WHEN figures in power decide what we are allowed to know or consider, question and discuss, it truly is time to worry.
The cancel culture ‘movement’ which began with ‘no-platforming’, banning and sacking academics for whatever unremarkable comment offence was taken at, went up a whole new gear in 2020. For the last few years (until the era of Covid) what we mainly saw was the punishment of thinkers such as Tim Hunt, Germaine Greer, J K Rowling, Jordan Peterson and David Starkey for challenging woke orthodoxy, whether consciously or unconsciously, and for causing ‘offence’. Hunt observed that women scientists cried. Greer was ‘no platformed’ for rejecting trans ideology. Rowling’s actor stars disavowed her for similar honesty, Peterson had his Cambridge visiting fellowship offer withdrawn for being Peterson, I think. Starkey was stripped of his fellowships, honorary and otherwise. For one careless word. They were all put into the public pillory of shame.
We may look back to those halcyon days when only reputations, honour and careers were at stake. Over the last year a whole new order of censorship dictated by Big Tech has come into being that would limit our very knowledge and freedom to think. Sceptics and dissenters are now demonised not simply as reactionary, racist or Right-wing, but as conspiracy theorists or wacko. Whether it was President Trump, America’s Frontline Doctors, or any other scientist or medic sharing information on Covid treatments such as hydroxychloroquine last year, Twitter, YouTube and Facebook took it upon themselves to ban the information altogether – or mark it as fake news. Twitter’s deletion of President Trump’s account last week was not the first time. Heaven forfend he should be allowed to say that schoolchildren do not die of Covid. Now, encouraged by Biden’s certification by Congress, the ‘Left-Liberal’ Silicon Valley, Big-Tech corporate-authoritarians have been doubling-down on the no-platforming, de-following and outright censorship as Will Jones reported yesterday.
That makes them particularly sensitive to anything that imputes them or is critical of their new role as public mind shapers and propagandists, as dictators of the parameters of debate. On this front one woman has proved very threatening. Her name is Catherine Austin Fitts. She is an American investment banker and former George H W Bush adviser whose dystopian view of Western democracy includes an unfavourable analysis of ‘the emergence post-Covid of a global elite, hell-bent on controlling and exploiting, well, everything’.
She believes they have already ‘taken over control of the money, real estate, business ownership, the freedoms defined in human rights and the US Constitution, and have succeeded in undermining the democratic process. Including stopping Trump’.
Whatever you may think of her thesis after reading it, you surely should be allowed to consider it. In my view it has more than a kernel of truth. Her idea of injectable mind control may seem a step too far but she’s totally on the money in terms of control and propaganda and Big Tech pulling lots of strings. Her background in finance, banking and politics make her a highly credible witness. Perhaps this is why YouTube last week suddenly ‘disappeared’ the major interview she’d given on these matters.
It went down in front of my eyes as I was watching it. I managed to find a less good quality recording on Vimeo and arranged to get it transcribed in case that went down too, to save it in a non-ephemeral form for posterity.
Here it is for you to judge whether you should be allowed to consider her analysis or whether it should be banned.
Transcript of Catherine Austin Fitts full interview, Planet Lockdown
CATHERINE AUSTIN FITTS: My name is Catherine Austin Fitts, I’m the publisher of the Solari Report and managing director of Solari Investment Advisory Services.
INTERVIEWER: And what do you think is happening economically as a result of all this?
CAF: So what is happening . . . I just published a huge study called The State of Our Currencies. And what I describe is the fact that, for many decades, the dollar has been the reserve currency. And the system is what I would describe as long in the tooth. And the central bankers are trying to bring in a new system, but it’s not ready to go yet. And what we’re . . . we’re in a period of great change and uncertainty where the central bankers are trying to keep the dollar system going and accelerate . . . so, they’re trying to lengthen the dollar system and then they’re trying to accelerate bringing in the new system. And they have to bring in the new system without anybody quite realising exactly what it is. So we’ve had a global reserve currency system, the dollar, and it needs to evolve and change. And it’s long in the tooth. There’s lots of unhappiness with the system. And the central bankers are trying to bring in a new system and to do it, they’re trying to extend the old and accelerate the new. And it makes it a very chaotic thing, since much of the new is being tested and tried and prototyped and it involves many different industries. So I describe the new system as the end of currencies. So it’s . . . we’re not bringing in a new currency, we’re essentially bringing in a new transaction system that would be all digital and essentially end currencies as we know them. So what they’re trying to do is . . . involves, essentially, all the money on the planet. So it’s big, it’s complicated, it’s messy. And the challenge they have is: how do you market a system that, if people understood it, nobody would want? And of course, the way you do that is with a healthcare crisis.
I: And why is a healthcare crisis good for that?
CAF: Because generally, if . . . if a few people want to control the money, the question is, how can you . . . you know, how can you herd all the sheep into the slaughterhouse without them realising and resisting? So the perfect thing is invisible enemies. So we had the war on terrorism, you know, with invisible terrorists. And then . . . then now a virus is perfect, because it’s invisible. You can’t prove that it doesn’t exist because it’s visible (corrects herself) invisible. So invisible enemies are always the preferred one, particularly if they scare people. If you can use fear and introduce significant fear, then people will need government to protect them from the invisible enemy. Then the second tactic, which is very effective, is divide and conquer. And so, in the meantime, if you can use the media, the media plays a very important role. If you can turn men and women against each other and black and white against each other. One of the reasons you import a lot of immigrants into . . . into Europe is turn the general population against the immigrants and then you need government to be in the middle. And, you know, so these are all, whether it’s divide in tactic, or invisible enemies, these are all ways to institute fear and get people to go along with things. And of course, the invisible virus allows you to do enormous control mechanisms. You can stop people from gathering. You can stop people from organising. You can stop people from getting together and talking about what’s going on, et cetera, et cetera. And if you digitise it with contract tracing, then you can control who’s talking to whom. If you can get them to do all their work and education online, you can literally listen to everything they’re saying. So you can . . . you can institute extraordinary amounts of surveillance all in, you know, the theory that we’re protecting you from the invisible virus. It’s very clever, you know, and as you can see, it’s working in . . . with many people, not everybody, but many people. So to me, a lot . . . and I don’t . . . I don’t want to underestimate the ability of the leadership to introduce pathogens that will kill people. And I don’t want to suggest that people aren’t getting sick. But essentially what you’re trying to do is you’re trying to get people to buy into a solution before they see where it’s ultimately going to go. Because you’re talking about a transaction system that is no longer currency, it’s a control system. So it’s like a credit at the company store. If every central bank comes out with a digital central bank currency, they have the ability to turn your money on and off. So if you don’t behave, that’s it. And of course, as we know, they want to combine this with transhumanism, which means literally, you know, I take injections that can institute the equivalent of an operating system in my body. And so I’m hooked up to the financial system literally physically.
I: To step back to the beginning a little bit, a little 101.
CAF: Sure.
I: Is . . . what is the actual effect of the lockdown measures?
CAF: So what you’re doing is you’re trying to . . . I used to call the Patriot Act the Concentration and Control of Cash Flow Act, and this is a very similar process. You’re trying to dramatically centralise economic and political control. So let me give you an example. We have 100 small businesses on Main Street in a community. You declare them nonessential, shut them down. Suddenly, Amazon and Walmart and the big box stores can come in and take away all the market share. In the meantime, the people on Main Street have to keep paying off their credit cards or their mortgage. So they’re in a debt entrapment and they’re desperate to get cash flow to cover, basically, their debts and their day-to-day expenses. In the meantime, you have the Federal Reserve institute a form of quantitative easing, where they’re buying corporate bonds. And the . . . and the guys who are taking up the market share can basically finance at, you know, zero to one per cent – or their banks can – zero to one per cent, when everybody in Main Street is paying 16 to 17 per cent on their credit cards without income. So basically, now you’ve got them over a barrel and you can take away their market share. And generally, they can’t afford to do it, they say, because they’re too busy trying to find money to feed their kids. In the 2016 election cycle, we saw the general population support candidates who represented populism in a variety of different ways. So Bernie Sanders was a populist relative to the other candidates. Donald Trump was a populist relative to the other candidates. And literally what the sort of global capital class realised was they had a problem that that, you know, that could be solved by destroying the independent income of small business and . . . and sole practitioners and people who had independent forms of income. So if you’re a doctor, if you’re a lawyer, if you’re a CPA [an accountant] and you have your own practice, you are generally going to . . . you are going to support the populist candidates. And so the way to shut the populist candidates down is to shut off their income and support, which is: you put Main Street out of business and then there’s nobody to finance a Bernie Sanders or a Donald Trump. There’s nobody to support him.
I: A-ha. So, I mean, do the . . . do the lockdown measures appear to you to be . . . it’s more of an economic thing than a virus mitigation thing?
CAF: So this is an economic war and you’ve basically had sort of the top 1 per cent. So since April, we’ve seen global billionaires increase their net worth by 27 per cent. Now, what that’s . . . what that says is this has been a very successful global economic war, because what you’re having is the sort of global capitalist class – and I’m . . . I shouldn’t call it capitalism because it’s not, it’s much more totali— . . . it’s economic totalitarianism. What you see is they’ve been able to consolidate fantastic amounts of economic wealth, not just by deleting the income of the middle class and consolidating it into their companies, but by significantly improving the wealth and power of the largest G7 developed countries and China vis-a-vis the emerging markets. So, you know, the . . . the countries with the most advanced technology and the access to A.I. and software and to the sort of digital systems, including through space, are dramatically consolidating economic power vis-a-vis the weaker nations. So we’re seeing a consolidation of economic power, centralisation both into the . . . the wealthier and the more powerful nations and . . . the, basically, top 1 per cent who control them. So I would describe the you know, the . . . what Covid-19 is, is a . . . the institution of controls necessary to convert the planet from democratic process to technocracy. So what we’re watching is a change in control and an engineering of new control systems. So think of this as a coup d’état. It’s much more like a coup d’état than a virus. So, for 20-some years in the United States, we’ve had a financial coup d’état. And we knew in . . . at the end of 1995, a decision was made to move much of the assets and money out of the country. That was part of . . . of, sort of, doubling the global economy with globalisation. And they knew that once they’d finished moving all those assets, that they would have to consolidate and change the . . . the fundamental system. So after the financial coup, you’ve stolen all the money in the pension funds, you’ve stolen all the money in the government. And now rather than turn and tell people, ‘Well, we stole your money’, you need an excuse that will allow you to consolidate and change the fundamental system. And so you have a magic virus. And the magic virus is, ‘Oh, you know, we have to fundamentally change the system. You know, thanks to the magic virus, there’s no money in Social Security, thanks to the magic virus, there’s no money in the Treasury.’ You know, and you have your perfect magic excuse.
I: Everything can be blamed on the virus.
CAF: Oh yeah, the magic virus can . . . you know, it’s amazing because . . . because every implication of the financial coup has been magically solved by the magic virus. It’s quite . . . if you’re a financial person and you look at the world through the mathematics of time and money, it’s quite amazing that anybody believes it. But they do.
I: Yeah. Yeah.
CAF: Right. It’s part . . . it’s part of joining the, you know, what C J Hopkins calls the Covidian Cult, you join the cult and you say, ‘Oh yeah, yeah, yeah. Well the magic virus took all the money from Social Security. The magic virus caused our pension funds to, you know, not be sufficient.’ Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.
I: So what do you think the technocracy that we’re being pushed towards looks like?
CAF: So, technocracy . . . the technocracy that they’re pushing towards is what is called transhumanism. So, essentially, what you do is you use injections to inject materials into the body that create the equivalent of an operating system. So everybody knows the idea of Microsoft causing you to download an operating system in your computer that gives Microsoft and a variety of other players a back door into your computer. And . . . and every month or two or three, you’ve got to update it because there are viruses, right? It’s back to the magic virus that can solve all problems. And so . . . so this is a similar system for your body. You inject materials into your body that essentially create the equivalent of an operating system and a receiver, and you can literally hook everybody up to the cloud. And that includes hooking them up in a way that their transaction system, you know, the Bible calls it the mark of the beast, is one way people know this stuff, but you’re . . . you’re basically talking about being able to digitally identify and track people in connection with their financial transactions. So it’s a world of zero . . . zero privacy. But more importantly, what’s important to understand is you . . . if you . . . if you then institute one or more central bank cryptos, you’re now talking about a system where every central bank of the world can shut you off individually from transacting if they don’t like the way you’re behaving. So many people are familiar with the social credit system in China. It’s very similar. You’re . . . you’re basically if you . . . if you installed the smart grid in their car, their community and now in their . . . literally in their body, you’ve got 24/7 surveillance. And if people don’t do what you say and behave the way you want, you know, they can and . . . and will shut off your money. So, and . . . and they’ll also have spatial control: if they say you can’t travel more than five miles, that’s it. You know, because you’re in a . . . you’re in a complete digital control system and it’s controlled by the central bankers through the money. We’re digitising everything, but it includes the human body as well and the human mind. So this system comes with complete control, not only of your ability to transact financially, which is hooked up to your body, but very sophisticated mind control technology through the media and those cloud connections. So . . . so basically, you’re talking about hooking up into the Borg, if you will. And . . . and so transhumanism and technocracy go hand in hand. Now, I would describe this is a slavery system. So we’re talking about shifting out of freedom, where we have freedom to roam and freedom to say what we want, into a complete control system 24/7, including mind control. Now, the challenge before us is if the, you know, sort of the committee that runs the world, my nickname being ‘Mr Global’, if Mr Global wants to go to a slavery system and we want to remain a human civilisation, then we have a fundamental disagreement. And that is the disagreement before us.
I: And we get to the . . .
CAF: Uh huh.
I: . . . the diagrams here.
CAF: Okay. So if you look at what’s going on, we have the tech people building the . . . the clouds and the telecommunications. We have the military doing space and Operation Warp Speed, so they’re putting up the satellites. Okay? Then we have Big Pharma, which is making the injections that are full of these mystery ingredients and change, modify your DNA and for all we know, make you infertile. And then we have the media pouring out the propaganda. And then we have the central bankers engineering the, to . . . to the crypto, the central bank crypto systems. So you have these different pillars. And it’s very important when you look at what’s going on day to day, particularly in the media, they’re trying to keep them separate so that you can’t see how they’re going to come together in an integrated system which is basically integrated into your body and your mind.
I: For what purpose?
CAF: To institute the slavery system. So in other words, if I am going to do everything through a smart grid and I need to run the smart grid into your neighbourhood and then I need to run the smart grid into your body, the question is, how am I going to build it out in your neighbourhood and build it out in your body without you seeing the trap? Right? So . . . so that’s why you try and keep these different lines separate. So if you listen to the central bankers, they try as hard as they can to stay away from these conversations. So it was interesting, I was watching an IMF presentation on cross-border payments and the Federal Reserve Chairman, the head of the IMF, mentioned the Digital Global ID system. And you would have . . . the Federal Chairman, the Federal Reserve Chairman, almost blanched and you could energetically feel him moving like a galaxy away, like, ‘No, no, no, no.’ Because, you know, there are more . . . there are 325million Americans and there are more than 325million guns. And he doesn’t want everybody to see this until the trap is thrown, it’s too late.
I: We’ve been put in a trap this year?
CAF: Yes, right. But the door hasn’t shut. So that’s why . . . the reason we’re talking is because transparency can blow the game. It’s interesting because . . . in . . . in the beginning of the year, when I wrote the article Injection Fraud and said Bill Gates is trying to download an operating system in your body just the way you download it in your mind and use virus as an excuse to have to update it, you know, to . . . to make it work for his back door every day, three months later . . . and then . . . and then Corbett did a great series on Gates and several people came out and sort of reaffirmed this. And . . . it was in the fall, Yahoo! Finance did a poll . . . published a poll saying that 44 per cent of Republicans thought Bill Gates wanted to chip them. And I said, ‘Okay, we’re making progress’ (laughs). So, you know, and that’s exactly when Gates sort of disappeared and they brought out Operation Warp Speed because they needed . . . and, interestingly enough, the person they chose to run Operation Warp Speed was an expert on injectable brain-machine interface. He used to head research at GlaxoSmithKline and he’s a brain-machine interface expert.
I: It’s a creepy resume for that job, huh?
CAF: It’s a perfect resume for that job. You know, here’s one of the most important developments that happened in 2019. In addition to the . . . to the approval of the (word or words unclear) plan by the Central Bankers in Jackson Hole was the issuance by the Department of Defence of the JEDI Cloud contract to Microsoft. So you had Amazon receive . . . Amazon is essentially a CIA and intelligence agency contractor. They started generating profit when they entered into major contracts with the CIA to provide the clouds, not only for the CIA, but all 17 US intelligence agencies, through that umbrella cloud contract. So you now have Amazon running the intelligence agencies contract. This year, (word unclear, ‘Latos’?) did a big contract, or at the end of 2019, (word unclear, ‘Latos’?) did a big contract with the . . . with the Navy and then the DoD [Department of Defense] did the JEDI contract. And so those three huge cloud contracts give you the ability, once you get everybody hooked up into them, to radically re-engineer how the . . . how the cash flows work. So you can literally shut down all small business, or almost all small business, put everybody on a universal basic income, which is basically a control system, and run it all through the . . . through the military clouds.
I: So you can . . . you can see the direction we’re headed, but it’s a little uncertain as to . . . as to why? Or . . . ?
CAF: No, it’s . . . it’s simple. Technology gives you the ability to institute a complete control system and further centralise economic and political control. So I’ll give you a perfect example: the reason the African American slave trade ended, there were two reasons, in my opinion. One is you couldn’t perfect collateral. So the banks in London kept losing money because the plantation owners, when the commodities market were down, would sell their slaves west and the banks couldn’t go get their collateral. So they would finance the purchase of a slave at, say, 50 per cent loan to value ratio. And then when the commodities market’s down, they’d sell the slaves, say they ran away and the banks would be hung, right? And the banks couldn’t prove that, you know, Harry was their slave, because they couldn’t . . . they had no way of perfecting collateral. Okay? So . . . so that was number one. The second was the Haitians rebelled and . . . and the Europeans sent several armies in to try and quell the rebellion and never could. The Haitians were too good. Okay? Now, if you look at digital technology, you can perfect the collateral, okay? And with space weaponry and . . . and the kind of weaponry you have from space and surveillance, you can put down any rebellion. Right? So the reasons that the slave trade, which was unbelievably profitable, the history of the world is slavery is the most profitable business. It’s more profitable than mining, it’s more profitable than . . . than narcotics. I mean, it’s . . . it’s more profitable than all the addictions. So if you now have the technological capability of implementing slavery, their attitude, I think is, ‘Okay, let’s do it.’ Right? And part of it is technology also makes it much easier for a small group of people to get together and be very powerful. So, for example, if they bring in breakthrough energy technology, the danger is a small group of crazy people can weaponise it. So technology is powerful. The more powerful technology you integrate, the more danger there is you lose control. Now, there are other theories as to why people would want complete control. So for . . . I’ll give you another reason, you know, given the difficulty of feeding and managing a population that’s getting ever larger, if you now have biotechnology that allows Mr Global to live for 150 years, you know, you can’t afford . . . you can’t keep that secret, right? If . . . if the wealthy are living for 150 years and we’re not, you can’t keep that a secret. So . . . so why not downsize the population, integrate robots, use robotics for everything, and you can have a very wealthy and luxurious life without all the management headaches. Right?
I: So the kind of breaking of society into different classes or into an uber class and a vast peasantry, mixed with robotics?
CAF: Yes. Yeah. In other words, what I think, what’s trying . . . what’s trying to happen here is Mr Global is using technology to move to a system where between robotics, A.I. and software, a few people can control the many with far less headaches and fear. You have to remember, Mr Global is very, very afraid of the general population.
I: Their fear?
CAF: Yeah, they’re very afraid, because if you’ve been keeping . . . you know, several times, I’m told, the leadership in the United States has gotten together to discuss how can we undo the secrecy. And each time they come to the conclusion, it’s impossible. You can’t undo the secrecy, because the liabilities are too enormous. So if you are the swamp and you’re guilty of all the different things the swamp is guilty of, and you try and open the window on the secrecy, you run tremendous risks, tremendous risks. So you’re afraid of the general population. And the history of governance is, you know, the general population occasionally does turn and kill the leadership. So, the 325million people in America, there are more guns. So, you know, my guess, the reason J Powell was back-pedalling when the head of the IMF was talking about digital identities is: he’s sitting there knowing he’s got three 325million people and more, and a lot of them have guns and they don’t have a lockdown yet. This is why the Second Amendment is such a fractious issue. Most people around the world don’t understand why people in America are so rabid about owning guns. And, you know, the first reason they’re rabid about owning guns is they don’t understand the power of mind control. So, you know, so if I can institute total mind control, which is what this system is, you know, guns aren’t that dangerous to me. But, you know, the leadership is . . . to do what they want to do, it would be very, very convenient if they could bring in the guns. And you’ll see if the Democrats win this election, that’s the first thing they’re going to try and do after making everybody wear face-diapers, they’re going to try and bring in the guns. And this is why the Republicans holding the Senate has been such a big issue.
I: Yeah.
CAF: Because they can’t do it if the Republicans hold the Senate.
I: The election’s such a mess, huh?
CAF: So here’s the thing. When I try and tell everybody, you know, because I . . . I grew up in Philadelphia and my first boyfriend’s father was a ward leader who used to go out with a roll of cash and buy all the votes every election. So, you know, there’s an old tradition in America of voting fraud. And what I tell everybody is: neither one of these candidates would have been the candidate without the voting fraud to begin with. So, you know, we’re in a funny position, but I’ve never seen the voting fraud as blatant. And I think to a certain extent, you know, it’s interesting, they could not have stopped a Trump landslide without Covid-19. So one question I have is how much of the . . . – because I thought they would do this after the election – how much of the timing of the healthcare op is basically designed to make sure they don’t get a populist president? Not that Trump isn’t . . . you know, it’s hard for me to think of Donald Trump as a populist, because he’s very much on board for the pro-centralisation team. But he’s, as Michael Moore has said, he’s the American people’s way of saying ‘F. you’ to the leadership. So I think it was very important to them to get rid of Trump, which they’re trying to do. The problem is they’ve used massive voter fraud to do it. And . . . but they’ve used the fraud in a way that it’s obvious that the fraud is off the charts. And it’s almost as though, you know, they’re turning to the . . . the population, which they’re trying to turn into a cult and saying, ‘You have to pretend this guy is the president, even though you know he’s not.’ (laughs) So . . . so, you know, we have a fake virus and a magic virus and a fake president and a magic political system. And it’s . . . you know, it really is getting very cult-like, it’s the only thing I can say.
I: Yeah. It’s almost like a switch was flicked this year and we’re in bizarre world, right?
CAF: So we’ve been in bizarre world from the minute they started to . . . to steal the money, we moved into a bizarre world. And I think, you know, the only difference is now, as they moved all the money and the official reality moved away from reality even further and further, you know, that’s part and parcel of the secrecy, many people thought they could stay on the middle of the road. And now what’s clear is, you know, you have to go with the cult or you have to go with truth. The middle of the road is . . . is going away. And so everybody has to choose which they want. Let’s go with the riots. Okay, so . . . so when the riots began and the leadership took the position that you couldn’t go to church because of the danger of the magic virus, but you could go to the riots and protest (laughs) my team and I started to look at the riots. And so we . . . first we made, if you . . . if you come into Solari, there’s a database called Covid-19, and . . . I think it’s Covid-19 riots and Fed. So the first thing we did is we looked at the state and we looked at the cities and whether the governor was Democrat or Republican and then what the Covid cases and deaths were. And then we said, ‘Okay, we’re going to check a box called riots where riots have been.’ So, we started to look at the patterns of the riots vis-a-vis the machine . . . political machine control and sort of the Covid magic virus op. And there was something wrong when I was looking at the data and I could feel, you know, I’m a very intuitive person, I’m saying, ‘There’s something, there’s something here.’ So I said to the wonderful team-mate who was building this, I said, ‘Do me a favour. I want you to put a box called ‘the Federal Reserve’. And I want you to check the box, there are 12 banks, one headquarters and then the branches, for a total of 37 locations. I want you to check the box wherever in . . . in any city where we have a branch or a bank or the headquarters, I want a check.’ And what we discovered is 34 of the 37 bank locations have riots. And I said, ‘Well, wait a minute, that’s a pattern.’ (laughs) There’s something here. Let’s drill down.’ So we started with Minneapolis and we said, ‘Let’s take the data of all the buildings that were harmed or burned, or businesses and we’ll map it. You know, we’ll do a GIS software and we’ll map where these businesses were and how close they were to the Federal Reserve Bank.’ And so the first thing one did, there’s a . . . there’s a street going across Minneapolis called Lake. And we map them. And one of the things we did when we mapped them was we drew pictures of where the opportunity zones were. Do you know what an opportunity zone is? An opportunity zone is a tax shelter mechanism created in 2018 to help the tech billionaires, as they sold their stock, avoid capital gains. So you can . . . if you’re Jeff Bezos, who sold $10billion of stock this year, if you were to roll over your proceeds into opportunity zone investments and handle it in a certain way, you could avoid all capital gains tax. So this is fantastically profitable. Now, if you look at the riots, when I first saw how all the buildings and businesses destroyed along Lake Street were right at the bottom of the opportunity, I started to laugh and I said, you know, ‘I was Assistant Secretary of Housing. That’s not a riot pattern. That’s a real estate acquisition plan.’
I: So what are you saying it’s . . . it’s to cheapen the prices in the city, (words unclear due to speaking over)
CAF: So . . . so I have a thriving series of small businesses, a lot owned by African-Americans and Hispanics along a particular boulevard in the opportunity zone. If first I declare the businesses non-essential and shut them down, right? Magic virus. So first I declare them nonessential. So now they’re in real trouble, right? Because they can’t do their business. And then I have riots and burn and damage them, right? If I was really clever, I’d pull their insurance right before I did it. I don’t know what the case was, but we’ll see. So, now their business is shut down. They’re . . . now hung on their debt, right? Whether their mortgage or their credit card. But even worse now, their building has been damaged. And, of course, insurance doesn’t cover all the repairs and fixing, right? So, needless to say, it’s going to be a lot easier and cheaper for me to go in and buy up all those buildings, right? Voila. It’s called disaster capitalism. So we then mapped, we did Minneapolis, then we mapped Kenosha, then Portland. And now we’re doing a place in Ohio. And the patterns we’re seeing, if you look at the clusters of where the damage is, just speaking as Assistant Secretary of Housing, those are, in my opinion, real estate acquisition plans completely, you know, especially when they come on top of declaring all those small business nonessential and shutting them down or restricting them. You know, I’m sure you’ve got a lot of restaurants in there.
I: Yeah.
CAF: So, for example, if you look at San Francisco, 49 per cent of the businesses in San Francisco are expected to be out of business by the end of the year. Do you know how much real estate you’re going to be able to pick up cheap on this? It’s going to . . . it’s phenomenal. Now, when you realise that if they sell their tech stocks high, they can pick it up really cheap, what’s important to understand is this makes the economics of building the smart grid out in the Fed cities. Remember, I said 34 of 37 cities have a Fed bank or branch. So this makes building out the smart . . . smart grid around the Fed banks much cheaper, which I’m assuming you want to do if you’re going to come out with a crypto system.
I: Okay.
CAF: Okay. So Mr Global is now coming to the point where . . .
I: Can you explain who’s Mr Global.
CAF: Yeah, so Mr Global is my nickname for the committee that runs the world. The defining characteristic of life on planet Earth is our real global governance system is a mystery. And think about it. It’s phenomenal, we live on a planet and we don’t demand to know how our governance system really works, but instead it’s a secret. So, you know, I have a lot of high-octane conjecture, as (word or words unclear) would say, about who and what that is. But for now, we’ll call it Mr Global. So Mr Global was now implementing robotics. That’s one of the new technologies that’s really starting to make an enormous difference.
I: Can you label that (words unclear due to speaking over)
CAF: Okay, so . . . so here’s our robot and here’s our human. And of course, the question for Mr Global is, you know: which is more efficient, doing what? In other words, if I’m supposed to manage the planet and all the natural resources and harvest it to my benefit and make sure, you know, my risk is reduced, how much do I want to use robots for and how much do I want to do . . . do humans for? Now, the brilliance of hooking everybody into the cloud with a crypto system . . . a crypto system is with A.I. and software I can have the humans teach the robots through the A.I and software how to do all their jobs. And in fact, I was at the Aspen Institute 2017, and I was having a discussion with . . . with a venture capitalist, you know, sort of billionaire type. And he looked at me with these amazingly dead eyes and he said, ‘Look, honey, you know, I can . . . I can take every company completely automated with . . . with software and robotics and fire all the humans. We don’t need them any more.’ I’ve never talked to anybody who didn’t understand the riot part, because that’s a very typical old game.
I: Yeah. (laughs)
CAF: Yeah, especially in poor neighbourhoods.
I: Yeah. Right.
CAF: Yeah. Okay, so do you want me to continue with this? So we have, we have the . . . Mr Global at the top, we have the database and software systems using artificial intelligence. A very important part of this now is the satellite system that’s being put up in the orbital platform. And using telecommunications and digital technology, you have the ability, 24/7, to track and monitor both your humans and your robots. And the question for Mr Global is: what’s more efficient? If I can do everything with robots, then what do I do with the humans? I don’t need them any more.
I: So are we seeing build a kind of human farming or something?
CAF: So, they would describe it as ‘resource management’. And if you look at the technocracy and the writing about technocracy, so many of us describe we’re moving from a . . . you know, from whatever systems we use now to a technocracy. In a technocracy, they . . . they view . . . you have two different visions of the world: my vision of the world is that humans are sovereign individuals whose freedom comes by divine authority. That is what the Bill of Rights, the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution all revolve around: the image of . . . of a sovereign individual as . . . as someone who is free, by divine authority. In the vision of technocracy, a human is a natural resource like a . . . oil deposit, and to be used as such. So they’re not a sovereign individual, they’re labour, and they are either more efficient or less efficient than a robot at different functions. In other words, what I’m saying is Mr Global views the human race like livestock, not someone with which they share empathy. And, you know, they don’t view us as the same species as them. And in fact, with a lot of the biotechnology, they figure they’re going to live much longer lives than we do and live very differently than we do. So there’s been a real . . . one of the . . . one of the challenges with the secrecy, as one group becomes more and more technologically advanced, they separate culturally, legally, financially from all the other groups. In other words, they have literally broken away and created a separate civilisation. They don’t think of themselves as part of our civilisation anymore.
I: And who’s ‘they’?
CAF: Well, that’s the great mystery. And that’s why I call this group Mr Global. And I, you know, my personal experiences with many different people in that group and factions. But ultimately, I can’t tell you who really controls. What I will tell you is the planet is run by force. And so ultimately, the question is: who is the . . . who is the most powerful gun? And that comes down to space, who has the most powerful space presence, space weapons, as well as who controls the sea lanes. So traditionally, control behind the reserve currency came from control of the sea lanes. But then as we’ve moved into space, it’s . . . it’s now become control of both the sea lanes and the satellite lanes. And the question is: who controls what and who has what weapons? One of the reasons you’ve seen a very interesting discussion in the United States for the last two years is Trump has been very verbal about Space Force and what is possible in space. And he’ll make these allusions to our magical weapons in space, at which point the generals look at him very disapproving, like, ‘Don’t talk about that.’ So the answer is, we don’t know. We don’t know. What we do know is part of the competition right now between China and America is that the player who has the most dominant position in space has the power to control the whole planet. So . . . so, the Chinese have a . . . a system called the social credit system, and they’re very much tying their financial transactions and different abilities to travel and do other things to your behaviour. And, you know, we’ve seen different TV shows talk about these kinds of systems. But you’re talking about a world where – and we see in China – where most people are under 24/7 surveillance and then their financial incentives and their financial powers relate to how well-behaved they are. And I would describe it essentially as a . . . as a slavery system, because there’s no personal freedom. So to a certain extent, what technocracy will do is move us to a similar kind of system as the Chinese social credit system.
I: Where if you misbehave, you can be punished.
CAF: Right. So . . . so you . . . so, so in theory, you have to get a certain kind of job to make a certain kind of money in the current system. In the new system, you have to work for a certain kind of company and achieve a certain kind of prominence to be allowed to . . . to move more than ten miles from your home or to be allowed to fly. So there’ll be a pecking order that relates to your freedoms to either travel or roam, or how much, sort of, access you have to resources. So how much money you can make. But remember, you’re going into a system where, if they believe they can automate everything with robotics software and A.I., it’s going to be that much harder for you to share in the benefits and the wealth of the system, because the central group can extract so much more. In other words, they have a one-way mirror. They can see everything you do. You can’t even see who they are.
I: Yeah, okay.
CAF: What’s very important to understand about what is happening is that the majority of people have been . . . if, if we’re talking about a transhumanist system or, you know, in short, a slavery system, most of us have been supporting it and financing it and building it. So when I look at all the Big Pharma executives, why are they building a system where their own children or grandchildren will be slaves? Why are the central banks doing it? Why did they think . . . you know, there’s a theory in America for many years among the sort of moneyed classes that ‘If I make enough money, I can get a waiver, I can get out of it, I can eat organic food, not eat the GMOs, and my grandkids won’t have to take vaccines.’ But if you look at who’s implementing all these different activities, you know, we’re building our own slavery system and that means we have the power to stop. In other words, we don’t have to finance the companies that are doing this. We don’t have to work for the companies that are doing this. And in fact, we don’t even have to pay our taxes because the government is breaking all the laws related to financial management. We have the ability to hold them accountable. So we’re building the prison and we’re financing the prison. And that gives us the power to stop. And that’s why it’s so important that we see where the system is going. There will be no exceptions.
I: So what is the solution?
CAF: Solution is, number one, bring transparency to what’s happening, understand where the system is going, and then stop building it. You know, if . . . if you work for Big Pharma and you’re building this, stop, you know, go find something else to do, like build local fresh food systems so you will have food. You know, so stop financing it, begin the conversation of where this is going and, more importantly, where we want to go, because we’re going to have to rebuild the economy bottom up if we don’t want to be highly centralised. So this comes down to, you know, I call it coming clean. Once upon a time, I was in Washington, I was writing a cheque on my JPMorgan Chase private banking account. And in the meantime, I was engaged in 12 different tracks of litigation, litigating with the people who are trying to engineer the housing bubble. I was trying to stop the housing bubble from happening and I was running a cheque on my JPMorgan Chase personal banking account. I realised, ‘Why am I banking at the bank doing this criminality that’s destroying communities, that’s doing predatory lending?’ And I said, you know, ‘I need to come clean. I need to stop banking there.’ So, you know, if tomorrow everybody woke up in America and stopped banking at JPMorgan Chase and said, ‘You know something, you all are criminals. We want nothing to do with you, we’re out’, and went to a local credit union or community bank, it would be a revolution. It would be a total revolution. If twenty women turned to Big Pharma executives and said, ‘You know something, you’re disgusting. No sex. Bye. Out the door,’ there’d be a revolution. So we have the power to change this, but we’re all going to have to come clean, because almost all of us are complicit in implementing this. It’s not them, it’s us. The solution is for every one of us to come clean. You’re either for the transhumanist slavery system or you’re for . . . for a human system. But if you’re for a human system, then you’re going to have to find a way to make money, you know, and . . . and engage socially in a human system and stop building a transhuman system. Well, the first thing you have to see is you have to get a good map. In other words, you can’t navigate this unless you can see the transhumanist system that is being built and whose building it. But if you’re involved with . . . so let’s go back to the pillars, okay? Don’t help the military build Operation Warp Speed, okay? Don’t help the tech guys figure out how to inject nanoparticles into your body and hook them up to the cloud. Don’t help Big Pharma, you know, make . . . make injections which are poisoning American children to death. Don’t help Big Ag make, grow GMO food that is poisoning America to death. Don’t help the Government Institute corrupt, you know, sort of health crisis regulations that are really, disaster capitalism and making the private equity guys and the billionaires rich. And on and on and on. But if you . . . if you, you know, I’ll just be blunt – get The State of Our Currencies and read it and you’ll know who’s doing this. I mean, it’s pretty obvious who’s doing this.
