you know, the market that was created with PayPal, you know, via eBay, they can they can switch with a flip of a switch to being all on a ledger and being these tokenized debt instruments that are stable coins. And they're going to come in with highly regulated trillions of dollars of stable coins that are king made by the regulatory arm of the government. But really, it's a private sector infrastructure company, heavily invested in by PayPal, heavily connected with PayPal, with Paxos.

And they get to basically be the private capital creators of the modern economy as things digitize. And so like, you know, who's going to buy the U.S. debt? Who's ready? Who's primed to do that? It's these king made groups. Now we have a VC VP who literally invested in this group specifically, very connected to PayPal. Here we are.

I mean, I don't think this is this wonderful win for the free market. I think it's we're being manipulated into saying central bank bad, but we're ignoring the fact that, again, the private sector has more ability to restrict user access to blacklist people to seize funds, all the things that the private sector can do because they can restrict customers because they're a private business. CBDC potentially wouldn't be able to do that. It would be a lot harder. They'd have constitutional issues to go up against, a lot more paperwork. A private company can seize your funds. We're seeing Tether already. They just recently hired a guy from Chain Analysis, which is In-Q-Tel funded. They've

integrated Chain Analysis into their program, the FBI, the Secret Service. They have to play ball. Howie Lutnick and Cantor, they want to hold $100 billion of treasuries. They got to play ball with the public sector and do whatever the regulatory arm of the United States wants. But they are certainly a private sector company. Yeah, all this. I mean, even going back to the surveillance to predict mass shooters, facial recognition, all of that.

When I hear stuff like that, particularly like mass shooters, it's like, all right, you're gonna just jump to surveilling everybody why don't we look into ssris and their effect on the psyche of people that are yeah well a lot of the stuff i mentioned in that regard happened after the el paso walmart shooting which was a very questionable mass shooting just on its face and that's the other thing mass shootings like let's look at fbi entrapment uh there's been plenty of cases where the fbi is actually setting these people up to do these things and then facial recognition at the border it's like i i can't go to an airport anymore and not have that face scan in front of me and i have to opt out but i'm just like looking at that

it's like no i think we should abolish the tsa and not have this um crazy surveillance society as i'm walking through wasn't that the policy though of like libertarians before it was like let's dismantle all the stuff set up after 9-11 that's like harmful to our freedoms like the tsa Or like, let's, you know, I mean, but instead we're getting like this privatized CIA connected version through, you know, companies like Anduril or, you know, Clearview AI and all of this other stuff that's either tied to Peter Thiel or it's tied to some other Silicon Valley oligarch. And the idea that we need to like scan our face to be able to vote, like, why can't we

just use driver's licenses or like other physical IDs? Like, why does it have to be all of a sudden this biometric crap that is not just being rolled in the U.S., rolled out in the U.S. right now, they're rolling it out in the EU, in the UK, it's in Chile, they're rolling it out everywhere globally. And it's, I mean, it's clearly a global agenda. It's the cornerstone of Agenda 2030, the UN Sustainable Development Goals, and a key part of the directly related to those global policing goals of Interpol, which is like almost every country in the world is a member of Interpol. So this is the way they're selling it to the American public as a solution for voter ID issues and for illegal immigration issues, which again,

the illegal immigration situation was allowed to happen. It was clearly intentional. And considering that like this biometric stuff at the border and as far as digital ID, it's a bipartisan agenda. Both parties work together to make the conditions for that to happen. One creates the problem and the other sweeps in with the solution that everyone's clamoring for because the problem has been allowed to become so bad. And I think it's not just with biometric digital ID, you're going to see it with the programmable surveillable currency.

You're going to see it with pretty much everything that's going to be pitched to you as a solution to all of these problems we have. But really the solutions are going to just give us, you know, increased surveillance and march us closer to this techno tyranny that's been built by the national security state in close collaboration with the private sector

and particularly Silicon Valley, even before 9-11 happened, but obviously after that, it got supercharged in very significant ways. And, you know, I think cheerleading this kind of stuff, I mean, people need to be a lot more vigilant because, I mean, they're just looking for ways to sell it to people and to manufacture consent for these systems, ultimately. And if it's not working by doing it, you know, if they can't appeal to one, you know, one set of talking points isn't working, they're going to switch to complete polar opposite talking points, but the solution's the same, right? And, you know, again, this is the public-private partnership that we're dealing with, stakeholder capitalism

and all of that. And actually, if you look at the war on domestic terror framework that was developed during the Biden administration, if you are a criticism of any form of capitalism, including stakeholder capitalism, you can be considered a domestic terrorist by the federal government now so you don't like uh larry fink and klaus schwab's stakeholder capitalism uh-oh and also anyone that doesn't like perceived government overreach uh-oh that's not good um and what we've seen time and again yes they're molesting me yeah yeah but what we've seen time and again over the past like 20 plus years is that one administration put stuff in and then the next administration of the opposing party uses that

as building blocks. And we've gotten to this like extremely, the infrastructure for an extremely dystopian techno tyranny is practically here. And I think what we're seeing is a major effort to manufacture consent so that a large segment of the population cheers it on as the only possible solution. And this really concerns me when you consider that Peter Thiel is a major funding source for most of the biggest voices in alternative media. Not to mention the fact that he dominates uh you know the the investments for rumble which is framed as the you know alternative to youtube and stuff um and i mean people should be really concerned about that i think considering the palantir connection all this data mining stuff uh in the ceo of palantir's like

i don't like christian conservatives and they've all sort of been herded onto rumble and so your rumble account the videos you watch the videos you like what you say in the comments um can we trust that it doesn't get sent off to Palantir, considering the mutual Peter Thiel connection? I don't know. I would like someone to ask the Rumble people that question. But either way, you know, because of the extreme funding of alternative media by Thiel, very few people talk about him and very few people talk about Palantir. And it's been that way for several years. I'm hoping that will change. But the question is like, you know, obviously, the The government the U.S. has now is terrible. But I mean, people need to think seriously about what the stakes are and how many election cycles this country can go voting for the lesser of two evils, you know, because, I mean, if you're going to get the same bipartisan surveillance police state agenda, regardless of who you vote for, I mean, is that really what we want to keep doing?

is that really how we fight and stop this um you know i don't i don't think so but you know if i have any sort of reasonable criticism of this bipartisan blob that has been you know uh destroying our society and and implementing all of these like orwellian um technologies and policies for decades you know people say i love democrats and i have trump derangement syndrome um no i don't like any politician i've never backed any of them um i don't know i think they're all organized crime i've been pretty explicit about that but apparently it's you're you know in some circles you can't have the opinion that both are bad anymore you know and and speaking of manufacturing consent via this you know simulated contrarian narrative who took rumble public who did their

spec it was canter fritz gerald who holds all of the t-bills for tether but i think this idea of yeah this manufacturing consent via this you know false dichotomy is literally i mean it's hegelian dialectics and we're seeing you know one group you know will come in and create a situation will simulate and stimulate a situation and propose a solution get everyone rallied up about that solution and then it it actually ushers us into an unknown but desired by this the this the simulators uh you know outcome and that's sort of you know the the general axiom of how hegelian dialectics works and now it's like people are so unaware of how they're being played that the dissident right is cheering on biometric voting and and border just digital id it's just crazy

i mean these were the people that were like the most against it yeah right right and i watch you know as someone who you know like i was in the bay area during covid i was an anti-vaccine anti-mandate uh dissonant and people were calling me a trumper uh which didn't make any sense because he was the guy that pushed the vaccine in the first place, gave Fauci award, did all this Operation Warp Speed stuff. And now I've really not changed my position at all. And now I'm saying, why would you ever vote for Trump? He was the Operation Warp Speed guy and all this stuff. And now I'm being called a libtard, and I'm a Biden voter, and I love the left, and I'm a social commie. And it's like, no, no, no, I don't want any of this stuff. He was wrong then, and he's

wrong now i haven't changed but the simulated uh perception of my opinion has now pivoted because they've again used their social networks that they create in this data distribution content distribution they've created x truth rumble all of these things they have these they have us exactly where we want and they keep us on the reservation on the farm on this in this thought room uh by being able to control exactly what it is that we see algorithmically um and it's extremely dangerous that people don't uh really aren't aware of this and and we just we just eat up uh you know this controlled narrative and i think so much of the alternative media now people just have replaced you know cnn and the daily show with like tucker carlson and tim pool and rumble and and i'm not

saying there isn't good content on rumble i'm sure that there is uh but all the stuff that's promoted really heavily it's like you know you can start to see these common agendas these common themes like something like trump was you know saved by god via his assassination attempt or whatever you know you can see these talking heads that are incentivized to algo post they're now making money on x as a content creator they only get money based on how much uh interaction they have. They're being directly incentivized by the algo and by the money being paid out to content creators to post in a certain way. Those things get signal boosted. We have someone like a Jack Dorsey at the HRF coming out and saying free speech is a distraction. We should be really

talking about having more algorithms and not open box, open source algorithms, but just more choice. It's really about free will. And so they're, again, pushing us into this false, you know, this simulated outcome, this simulated thesis to say, no, we don't need to know what these algorithms are. They don't need to be open source. Free speech is a distraction. It's about choice of algorithm, which is absolutely horseshit when they control all the algorithms. They control Truth, X, Rumble, YouTube, Facebook, WhatsApp, LinkedIn, all the things that you are participating in taking in content from, Instagram. All these networks are held by very, very similar people that are all in connection with each other. And then especially when you look at the VC stuff behind it, I mean, there's an insane amount of connections between all these people and all of these networks, not to mention the internet service providers. And you start to see that there is, you know, there's really, honestly, seriously a conspiracy against our perception via the content algorithms that are manipulated and controlled by these data barons. And here we are. And again, it's just I've seen the phase shift happen in real time. I've seen the people coming out cheering about Malay as he dollarizes the country and sells out the minerals to Israel and brings in JP Morgan and Goldman Sachs and all these people to help his cabinet and dissolves the right to print money. Why shouldn't he be able to print money that you're actually taking away a tool from the people to be able to do something with?

Yes, it's been manipulated by private sector goblins that have jumped into the public sector when it's convenient for them. But but these are tools that citizens should have. If we're free market capitalists, you should be able to make money. You should be able to create money. But we've been so controlled and our reactions so, so simulated via stimulus that I think we really have no idea what we're just kind of passively letting happen. So in the case of Malay, though, I just want to say that the play there, it seems to be if you look at influential people in the Argentinian fintech space and also this broader network that Mark and I have now a couple articles writing about. The plan there is to use is to develop stable coins backed by commodities, specifically in the case of Argentina grain exports. So in that case, you know, maybe he might get rid of the central bank even or something like that at some point. But instead, you're going to have these stable coins tied to commodities and whoever owns those commodities, which in Argentina, I can I can tell you they are all oligarchs, a very small, just like in every other Latin American country. It's a small group of oligarchs that have been in charge of those respective countries for a very long time.

You know, they own the commodities and they're going to be basically your central bank replacement. Is that necessarily a better system? I mean, some people might argue that it is, but I think we should also, you know, look critically at this stuff. And as far as what Mark said on the case of media goes, you know, as far as subbing out alternative media for mainstream media, I think the most problematic aspect of that is that people didn't change their relationship with media when they made that switch from mainstream media to alternative media. What do I mean by that? Whatever the talking head that you're watching says, you just believe them and don't think critically and you just, you know, take what they say and believe it because this person that you trust said it. Right. And that's, you know, what got us in a lot of trouble as a country with mainstream media. And now we've gone, you know, a lot of these people have gone to alternative media or people that are seemingly independent and are, you know, but their same relate that same relationship with media continues. You know, there hasn't been maybe there's been a revolution in viewership from mainstream to alternative, but there has not been a revolution in, you know, just believing whatever people say and critical thought and doing your own research, following up, checking their sources. And I think that really needs to happen as well, which is why, you know, in my articles and in Mark 2, you know, we put hyperlinks everywhere so you can see the sources we had and, you know, what we used. You can look at the, you know, at the sources for yourself and draw your own conclusions.

And I think that is, you know, people need to be responsible media consumers. And that shift hasn't unfortunately hasn't happened. And I think it really needs to. Yeah. And you see it so much, especially. And that's why I'm so thankful, Marty, for a show like TFTC to have us on is that, you know, you see so many people that are sponsored or that have opportunity for brand deals, you know, prevent certain type of content coming out that maybe is negative against certain companies or certain infrastructure. and you see so many talking heads in the Bitcoin space. And I don't really like to air dirty laundry

and I don't really like to attack people personally. Like when I wrote the Bitcoin dollar, it's specifically about the mechanisms and it has almost no names in the book at all. There's very few people that I'm actually calling out specifically for building this. I think it was a lot more important to understand how the mechanism works rather than like,

hey, this guy works for this company, he's a prick. I'm not necessarily saying that. Now we're kind of starting to name some names because we have to because it's everything's just accelerating um but i think it's it it's really important to know that you know a lot of the talking heads in this space are sponsored and and their their consent is is purchased and their manufacturing consent for other people um this whole idea of you know uh you know banking the unbanked and all this stuff is you know bitcoin and and crypto you know being this innately uh you know empowering technology for

the for the underprivileged well no actually bitcoin is so powerful and so crazy with what it is it is what it is that it that it empowers uh microsoft city paypal facebook uh executives uh as much as it does uh the unbanked guy uh in uh you know in the global south and and i think that that mechanism and that understanding is just completely not talked about um and by design Because you see a lot of these podcasts and a lot of these people are afraid to have kind of counter narrative to the pro stable coin sort of concept, which, you know, really what stable coins are, are tokenized U.S. debt. And if we're supposed to end fiat and Bitcoin has this opportunity to replace settlement networks and replace the treasury market as a reserve asset, you know, you can argue if it can replace the dollar as a currency, but it certainly can replace treasuries as a reserve asset. But we have basically every single pay talking head in Bitcoin coming out and saying, you know, oh, I'm really impressed by stable coin issuers, you know, passion for banking the unbanked. And it's just like, well, no, what they're really doing is buying up the biggest terrorist organization in the world's debt.

And they're perpetuating dollarization, which the U.S. Treasury market has been used as a financial tool to inflict financial terrorism on the global south. And now you're claiming that, oh, actually, now we have this private sector company coming in that now has access to all the data, all of your purchasing data. You're down in South America. Everybody loves Tether. They love it. They love it so much. And I empathize and sympathize. But what are we really pushing them towards? We're pushing them towards intelligence-linked private sector companies that can blacklist and sell your financial data at a whim. Not even do they have to sell your financial data. It's just available on the blockchain. And if they have any sort of nation state capability of data harvesting, they can sweep the blockchain and basically, you know, triangulate any purchasing identity, you know, using, you know, chain analysis tools, which again, literally chain analysis, the company is an In-Q-Tel sponsored company. It's a CIA sponsored company. So, you know, here we are, you know, the Bitcoin space, the consent has really been purchased to this financial freedom element. Well, it's financial freedom for everybody, including the CIA. And that doesn't mean that I think, you know, we should throw away Bitcoin or throw away the ability to have trustless, unstoppable, no trusted third party settlement. That's obviously a state change of money, not to mention the monetary policy.

There is so much that I still love about Bitcoin and think is a state change for humanity. But what we do next is extremely important. And you can't know what to do next if you don't understand the scope of what's going on here. And when you look at some of the work that Whitney's done and you look at this group, this cabal of organized crime that has infiltrated the public sector and has infiltrated private banking, and you see what they've done with backdoors and the way that they've built out this Panopticon from a hardware and a software standpoint, that has extreme implications

on how a Bitcoin system could work and the freedom that actually could come from it, from the ISP level, from the fiber optic cables in the ocean, from the satellite data distribution constellations. There's so much to be said about how a Bitcoin system actually works. And there's a lot of orange washing, frankly, which is sort of a term of like, well, hey, Bitcoin's a freedom tool.

So everything associated with Bitcoin must be freedom. And that's just not absolutely not true. You can build a whole bunch of things on Bitcoin that are very bad. And I think we're starting to see the finks of the world understand that Bitcoin as a ledger can be used to put a bunch of data on there that's unfuckable and immutable. And that's very powerful for people like that to create identity systems, to use it as an asset storage technology for their tokenized debt. And I think we're going to see that really go off very extremely here in the next few years. And it's going to happen via the enabling of regulatory kingmaking from the public sector before they really kind of dissolve, you know, really the advantages of being in the public sector before we really just disintegrate into the private sector. And the private sector has really cooed, you know, the government basically in every way, unfortunately.

And once they take private capital creation, just strictly from a technology standpoint, information is now money. Information is now a commodity, literally, with Bitcoin, bits and bytes. You know, there's just a lot to be said there. That's all. I'll leave it at that. No, I completely agree. I think, I mean, obviously, I think about this a lot. I'm immersed in the Bitcoin space.

Full disclosure for anybody listening. i'm a venture capitalist myself in the bitcoin space and i do talk to a lot of the people across the industry and even those working on stable coins and that's what i'm trying to discern just personally like is the stable coin thing like going back to like the global south and um utility that it provides individuals there like i think i do think there's a case to be made that a lot of these stable coin issuers were looking to fill demand that was there which are people like i can't stomach the price volatility of bitcoin so i need something stable and they're like all right here's a stable coin and then i what i imagine happened is like the people involved with treasury

markets and all these banks looked at that and they saw that as an inroad um then moving forward i completely agree we have to be conscious of this expanding and the regulatory moats being erected because it could really hinder bitcoin adoption if we're not vigilant enough and that's why um i'm sure you've seen i'm trying to be white pilled i don't want to i don't want to do him too much and so like things like i'm not sure if you've been following i know we talked about it last time with chami immense um and noster a little bit but i think what's beginning to bubble up over there gives me a lot of hope that we can avoid um the co-option of the industry if you will i'm not sure if you've seen cali is integrating noster and emits into https which

would give you like inherent um it would give you like it would give you inherent privacy like your ip would not be exposed since nosters and then encrypted like you'd be able to interact in the web browser using noster with a way higher degree of privacy and then on top of that if you're using e-cash as your um currency there you get you get privacy transactionally um and then on top of that like from stable coins competitor standpoint i'm not sure if you've been following the um the uh development of these stable channels that you can create in these stability pools you can create within these mints but you can essentially create a stable coin like experience that is fully backed by Bitcoin and way more private.

And so I think it's- So on both of those points, Marty, from the get-go, from the incubation of both of those projects, Kale is the man. I think he's great, incredibly smart person, building really important tools. eCash has some limitations, but I think it also can do a bunch of things extremely well. I wrote a piece called Ideal Banking a couple of years ago now. I believe it became a chapter in my book as well, that basically kind of offers this same path forward saying, hey, maybe Bitcoin can't compete with the dollar as a currency, but it certainly

can as an asset. And so we can use, you know, Chami and E-mints, you know, like a Cashew or a Fetty and create, you know, really, really nice privacy within the mint. You know, amenity sets are sort of beyond the mint as well, but within the mint and using Lightning is basically the settlement network between these mints and we can create a really cool financial system that's really what we should be doing is creating an alternative financial system that doesn't perpetuate treasuries and that's the issue with these with these these tether and and usdc and py usd is that they're backed with treasuries and they're buying government debt and that's the problem the problem isn't the dollar the problem isn't someone in argentina wanting to

avoid inflation via the peso and have a stable purchasing you know unit that's not the that's not the problem again i totally sympathize with that but how do we create those instruments the idea of a dollar uh without perpetuating the biggest terrorist organization in the world and we can use it with we can use technology to do it and we can make back bitcoin back things um and then again specifically with stable channels i was in bitcoin azores and the creator of stable channels came up to me and said hey you're mark goodwin i read your book i think you've been writing some interesting stuff i used to work and do a lot of stuff with banks uh that perpetuated the tokenization of treasuries and i don't want to do that anymore and i came up with

this really clever idea of basically creating the idea of a dollar by having one person on the side of the lightning channel being long the dollar and one person being short it's all bitcoin uh and you have some sort of oracle feeding it and it's a it's a price feed and it just sends bitcoin back and forth to offset what the price of the dollar is uh or what the price of bitcoin is in dollar terms. Incredibly genius. Doesn't touch a treasury at all. eCash, Cashew, Fetty, doesn't touch treasuries at all, but it still creates dollar-esque instruments, which are, again, that's a financial tool. Great. So those are awesome. But then you look at, you know, okay, well, the stable coin bill, you know, written by Lummis and Gillibrand, this is a little bit of alpha that's going to be

in part two, but fuck it, we'll do it live. You know, you look at, okay, Terraluna was sort of the most famous algorithmic-backed stable coin where they were trying to create a US dollar instrument backed by Bitcoin infamously exploded and led to, you know, huge issues in the Bitcoin space, potentially leading to FTX implosion and a bunch of other things. Well, what actually happened there? Why did Terra Luna blow up? Why is Gillenbrand and Lummis in their stablecoin bill literally saying we can't have algorithmic alternatives to stablecoins because of look what happened at Terra Luna? Again, this manufacturing, this Hegelian dialectic of, hey, let's ban algorithmic-backed stablecoins.

Well, why? We should be able to do that. There's absolutely no reason why we shouldn't. Why not? Who blew up Terra Luna? Again, who's to say exactly, but over 70% of all value in the Terra network was in this thing called the Anchor Protocol at the time of popping

that was offering almost 20% plus yields. So all of this movement was going into the Anchor Protocol on Terra. Well, who made Anchor? This guy, Ryan Park out of Korea, who was literally paid by Peter Thiel as a Thiel fellow to build Anchor. And then they pop Terraluna, which is this infamous Bitcoin-backed dollar algo stablecoin that's now being used by politicians to say, this is an example why we can't do this, and this is bad. And you can directly connect the reason why it popped to the yield of a chain or rather a protocol within the system built by a Teal fellow. Very interesting that, and again, I think that these things aren't really accidents when you see that, hey, he wants to make PYUSD. You know, I talked to Walter Hester, the head of strategy at Paxos. He says PayPal is uniquely set up to sort of dominate the highly regulated stable coin market, even more so than USDC and USDT. And why is that? Well, because they have inroads in the public sector.

They have people advising senators to write specifically, hey, Terraluna bad. We need highly regulated treasury-backed stablecoins because we can't trust those darn Bitcoiners to code. Well, you could very much so argue that that consent was manufactured by the Anchor Protocol and by the Teal Fellow ship specifically to create an enabling environment for trillions of dollars of highly regulated stablecoins issued by Paxos. The head of Paxos, Charles, was one of the founding members of Coin Center. And the chair of Coin Center currently is Wenceslas Casares, heavily connected with PayPal and is the founder of Zappo, which is the first fully licensed bank to integrate Tether. They integrated USDC. They built the custody for that they eventually sold to Coinbase, which which houses all of the Bitcoin or eight of 11 of the spot Bitcoin ETFs, including BlackRock's like 400000 Bitcoin. So, you know, you you begin to kind of look at, well, the lobby of the public sector is also dominated by these same players. uh and and you know you're looking at well hey maybe a lot of these things weren't done um these weren't accidents and maybe that these were simulated control demolitions to lead us into

the exact uh pen uh that they want us in yeah for what it's worth i met charles from paxos multiple times i personally like him i think he's a interesting dude from what i can tell like really gets bitcoin and that's what i wonder with all the stablecoin stuff specifically like is is it a lot of these people like just trying to push things forward and that's what stablecoins have been marketed as for for many years is this transitionary tool um that we're going to use until we get to a bitcoin standard and that's just like the question i have like is our when we question the intent of these people is it nefarious from the beginning like um i'm not sure or are they simply trying to solve a market problem then outsiders are recognizing that

they're trying to do this and see that they may be able to co-opt it but point being said like i don't think we need these stable coins and going back to the stable coin bill like when it comes to these stable channels like i think they they would actually be immune from that because you really don't have a it's all bitcoin at the end of the day you don't have a token that you're creating like terra usd or something like that it's literally right that's why i think those alternatives are so important and should be championed and not the u.s treasury perpetuate but i would say quickly and i know i know when he's chomping at the bit to get in here but i think this this idea of is this is a mistake or is this not uh it's not a mistake uh i don't

think so uh i think that this new system this new financial system was created very specifically to use Bitcoin as this underlying energy commodity, exactly like petrol was used when we went off the gold standard, which is also an energy commodity by metal standards. Our energy commodities, it takes energy to take stuff out of the ground. The Bitcoin dollar system absolutely started in 2020. Oil went negative one month before or two months before the May 2020 halving, where Bitcoin's relative issuance goes below 2%,

below the target inflation rate of the dollar, below the you know gold coming out of the ground um and and so we've basically created this analog to the petrol system where there's this de facto not literal but de facto monopoly of pricing the underlying energy commodity that everyone wants that's highly demanded in dollars uh and you create artificial demand you have to buy dollars first to buy bitcoin which is something that the bitcoin system is is is absolutely encouraging now and then you look at well what incoming, you know, capital requirements are going to be with the Basel III, you know, regulation that the US is looking to adopt. Bitcoin is considered a liability, you're going to have to

have all of these dollar instruments to offset the price appreciation of Bitcoin. So they basically created this wonderful area, you can look at Bitcoin as a vacuum for the debt bubble, that is the fiat monetary system, the debt monetary system, and Bitcoin is ready as a demand inelastic energy commodity to suck up the hyperinflation of the dollar. What does trillions of dollars of highly regulated stablecoins mean? It means trillions of dollars of treasuries made, which means a lot of monetary printing. So I think this idea that maybe it's just this transitionary tool, I would say that's not true. I'd say it's much more likely that it was literally created by design, much like exactly the way they created the petrodollar system. This time, they don't need military

force this time it's just economic incentives um but this idea that uh sort of it's uh this this net good as we transition to a bitcoin standard it's like well we don't need to do any of this at all we don't need to yoke bitcoin to the dollar tether bitcoin to the dollar uh for any reason at all whatsoever um there's other alternatives as we've just mentioned that we can do um so i would say that this i think was was designed frankly and waiting before you jump in Another alternative, instead of needing dollars to get Bitcoin, just work for Bitcoin. Go set up a Zephyrite account and plug in your self-custody wallet and receive Bitcoin for your goods and services. That's a good way to do it.

You do it here at TFTC. Sorry, Whitney. No, no worries. All I was going to say was just comment on what you brought up about intent. Right. So when talking about expressly, you know, PayPal backed entities, since Mark spent a lot of time talking about PYUSD specifically, I think a really good example in terms of looking at intent is something like Kiva, which is the sort of this microfinance platform that framed itself as direct peer to peer lending or micro lending. And it turned out it wasn't actually directly peer-to-peer a few years after it launched. But the main people behind that are people like Pierre Omidyar, the eBay founder, who obviously has a lot of direct ties to PayPal since he has owned it since 2002.

And then you had people like Reid Hoffman from the so-called PayPal mafia on the board. You also had Wenceslas Casares on the board for some time. I don't believe he's there anymore, but Reid Hoffman still is. And a lot of the other people, including the people that created Kiva, hail from PayPal or they hail from eBay or the Omidyar network. But essentially, we're in the eBay PayPal family here when we're talking about Kiva. And Kiva framed itself for a long time when it first launched as banking the unbanked or banking the unbankable, which is similar to the talking points that have been used with stable coins. So as time has gone on, what happened is that people in these

areas that were being banked by Kiva, or being, you know, receiving these loans through Kiva, over time became more, you know, like dependent on that service. And they also, you know, I guess, gained trust among among this particular base. And then Kiva launched something called the Kiva Protocol, and then teamed up with the UN to go in these countries where they had become a major part of the economy for the so-called unbankable, and they have now imposed a digital ID on these countries in places like, I believe, Sierra Leone as an example, but they're doing it across the board in direct coordination with the UN, of course, part of the whole digital ID agenda backed by the UN-sponsored public-private partnership ID 2020 brought to you by Bill Gates and the

Rockefellers and all of these guys. Right. So and, you know, the framing of it is, oh, it's not just going to be, you know, your your government ID, it's going to be your key to banking, and it's going to have your credit history. And it's also going to have all your health data and all of this stuff. I mean, basically an exact replica of, you know, what the World Economic Forum and UN plans for digital ID are, you know, on these people. And, you know, the so-called unbanked or the unbankable are often, you know, voiceless people, vulnerable people, and people that don't really know that these particular agendas are, you know, rolling out on the global level. So, you know, and I think also when you look at sort of this particular network as it relates to PayPal,

which we do in our most recent piece, Chain of Custody, looking at how they frame either their philanthropy or their sponsorship of entrepreneurs in places like Latin America and Africa. It's framed under altruistic terms, but when you actually look at what these people's motives are for doing it, something else definitely emerges. And I think that's particularly true if you look at someone either like Pierre Omidyar or someone like Reid Hoffman, who spent a lot of his, you know, in Hoffman's case, a lot of his quote unquote philanthropy, um, has been, you know, for, uh, fighting like shadow wars and political campaigns and like creating, um, you know, false flags that didn't happen and all of this weird stuff that he funded through like these shadow

groups called acronym and all of this stuff. Um, you know, uh, and a lot of it just, uh, as we discuss on the article turns out to be like influence peddling for this particular group. That isn't to say that every stable coin that says banking the unbanked is just like these guys, But this particular network that we're talking about here, whether like eBay, PayPal, you know, that particular crowd and obviously the same crowd that's behind PYUSD, you know, this is the kind of stuff they've done before when they've used a lot of these same talking points, I guess. And considering that you have people like Wenceslas Casares involved, who, you know, also is, or at least he was involved and then went on to Zappo and all of that. And this idea that Zappo was going to be the bridge between stable coins, the dollar and Bitcoin and bring it all together. And his past ties to PayPal and also to like Facebook's DM project, you know, their attempt at a stable coin, I guess. You know, I mean, you know, I find that a little bit concerning.

Definitely. i do as well and the and that's another thing i think we talked about this last time you guys were on to like narrative crafting and manufactured consent and that's one thing uh i've been trying to again like similar to what i did with esg five years ago it's happening this cycle now bitcoin doesn't compete with the dollar it's like not money it's a commodity it's real estate property whatever you want to call it it's like no bitcoin is money it is competing with the dollar um and every other currency for that matter matter whether they be fiat currencies or cryptocurrencies and we need to own that and get ahead of that because that's from a framing

perspective within the bitcoin industry i think that is something that could really trip us up in the future if we go along with bitcoin's just property it's this commodity it doesn't compete with the dollar and then lo and behold bitcoin price goes up it becomes easier to spend it more people want to receive it it is obviously competing with the dollar as a monetary asset the government's like well you guys told us it wasn't competing with the dollar so we have to come in and down with the hammer like we should just own it from the beginning be like no this is competing with the dollar we don't like the dollar system we think it's inherently corrupt this monetary system is much more open transparent and morally aligned with the future that people

want to see but michael saylor says that we shouldn't fight the dollar and we should you know no but uh yeah no i for 100 i think i think you are seeing uh you know narrative uh carving or whatever the phrase was that you used that was better than what i just said but you are seeing it in the bitcoin space um and you're seeing huge people come in like a larry fink pushing uh bitcoin as digital gold or or in this way that's that's not really this peer-to-peer currency and i'm not trying to go total roger bear hijacking bitcoin thing or bcash i think bcash is a bad idea because of the centralizing effects of big blocks um but this idea that you know hey well our bags are gonna go up uh so we should just sit back and be passive because we're rich now

uh is super lame that's not why we're here i think we are here to have a state change of money and take the power back from the debt pardoning levers of the state via the central bank and via this Ponzi scheme that is the treasury market. We're here to defang that because it's an extremely powerful political tool that they use to wage war on the world with the treasury market. So let's not let Bitcoin become a ledger where we store dollars and store treasuries and tokenize debt because that's what they want to do. And, you know, they're not just going to tokenize debt or dollars, they're going to tokenize pretty much everything. They're going to tokenize the earth, they're going to tokenize carbon, they're going to push all that ESG shit. Fink didn't just start, you know, stop being an ESG guy, you know, because it's politically convenient. You know, he's been building these structures with, you know, hugely important groups, World Bank, UN, you know, Whitney's written a ton about, you know, sort of the green finance system.

And these guys haven't just forgot about that. It's just convenient for them right now to push Bitcoin as digital gold, price out a bunch of people from, you know, we might even already kind of be there. You know, how many, you know, America is probably the highest purchasing economy in the world, the best positioned. Most people in the United States can't afford a whole Bitcoin. And that's just going to continue to get worse and worse as Bitcoin does, you know, inevitably, I would say, cross six figures and maybe even seven figures here in the incoming decade. As that happens, more and more people will be priced out. It will be harder and harder to transact on the base layer and to actually have the power that we enjoy as early adopters or early-ish adopters. And I think the only responsibility Bitcoiners have is to leave Bitcoin as permissionless and as accessible as it was when we got there. And that changes a lot economically and programmably as more and more people use it. And as Bitcoin gets more and more expensive, you know, what Bitcoin actually does is it purchases ledger space.

You know, that's really all that it can purchase. It's the bits in the ledger to, you know, basically describe your spending conditions. And as more and more people get on the Bitcoin network and as Bitcoin gets more and more expensive, it actually becomes harder to have permissionless settlement for the users of Bitcoin. And that pool of people being able to access permissionless settlement is going to get smaller and smaller, which seems sort of backwards. Early adopters get richer, less and less people are actually able to use Bitcoin. And then they're forced to use treasury perpetuating tokenized debt systems

like stable coins in lieu of actually being able to access Bitcoin and hold their keys. So I think this is a really important time not to get too soapboxy, but it's just so important as consent is being manufactured and we're being fattened up. I mean, quite literally, you know, we're pigs feeding on Larry Fink's, you know, inflationary effects of Bitcoin price. And now we're, you know, a lot of people, I think, are just losing the ethos completely of what made Bitcoin special and what made Bitcoin interesting. And we just really got to get back to what we're here for. I think, you know, I don't think we should trust a Trump. I don't think we should trust the state moving into Bitcoin like the way that they are. We should understand and have learned by now there's ulterior motives for the adoption of Bitcoin.

No, I completely agree. But I think all of this was inevitable. Like people getting priced up, particularly at transactions at the protocol level, just like the nature of scarce block space and increased adoption. but then going back like that's why i'm so bullish on shawmy and mints yes they may be more centralized than peer-to-peer transactions at the protocol level but they are permissionless and in the sense that anybody can spin up a mint it's open source code that anybody can go implement and try to provide a service to a market and allow people to accumulate e-cash tokens commensurate with bitcoin um over time cheaply privately um and so that's where i think the when it comes to

this particular discussion about scaling bitcoin in a permissionless like fashion to as many people as possible i think it is abundantly clear that's never going to happen at the protocol level and so what can we do to ensure that we build these layers above bitcoin that are that are tightly aligned with the permissionless nature of the protocol level and that's why i'm infinitely bullish on these mints and i i do think i think we may have mentioned this before but if not bears uh repeating which is like this like how finney identified this in december of 2010 where it's like not everybody's gonna be able to track be able to transact on the protocol level like we're going to need to build these bitcoin banks and this was before the re-emergence of chami

mints on top of bitcoin but i think what he described in that bitcoin talk.org post is coming to fruition via these mints and it's really imperative that i agree with you that we begin to highlight these technologies and this particular way to leverage bitcoin as opposed to centralized stable coins or any other centralized uh technology that the the borg wants to build on top of bitcoin and try to funnel people into. Yeah, financial services are necessary for scaling an economic system. Trust is okay.

Not everything, trust can't be replaced by ones and zeros. There's a lot of things that can't be done. But I think this perversion of Bitcoin's blockchain to become a storage of dollars when we have PayPal, we have Venmo, we have all of these centralized trusted programs and now we're just building it again

and pretending it's trustless. I think it's kind of sad in general that the space has been so co-opted by these groups when it's like, oh, cool, we digitize the dollar again. We tokenize debt again. This is some big innovation. I think it's pretty lame. Bitcoin is really complicated and stupid and blockchains are really clunky and dumb and slow. And to build up all this thing, have this 10,000 iterations of the blockchain scattered across the world, and then just to reduce that back down to trusted dollar instruments, I think is obviously dumb. So, yeah, I think we're on the same page. But, you know, there's a lot of people in this space that want to turn Bitcoin into a place to just stash dollars in debt and, you know, carbon credits and and all of these things. So, yeah, it's worth saying that, you know, one of the pioneers of trading electronic U.S. government debt and, you know, that's intimately involved with Tether Cantor Fitzgerald were also the pioneers of electronic carbon credit trading. Like in the late 90s, early 2000s, they've always been into that. A lot of these guys have, if you look at it. Yeah, but whether, I mean, I don't think Larry Fink has changed his mind about ESG.

I think he's taking a step back and trying to reorient and think about the next iteration. Well, he's trying to rebrand. Yeah, exactly. But whether it's ESG, I mean, carbon credits fall under the bucket of ESG. think these dooms these things are just doomed for failure um in the the lust for power and the attempt to funnel people into these products um with the with the intent that it will allow them to control more things it's very hubristic in the sense that it ignores economic reality which is these things fundamentally don't make sense yeah but that's what the public sector does

regulation ignores economic reality all the time they force us to buy carbon credits well you know I think too, if we allow ourselves to be onboarded to these digital ID systems and these financial surveillance systems, these programmable, surveillable currencies that they've been developing, then it's going to be much easier for them once everyone's dependent on those new systems to force things like carbon credits on people. And I think that's part of the plan because the same people that are the architects of the digital ID stuff at the UN, people like like Mark Carney and Mike Bloomberg, I mean, they're all in for this carbon credit stuff. They're arguably architects of that entire system and the whole like stakeholder capitalist model

and ESG stuff. They love all that stuff. And I don't think they have any intention of abandoning that market just because people don't like it. I think they're waiting for the right time that once they have people onboarded to these systems enough, and there's this insane surveillance state in place where like you know your face is your id and all of this stuff um and they can just track everything you do and everywhere you go and whatever um and smartphones become more invasive and we're at you know this this point too where like uh in the next couple years all the brain machine interfaces are going to roll out like neural link and whatever for commercial use at least allegedly i mean you know it gets kind of crazy then uh and i think at that point it will

be much easier for them to impose this kind of stuff that in the current environment would be a hard sell. It becomes a much easier sell once you have those kinds of systems in place. And I think that's why, you know, like in UN documentation about the SDGs, without digital ID, so many of them just don't work, right? And, you know, the digital ID stuff in the SDGs is built within SDG 16, which is intimately tied up. I mean, Interpol is the implementing partner for SDG 16. It's about building strong institutions and like ensuring peace. But if you look at the nuts and bolts of it, as Ian Davis and I have done in our work on the SDG, specifically SDG 16, it's about completely controlling speech online. Since, you know, complete blanket censorship of dissent

is a key part of manufacturing peace here uh no one's disagreeing online anymore so i guess we've solved the hate speech problem oh no well you just like censored the crud out of like people talking um you know that's not exactly the same or giving like interpol all this power to basically become a de facto like global police organization which is what it's been angling to be for a very long time quite frankly um but you have like you know people like um you know like i mentioned earlier, the idea of this biometric entry exit thing, you know, that's the SDGs, and that's Interpol, it's tied up with the digital ID stuff, and the financial inclusion agenda of the UN. But, you know, all of this stuff is very bad. When you look at, you know, what it's building

toward, and if we have that kind of system, or like, you know, peace through surveillance, mass surveillance, and like peace through a police state, and all of that stuff, like, yeah, I mean, you can have an extremely authoritarian, totalitarian government impose order on a society or whole nations or the world, and you can say that's peace, but that's not really what most people think of when they see the flowery description that they give of SGG-16. But when you read what it's actually about, you know, a very different picture emerges, and they can't do it without digital ID. They can't do it without implementing this whole, you know, surveillance panopticon, and they're relying hugely on private sector partners to build that, right? But again, as we've discussed, you know, before, and as is noted a lot in this piece, you know, that Panopticon has been a public private partnership. It's been these private companies, the same network of Silicon Valley oligarchs who, oddly enough, all have some sort of Jeffrey Epstein connection. That's how close knit they all are, have, you know, have done it with like, you know, In-Q-Tel funding or some sort of, you know, federal backing of some variety. And almost all of them, I'm pretty sure all of them actually have the biggest tech companies are government contractors, either for the military or intelligence or other parts of the government.

So, you know, I don't really think it's, you know, it's fair to talk about some of these VC firms as just, you know, venture capitalists and, you know, they're free market capitalists and, you know, American success story stuff. I mean, they're there because a particular network like selected them and ensured their success. And there's a lot of, you know, incubators for those type of networks around. The one we focus on in the piece we've sort of been mentioning on and off today is called Endeavor. It's backed by the Bronfman family, which, you know, comes up a lot in my books as it relates to the Epstein scandal. and also Piero Midiar of eBay and has a lot of ties to the PayPal network because Reid Hoffman is one of their main dudes and they've developed a lot of these entrepreneurs in the global south that are now dominating, you know, fintech in places like Argentina and beyond and have all these ties with, you know, if you look at some of these Endeavor companies like Sadologic that we've talked about before, you have the involvement of people like Steve Mnuchin

and Cantor Fitzgerald and like a lot of these debt barons in the in these intelligence link satellite companies and stuff. I mean, there's a lot of very disturbing plays going on right now. And I think it's really not getting enough scrutiny. And oddly enough, you know, we're kind of in the situation where if you're, you know, on Twitter a lot, for example, you're being told that, you know, some of these billionaires are the only thing that stands between us and total tyranny, to quote, to paraphrase a recent tweet from Michael Schellenberger, right? And so this idea that like these billionaires are the answer to all of our problems. I mean, Trump's a billionaire too, right? I mean, it's just kind of crazy that people have been led to believe that

the only thing we can do as a country and as a society is place our entire future in the hands of a very small network of billionaires the the answer to all of our problems is always surveillance that's that's the idea democracy uh we need we need surveillance and id uh the oceans uh we need to uh to to surveil them pandemics pandemics surveillance surveil the animals the border the border issues uh we need to surveil more um and then you see i mean yeah like you mentioned side of logic tether gave them 30 million dollars uh you know in april um why is why is tether investing in blackrock neurotech um why are they investing in all this ai stuff why are they investing in satellite observation companies yeah someone needs to explain to me why banking the

unbanked tether is is is investing so heavily in brain machine interfaces you know and satellites like what why for what for what reason aren't they aren't they uh empowering the global south like why do they need to look at them with satellites i don't yeah run by uh you know chaired the board's chaired by steve mnuchin of the former treasury secretary you know and and and howie lotnick of cantor the head of the former head of the u.s like military basically is on the board yeah dunford yeah marcos galprin who's endeavors first success story who is the head of Mercado Libre, which is basically the Amazon, eBay of Argentina, of Latin America, really in general. You have the head of Caterpillar on there, which again, if you want to sort of look at,

you know, maybe we're moving towards commodity-backed stable coins. Well, then that puts all of this power into the oligarchs, not only the oligarchs that own all of the fields and all of the wheat, but also the manufacturers of the machines that can, you know, farm at a scale big enough to have uh agriculture commodity back stable coins you got you got you got them on there and saddle logic is like surveilling the grain stuff yeah uh already with the plan to you know do that and they already have a company in argentina called agro tokens backed by visa and all of that that's uh trying to advance that play as it relates to argentina's agricultural sector but the last time we talked about cytologic market marty it was because they were trying to

impose this carbon market with this network of companies, right? So again, you know, these are efforts, I think what we're going to see from this particular network is unprecedented efforts to create new markets where markets have not existed before. So a lot of this is being done through the real world asset tokenization frenzy, and the push to, you know, move into natural capital, which i know we've talked about for actually a couple years now um and the idea of like securitizing natural resources or the global commons the world's oceans um rivers lakes streams um and all of that um the guy that invented uh you know carbon markets really um richard sander who's like an ex-drexel burnham lambert guy uh and created you know

helped create derivatives and stuff um he wants to create you know a private market sort of like the carbon market but for clean air and water so get ready for your de facto air tax guys um i mean this is but i mean these are people making money and they want to make markets and the way these this crowd uh makes markets i mean i always go back to this larry fink quote where he says markets like totalitarian governments totalitarian governments can pose markets no one wants on the population like i mean this is what happened this is the china model you know this is why people like larry fink like love it over there the federal government comes in to help out the markets it's like centralized control for the purpose of creating controlled markets and

if this was a free market play uh people would be like no i don't want to why do we need this stuff like there's no need for it and they can try and manufacture consent through the need through climate change uh you know fear-mongering and whatever but at the end of the day it hasn't worked so how do they get it well they have to have governments impose it on people um and when you have a complete surveillance panopticon it's much easier to impose that on people than it otherwise would be and they have all these markets lined up to uh impose on us a lot of it involves you know the complete destruction of the natural world really um and you know just complete financial madness. And what are all these assets denominated in? Dollars. They're dollar

denominated assets. And so that it allows another place for the US government to shovel highly inflationary effects from printing a lot of money, which we know they have to do to be able to service the now $34 trillion of debt. The debt service is now outpacing the growth of our GDP. It's outpacing our military budget. So they need to find places to create artificial demand for dollars and they do that by putting a price tag on the trees in your backyard and the methane coming out of your ass and they do that and they dollar denominate it and now you're uh we're perpetuating the u.s treasury ponzi market because you ate uh some pinto beans you know you know well i mean that that was the sadologic play like talking about measuring carbon emissions from

space i mean they want to try and surveil this stuff from space so they can charge you for it this is a market right but it's a market no one wants and it's crony capitalism to the core yeah and teal's telling you find a market that no one else is doing because competition means price war which means bad for revenue find a market that no one else is doing no one else can possibly do this no one else can build uh observation is preservation carbon credit blockchain market that's backed by us dollar instruments that's tokenized debt that's upheld by a surveillance network of satellites that's upheld by oligarchs that own the grains in argentina no one no one can establish that market other than an extremely specific group of people

and guess what they're all on the board of satellite logic and guess what uh they're all connected to endeavor um they're all connected to uh you know a lot of this this this paypal Mafia, this group that, you know, Whitney has really done the work of really mapping out, you know, this mob connected, intelligence connected, you know, banker, data broker, debt baron, cabal, frankly, you know, that is really just kind of taken over the private and the public sector. One Nation Under Blackmail is now One World Under Blackmail, and they're shoving this debt, which is so useful to them, onto the natural world and buying up all of our data with it it's it's uh incredibly disturbing frankly no it really is and going back to just

repeating what i said earlier like the like from a first principles perspective all this is built on bullshit i mean you mentioned it whitney like the climate hysteria that's out there like well we need to put these carbon markets and put the satellites up there to track all this because we have existential climate change which i plan on having some scientists who recently released a peer-reviewed paper that claims and they would like to say proves it's absolute bullshit because they're manipulating the data um over time and they use fear that's like whether it's the carbon markets or the surveillance and the digital ids it's all either wrapped in some and due to climate change or terrorist uh gang i back like tsa like we should what what did 9-11

what did 9-11 create it created this state that we're talking about this panopticon of of the security state that was the private sector 9-11 created all of that there would be no consent for any of this stuff uh if it wasn't for 9-11 uh and then you go and look at the official story 9-11 and and everything that was going on there and i don't want to get you that demonetized i think we've already done enough here uh to to attack your channel but uh you know but no for Well, frankly, I don't necessarily feel super comfortable going on here anyway, but just, you know, why do we have Larry Ellison coming out and doing a huge op-ed at the New York Times immediately after 9-11 being like, we need a central depository for everyone's data. We could have prevented 9-11, you know, a literal CIA front coming out, you know, demanding a central repository for all of our citizens' data. Well, that was also the main argument from the intelligence community about their failure to predict 9-11 was that, oh, like all the data between intelligence agencies is siloed.

So we need to combine it all into one thing. And the people that made that argument, like the CIA's chief information officer, Alan Wade, again, tied up with the Maxwell family through Kiliad. He's, you know, one of the guys that helped create total information awareness as the answer to that. And now it's Palantir, right? So, you know, even if we, like we were talking about earlier, we get this shift where they dismantle these public agencies and name only. They've been moving to the private sector for a long time. I mean, you could argue that's what In-Q-Tel's all about and why all the big tech firms that are dominating our lives right now all have like significant intelligence connections. You know, the CIA has always really been a private thing in some capacity when you consider that all of the earliest members and directors were directly from Wall Street. They were either Wall Street lawyers or Wall Street bankers. A lot of the CIA's earliest coups were done expressly to benefit U.S. national multinational corporations, not necessarily U.S. national security, arguably the opposite on many occasions. And it's all been about protecting markets. And this includes the drug market, which, you know, organized crime has long dominated.

And then, as I noted in my books pretty extensively, organized crime merged with intelligence in the 40s, even before the CIA existed. And their big markets were drugs and, you know, sex traffic, human trafficking and all of that. And then, you know, the intelligence agencies got in those businesses and are protecting those rackets. Why was the CIA the first boots on the ground during the Afghanistan invasion, which was arguably about the banning of opioid cultivation and oil pipelines and all of that stuff? It's about protecting markets almost all the time. And that's why recently I've sort of been trying to frame the CIA as Wall Street's secret police. You know, that's essentially what happens. And it's the oligarchs, the money people in the United States that really, you know, that's who the CIA has been answering to for a long time. And these are the guys that are now backing like, you know, the Silicon Valley Titans and all of that. I mean, it's, you know, maybe they're going to change the facade the system wears, but, you know, it's going to be the same ultimately at the end of the day. And that's why, you know, I'm so critical of what, you know, appears to be shaping up here. Because I think it's just another effort to hoodwink us and saddle us with something that's just as Orwellian and terrible as what the CIA was trying to do decades ago. I mean, the agenda has marched forward. And if it's coming from the private sector, the public sector, who cares? It's like terrible for human freedom on all counts, right? so uh anyway i guess getting i don't know how long ago did i freeze it's like 10 seconds ago 30 seconds ago 30 seconds well time flies

do you need me to like wrap that up again i forgot what i was kind of saying you're like in the process of wrapping it up um you're worried about the narratives because i wanted to interject um it's interesting this is so multi-faceted it's so discombobulating right because you have the cultural war stuff going on too and that's one thing that i'll just admit like to me i am optimistic about uh like again going with the lesser of two evils maybe not from like the economic or surveillance thing just like culturally i think we've gotten so divided here in the united states and i do think things have gone to insane extents and like particularly like with the state interjecting between the family

the parents and the children um just crazy lawlessness in terms of attorney generals and district attorneys not actually um abiding by laws decimating the police force and letting people go rob and steal things so for me as an individual looking at the choices and particularly in the context of the cultural war it's like the message that the what seems to be incoming administration is putting out there in terms of like we're going to bring back justice and we're actually going to abide by the laws things like chevron deference that the supreme court court just overturned like that's a really good signal to me and like these are things that i would like to see happen but then as you guys bring up it's always important to be aware of these other things

that could really hinder financial and just freedom generally if we get thrown into this financialized panopticon. Yeah, well, the problem here is that, you know, especially considering the big Silicon Valley backing of whichever party wins in November, there's been a huge Silicon Valley push by these same players we're talking about that are tied to intelligence

and advancing the surveillance state into basically dominating law enforcement. And this idea of replacing, you know, oh, there's less police officers. So let's replace them with AI. Let's put facial recognition everywhere and identify people that we say are suspects. I mean, they've been doing that in places like the UK and then have found out that their facial recognition, you know, algorithms are like extremely inaccurate, but they don't change anything anyway. Which is if you look at some of the um you know inspirations uh of palantir specifically you know it's about goes back to this philosophical the philosophical development of the panic panopticon that people obey when

they just know they're being watched uh no one actually has to be watching just knowing that you are being watched uh induces a subservient submissive obedient behavior and um you know And in addition to that, I mean, the idea that like a lot of a lot of law enforcement and also emergency services, 911 call centers are all being moved to a lot of intelligence linked platforms. So in the case of law enforcement, a lot of them are being onboarded to the software program produced by this company called Mark 43. David Petraeus is like one of their backers, the former CIA director, along, I think Jeff Bezos is one too, and a lot of other, you know, intelligence linked figures. are on that list specifically. And then Carbine 9-11 has basically made a move to dominate the next generation 911 call system because there's a push to move away from sort of the decentralized emergency call model that the U.S. has had for a long time where it's, you know, county specific,

move it to a whole nationwide system. And Carbine is set to have that. They were backed by Peter Thiel's Founders Fund very heavily and have Founders Fund people on the board. And they also have currently DHS people, like Trump, one of Trump's DHS heads and one of the Bush era DHS heads on the board as well. And they were backed really heavily by Jeffrey Epstein, originally launched out of people who came from Israel's Unit 8200. It used to be essentially led by Ehud Barak, the former Israeli prime minister, had heads of former commanders of Israeli intelligence agencies on the board of directors no longer, but it was that way at the beginning. And basically, when you call 911 with your smartphone into a system that runs car by 911, you agree to basically

allow them to pull all of this data off of your phone, essentially data mine everything on your smartphone device for the purpose of helping locate you and also determining through another component of their system where past crimes have occurred and where crimes are likely to occur in the future, i.e. pre-crime, which is something that really all of this has been building to for some time. So, you know, unfortunately, a lot of what the sales pitches are, again, I go back to this whole, you know, idea of problem reaction solution that you have one party create the problem and the other party come in and offer the solution. You know, Democrats have dismantled a lot of the law enforcement stuff. And that's resulted in a lot of increased feelings of

insecurity and actual insecurity depending where you live in the united states um and this and arguably what's going to happen now and what's sort of being set up is that the solution is like no we need to uh use technology uh to get because it's more efficient and because there's less people and yada yada yada um and we need to you know onboard law enforcement onto all of these different platforms and software that are either tied with AI or run on AI and biometrics and all of that. So I don't, you know, I think there's a lot of setups here for this particular system that they've wanted to have in place. If you look at the history of it for many decades and that it's essentially been building up here, but they need people's consent to do it, right? Because

if everyone is in an uproar about it, they don't do it. And, you know, unfortunately, you know, I don't know how many people I can necessarily convince about this stuff. But, you know, I'm going to keep trying to do my best about it, I guess. But I think a lot of people are being had right now. And I think if you look at the same, at the funders of all of this, it's quite clear the type of world that they've been trying to build. I mean, in the case of Biden, you know, the person that's been his tech czar has been former Google CEO, Eric Schmidt, who's on the steering committee of the globalist closed door conference known as Bilderberg with Peter Thiel. They're actually Newsweek named Thiel and Schmidt, the most influential members at Bilderberg on the

steering committee. And basically, you know, argued in a 2019 article that Bilderberg factions were divided along, you know, along their two lines, they agree on a lot more than they don't agree. And they agree on a lot of the stuff discussed at Bilderberg, which ultimately advances this whole, like, global tyranny agenda that a lot of people got wise to during COVID and have seemingly forgotten again. But they back both parties. It's a uniparty. And I think enough people have learned that at one point or another and learned that hopefully we'll learn, if not this election cycle, I don't know when, that continually voting for the lesser of two evils is just, you're still voting for evil. right um is this really the best we can do and people say it's the only choice we have i mean it's not uh you can take personal responsibility build solutions and also not

comply i mean if we have enough people not comply with the digital id stuff and the biometric stuff um it won't work and that's what a lot of people said during the vax passport stuff during covid is like don't comply with the vaccine passport you know uh this is a trial for something they want to roll out that's going to be much worse than just vaccines but could be tied to that too potentially in the future you know you don't take a particular vaccine you can your freedom of movement can be restricted again or you say the wrong thing online your freedom of movement can be restricted this world is being built and it's being built by both parties um and i think some people just uh don't really want to face that reality and and find it doom and gloom and super

black pilling uh when i talk about this but it actually should be super white pilling that like it's very easy to not comply well maybe not necessarily easy but we're all capable of not complying and the more people that don't comply the better chance of success we have um and so i don't know i guess i'll get off my soapbox there no no stay on there but but i think i think you're totally right about the that it should be white pilling in the sense of you know this isn't my quote but you know if the situation was hopeless the propaganda would be unnecessary and if they didn't need to you know manufacture consent for us to comply if they didn't actually need that they wouldn't spend all the money and all the time and the man hours to create these like fake

counter narratives and these these false messiahs and these people that we look up to they would just they would just make it happen they wouldn't try to manufacture our consent so there's so much power that we have as individuals and as collectives to push back by not complying uh and And if this was useless and hopeless, it was over, they wouldn't go through all of this work. So I think that this net is about to be cast, this panopticon is about to be soldered in. The satellites are about to be unstoppably launched in space. The blockchains are about to be built. The infrastructure providers are about to be captured.

um you know we have we have an extremely important opportunity here uh to push back and to not comply uh even if they're going to give us ubi and stablecoin backed uh you know payments for the for the uh rights to the carbon in our backyard you know whatever the bullshit that they're going to uh try to incentivize us to do um we cannot comply we can push back and there's a reason why they're doing it and it's because they need our consent they need our compliance uh and and let's not fucking give it to them yeah completely agree and going back to problem reaction solution framing the hegelian dialectic it and like particularly as it pertains to like we've had crime waves and open borders and like all right now we got to replace it with uh ai surveillance

and pre-crime it's like again that's another instance where you point out you're like actually you're not solving the core of this problem like number one uh we have proven throughout time that we have been able to enforce laws and properly put people in jail for murdering and robbing people we've been able to do that before we don't need to replace it with pre-crime like we just need to go back to that and then even a layer below that like what are the conditions that are leading people to a life of crime which is a bad economy and i would argue a bad economy bad family lives bad food that make them hyperactive and the um a lot of people in a state of despair where they don't think they have the ability to pull themselves up from their

bootstraps and climb the social ladder or even if they don't want to climb the social ladder just remain where they are and so they're forced into a life of crime and so by like saying like no we just need pre-crime and all this ai it's like well you're actually still not solving the core the problem which is more psychological social and economic where we need good money we need people to have the ability to save money and live a comfortable life so they're not incentivized to go create crimes then on top of that let's fix the food so people aren't eating like shit which fucks up their brains makes them think in a hyperactive fashion like none of those conversations are happening out in the mainstream or even in a lot of independent media in the same way that

We're such perceptive creatures. We are what we eat. We are what we consume. And if we're on these platforms where we're being fed very specific things that are targeted specifically to our demographic, they're able to simulate literal brainwaves and behavior and thus action. And thus, they can simulate and stimulate compliance, you know, in any demographic that they want, you know, very specifically. So I think it's probably a good time. You know, we were talking about this earlier, like, you know, it's election season. Maybe sign off, maybe take a break, you know, maybe go to publish only. Yeah, if you don't want your brain to be fried, and you want to feel like more sane than you do now, probably best to like minimize. yeah assange was released like how many weeks ago trump was attempted assassinated a couple days ago the vp i mean it's just we haven't even discussed so many things that should be huge global news you know barely get any get any play anymore uh you know everything is so hyper normalized and moving so fast and if we understand you know who are these data barons uh you know they're they're the new debt barons uh and they control this infrastructure they control what

we're consuming which which affects how we think and what our reality is uh you know we need to make sure we're really careful about what we ingest in every way yeah that's it's very important i've been i've been very online the last five days um which and i and i can feel it myself like that's why i'm happy i talked to you guys today and i've been having conversations off of twitter with people um and yeah it's very it's very discombobulating it's funny whitney because we've talked probably two or three times over the last 12 months and i think every time we've talked it's like the election season's gonna get crazy like you're gonna be it's gonna get crazier than it's been this past week i'm sure like this is just like the pre-rnc nomination warm-up you

know just wait till the democrats are like a total intentional in my opinion clusterfuck and it's just going to be like can you believe that this is happening i mean i don't know i think that's just going to be so ridiculous as we get closer to it and i think they just want people like outraged and angry and like very emotional because when people are like very triggered and very emotional they're not critical thinkers um and uh you know pretty much ever since covid the agenda of you know the world economic forum and all the elites has been to rebuild trust uh the trust they lost during covid and all of that and so by having all of these like emotional triggers and you know one after the another after another i mean a lot of it seems like it's trying

to cultivate um you know a certain segment of the population like make them trust or you know practically in some cases maybe even uh beyond trust into like borderline worship um some of these figures that have been held up to us as, you know, the, the solution to all of our problems. Um, and you know, no, no one person is going to get into the white house and solve all our problems, even if he's great and not a lesser of two equals candidate, you know? Um, and I think again, that, uh, Americans need to return to like the core values of the country,

like individual responsibility and resilience and like take responsibility for building alternatives to this stuff. You don't want to comply with digital ID and programmable surveillable money, make new systems, make new alternative financial systems, alternative any system. But I think financial is definitely an important start because, you know, a lot of this ultimately leads to people being like financially deplatformed or like completely cut out of the economy, right? But there's a lot people need to be doing in terms of solutions. And the more we're distracted by like the political circus in the United States, you know, the less time people

are spending building and also letting people in the public know about solutions. Because as we get closer to November, the censorship situation on platforms is going to just get crazier than it even was last time or any of the previous elections. It's going to be harder to get information out. So either alternatives for communication or information distribution or finances, whatever, a lot of that has to be thought about and at least start to be developed like now would be good that's why i was holding my thumb out because i think the combination of bitcoin lightning noster e-cash is what people should be focusing on um to or just solutions building something you know um and a lot of it has not been that a lot of it i

mean it's almost like it seems like sometimes there was an effort to convince some bitcoiners almost like a version of q anon trust the plan like let's just sit back and do nothing and then we're just gonna win uh because bitcoin's the best and then you have i mean uh i don't know i think that complacency is not good people should be building developers should be developing right um and this idea that like we just sit back and do nothing and everything's gonna be like fine and dandy why like all these crazy agendas and policies are being rolled out um you know i i don't think that's good to have whether it's for bitcoin or really anywhere else you know no i know i completely agree no i don't think and i i'm a big proponent of we're going to win

i've written articles about this and i want to make it clear it's not like a complacency it's like you have to believe that you can win so that you can totally agree and so it's trying to instill confidence but white pill here is like i up front and close view to all this due to what we do at 1031 and it is happening people are building um and it is accelerating particularly on noster and ecash things are are really accelerating at a pace that i would not have expected only a year ago or at the beginning of this year even so that gives me a lot of hope and then another thing i want to add sort of unrelated to that but the going back to like the um emotional manipulation that's why i think i've been very online for the last five days

and trying to like figure out because if it was truly and i i like i think i do believe that it was a failed assassination attempt and so like if we're running with the assumption that that's exactly what it was which i tend to believe it was is like they try to manipulate our emotions that way and it failed and so that's been like the perplexing thing for me over the last five days it's like oh fuck like what like they missed and now what does that mean is it like and going back to the divine intervention was it some sort of divine intervention that sort of set a path that the uh incumbent power structure whether it was the democrats or republicans that have set something off or maybe it was truly a lone wolf guy and pure incompetence

by the social or excuse me um uh what's it called the secret service um that's where like for me personally just taking a step back be like oh did they try to manipulate us one way it didn't work and what's the ramifications of that just thinking yeah it's hard it's hard to know what is the manipulation what is the narrative what is the miss what is part of the point yeah exactly it's about the discord uh and sort of the breaking of you know keeping us really highly emotional high easily triggered creatures that become addicted to consuming more content on the service because we're trying to dig to you know the truth you know we're searching for meaning on twitter on reddit uh on 4chan whatever it is i mean they're they're controlled boxes and

we're searching for meaning on there and they they hide a lot of truth uh in in this these shit narratives you know there's a lot about q anon i'm sure that's very true and is you know why people are emotionally manipulated by it, you know, because there's elements of truth to it. There's elements of truth to all of these counter narratives. There's elements of truth to mainstream narratives, but they code it in a way with shit that, you know, that push you towards these boxes, these pens that they want you in.

So I would say that, you know, they want you thinking, was this a miss? Was this not a miss? let's go look at ballistic stuff let's go look at triangulations of points you know they want you thinking about that and consuming it on their platform um because it makes you a highly emotional and easily controllable person and obviously marty i think you're you're one of the best for sure and i'm not i'm not it's not criticizing you specifically because i'm just not um but i mean it's like i see this happen with people that you know i see it happen with myself like i should know better that's why i'm trying to put it out there because i'm just like i'm

just reflecting on how i've been affected over the last five days and trying to lay it out there yeah totally and i think we just in general you know there's there's a lot of understanding and moments of clarity but we really just have to like kind of practice what we preach and do it every day and every moment of every day uh you know because that's how we win again it's an internal thing you know we break away from these silos and these these these data feeds this this slop uh you know disconnect from it and get back to reality go touch grass uh you know go build barter systems go grow things you know yada yada all the typical white pills that we talk about at the end of every episode but but it's true you know go do those things and disconnect because

they they want your attention your attention and your perception is the only commodity your time is the only commodity and and the more distracted we are also the less focused we are in building solutions. I mean, honestly, during COVID and even slightly after, you know, we had enough information to know what the agenda was, you know, and what they were trying to push, this like global biosecurity surveillance state and how they were going to do it, digital ID, programmable surveillable money. Like we have known about this stuff from a long time and we've been, you know, told that, you know, for example, we were held up people like Ron DeSantis, he's against CBDCs against all of this tyranny and stuff but he like has pushed through florida's digital id

arguably faster along than most other states um push the patron like a world economic forum strategic partner uh from france fails i don't think that's how you say it but that's how it's spelled um and like i don't know i mean these guys um are politicians they're beholden to their donors. They have been, I mean, that that's just how it works. Right. And so we need to look at the money behind our politicians and see what that money wants and is trying to drive the country toward. And if you look at both parties, it's essentially the same. Yeah. So, you know, how, however much, you know, we want to get in the weeds of like, Oh, current events. And like, Trump said this, Biden said this, yada, yada, yada going on, you know, we're, you know,

distracted on, on this and not focused on the bigger picture of like what both of these parties are trying to develop, um, you know, and, and impose on the country and we need to be developing solutions. And if we're distracted by all this other stuff going on, you know, we're less focused on, on that. And I think that's, that's part of the goal. And I think also part of like this economy, uh, that they want to build, uh, that involves later on stuff like the metaverse and all of that, you know, it's, um, you know, us little plebs are going to get rewarded with like shit tokens for like what we read and like the stuff we consume and stuff that distracts us all day you know we're sort of being trained for that you know um and it's it's started and there's

people that are like all in for that on some cases you know um but i you know i'm certainly not um and i think people need to be kind of aware of all this that mind if you're still here listening two and a half hours in which i'm sure you are because people listen most people listen every minute of episodes that we record particularly with you two um bitcoiners be aware of what they're trying to do with the cftc and get every company that handles spot bitcoin um basically put under the cftc which is unprecedented cftc commodity futures trading commission only regulates derivatives and futures contracts right now and they're pushing to get it so they can regulate spot bitcoin and again this is i think i believe a fault of the narrative that

bitcoin is a commodity it's not money and the cftc is taking that like oh well if it's commodity we'll regulate everything um and so that's something to be aware of in the midst of this chaos leading up to the election is pay attention to if and when they try to present a bill in congress that would give the cftc domain over anybody that handles spot bitcoin because that would not be good for the industry at all um yeah i think you're in bitcoin and beyond just going to keep seeing these kind of power grabs sneak out here and there um and again the important of vigilance and trying to avoid some of these distractions but as these algorithms become increasingly manipulated it's going to be harder to use them to find useful information you know

I think after the assassination attempt, what a lot of people do after those kind of big events is they go on social media and try and find out what the heck is going on or what the heck happened, right? But if they control these platforms more and more and more and manipulate what people see more and more and more, you're going to find less truth on it. And, you know, all of these platforms, including Twitter X, whatever, are all part of, you know, these efforts to censor as we get closer to the election to protect democracy or whatever, just like last time i mean it's just but it's going to be worse guarantee it this time than last time um and i think people should be really vigilant about that and maybe find other ways to get their news um you

can develop your own news feed on rss you know and take out the social media middleman entirely and not have to worry about the algorithm bumping out something that you actually would need to see or it you know actually important news that's relevant to like your interests and what you care about, you know? And I think the more people that do that, the better off we'll be because the way Silicon Valley and this intelligent Silicon Valley link cabal have so much power is because our world has become so dependent on all of their platforms. And content creators, please stop making content that's just algo slop and just make content that you want to make and that you believe in. And don't change your headlines and don't change

your thumbnails and don't play all the games because then you become incentivized to just become algo slaves and you just end up creating the same content that you started out being a content creator to to circumnavigate and to create truth so you have a lot of responsibility uh and marty i think you do a great job um and and i i think more people out there should be really aware of you know of course there are some games that need to be played to get viewers but never let that affect the actual core of the content because this is such an important time and we need truth tellers. You can't be afraid to talk the truth. Don't let financial interests change your content. Don't let them censor you. Don't self-censor. You know, we need brave people

right now. We need truth. Don't make it about you. Make it about the content. And we just need that so desperately right now, especially the Bitcoin space. It's such an important space and it's so co-opted right now so i'll leave it on that but uh marty thanks so much for having us man this has been a blast it's always a pleasure and i'm gonna take what we talked about to heart uh my youngest is about to wake up for a nap and i'm gonna unplug and go to the beach for a few hours with my family yeah sounds like a plan all right you guys crushing it thank you for coming on and we'll do it again at some point i'm sure in the next few months absolutely all right peace and love freaks