TruthArchive.ai - Related Video Feed

They are implementing a digital transaction control grid that restricts how you use your money, when, and where. Your money could be disabled beyond a certain distance from your home, or taxes could be deducted directly from your account. This system will likely be overseen by global entities like the Bank of International Settlements, rather than national central banks.

Losing cash and relying solely on central bank digital currencies would give authorities the power to predict and control our actions. They could prevent us from doing things like buying a bottle of water if it goes against their rules, such as not leaving our house beyond a certain distance. This is why it's important to keep cash. It's concerning that politicians think they have the right to access all our information.

We've lived under a system where bankers manage monetary policy and elected officials handle fiscal policy. If we centralize control over both, we risk losing personal freedom. This could lead to a digital monetary system where authorities dictate how and where we can spend our money. For example, during the pandemic, restrictions could limit our spending to certain areas or items. It's crucial to preserve cash and checks to maintain an analog system. Experiences from disasters, like the cyclone in New Zealand, highlight the importance of cash for transactions when digital systems fail. Countries like Norway are recognizing this need and are reversing the trend toward a cashless society. Without cash, people face significant challenges during emergencies.

During the peaceful truckers' protests in Canada, government agencies took photos of license plates and used news stories to identify the protesters. As a result, their bank accounts and credit cards were shut down, leaving them unable to pay bills or support their families. This incident made me realize that financial freedom is just as important as freedom of speech. If the government can starve dissenters by cutting off their access to money, we are living in a troubling society.

You know my country was the first where they made cash illegal. 2016, digitalization was forced from the country. 08:00 in the evening announced midnight cash was illegal, the big notes. And 70% of the economy crashed. This digitalization is now going all over the world and there's a war on cash. They call it war on cash. Because cash is merely a medium of exchange. It has no value in itself. It's just a promise. You read the dollar note it says I promise to pay the bearer. But an element of that great reset is you will own nothing. And you might have also followed that while all this has been happening the founder of the World Economic Forum did a book called The Great Reset on how to deal with the COVID crisis.

Speaker 0 argues that there is a shift toward bankers increasingly controlling both monetary and fiscal policy, describing it as a "financial coup d'etat." They claim that for centuries there has been a balance of power between the people's representatives who control fiscal policy (taxation) and bankers who control monetary policy. According to Speaker 0, bankers have decided to use digital technology to assert control over both sides of government policy, leveraging CBDCs (central bank digital currencies), stablecoins, and asset tokens as programmable money. They assert that this move is underway and cite Davos as evidence, noting that Larry Fink, the acting co-chair of the World Economic Forum, is aggressively promoting the idea of moving the entire financial system into a digital control grid. The speaker contends that the descriptions of the bankers’ intentions are becoming very open and explicit, and that the result would be the abolition or collapse of the republic in favor of a system where bankers control both monetary and fiscal policy. The speaker questions whether legislative representatives would remain in any executive or ceremonial role, describing the future as fluid and capable of many directions. They emphasize that the transition has been very incremental for decades, facilitated by the federal government not running its financial statements and operations in accordance with the law and not disclosing them properly. This, they claim, has allowed the shift to occur with the public largely unaware or complacent. Speaker 0 notes that many Americans have accepted the current system because they benefit from it in the short term—“as long as I get my check, I’m okay with the system as it is.” They frame this acceptance as part of the reason the changes have progressed with limited public pushback. In sum, the speaker contends that the bankers are moving to extend control from monetary policy into fiscal policy through digital technologies and programmable money, a process they describe as a quiet, long-running coup that could redefine the balance of power in government.

A senior adviser to BlackRock revealed that a network of over 189 individuals, including leaders from major financial institutions, are working towards a one-world order, one-world taxation, and one-world money. They have rigged international finance laws and plan to freeze the global financial system during the next crisis. BlackRock is being targeted to be classified as "too big to fail," allowing the elites to take control of its assets remotely. The elites, including figures like Christine Lagarde and Ben Bernanke, aim to replace the US dollar with a new system. When the crisis hits, citizens will wake up to a worsening financial situation, with closed ATMs, restricted transactions, and riots. The elites have conducted dry runs, like in Cyprus, freezing the entire banking system and extracting wealth from citizens. This highly coordinated global attack on the financial system will be legal due to rigged laws and regulations.

The speaker describes Thailand implementing a biometric-based system that consolidates everything under one roof and ID folder, enabling authorities to “switch you off at the touch of a button.” Suddenly, over 3,000,000 people had their bank accounts shut down, causing a banking crisis as biometric data is used in every facet of life. Every banking transaction is monitored and scrutinized; any perceived discrepancy is flagged as fraud and punished without due process. Regulations overwhelmed the system, resulting in a full-fledged banking crisis. Over 3,000,000 Thai bank accounts were frozen instantaneously without warning. Transactions are denied, and when people contact their bank to understand why payments failed, they learn that their entire account has been frozen. The bank is investigating them for suspicious activity and potential money laundering or fraud, with no warning, no call or letter, and no clarification about which transaction was flagged. People are completely locked out of their accounts, losing the ability to purchase, fill their gas tanks, or buy groceries. They have been removed from the financial system, and there is no indication of when, or if, they will regain access to their funds. This is the reality for millions of people banking in Thailand. The situation caused widespread fear and panic, leading retailers to stop accepting cards and demand cash, as they also worry about being removed from the banking system. Confidence in the government and the entire banking system evaporated. People rationally fear that their accounts will be targeted next without warning. Government overreach backfired, causing people to withdraw from the banking system altogether, and the speaker notes this as a positive development to see people keeping cash alive. The speaker suggests the episode serves as a test case for what digital ID is going to do and as a warning against accepting it. The closing remark states that the controversy over Charlie Kirk is less important than what will be done with this technology. What matters, according to the speaker, is what they’re going to do with it.

Banks are increasingly restricting withdrawals and deposits. A friend attempted to withdraw $20 but was told he needed to explain its purpose. When he went to withdraw $20,000, the bank required proof of where the money was going. Additionally, attempts to invest in Bitcoin were limited to just $5 a month. This reflects a broader trend towards a cashless society, which could lead to increased control over personal finances. It's essential to diversify your funds across multiple banks, as relying on bank insurance can be risky. Political views can also affect banking access, as seen with Nigel Farage's experience of being debanked. Ultimately, it's crucial to take control of your finances and decentralize your money.

The speaker describes a system introduced in Thailand that centralizes biometric data and requires all ID and financial information to be under one roof. They claim this led to an immediate, nationwide disruption: "simultaneously, over 3,000,000 people had their bank accounts shut down." Thailand is framed as a case study for the use of biometric data in every facet of life, with "Every banking transaction [being] monitored and scrutinized." Any perceived discrepancy is said to be flagged as fraud and punished without due process. According to the speaker, regulations overwhelmed the system, resulting in a "full fledged banking crisis." They assert that "Over 3,000,000 Thai bank accounts were frozen instantaneously without warning as a result of government overreach." When people attempt to check why a payment failed, they are reportedly told that their account has been frozen. The claim is that "All of your accounts for that matter" are frozen, and the bank is "investigating you for suspicious activity and potential money laundering or fraud." There is said to be "no warning, call, or letter, and there is no clarification as to what transaction was flagged." The outcome is described as being "completely locked out of your accounts," losing the ability to purchase, fill your gas tank, or buy groceries. The speaker notes that millions are facing this reality in Thailand, and that the situation has "freaked the entire country out." They add that "thousands of accounts are frozen each week" and that panic has ensued. Retailers are no longer accepting cards and are demanding payment in cash as they worry about being removed from the banking system. Confidence in the government and the entire banking system is said to have evaporated, with people "rationally fear[ing] that their account will be targeted next without warning." The speaker asserts that government overreach has backfired, leading people to remove themselves from the banking system entirely, which they describe as "a really good thing to see, folks." The narrative frames this as a backlash that demonstrates the necessity of keeping cash alive and relying less on a digital system. It is presented as a test case for what the digital ID will do, and a warning against accepting it. The speaker contends that many warnings have been issued for a long time, and emphasizes the need for people to see what is happening. In closing, they say, "All everyone's been arguing over whether Charlie Kirk died or whether he didn't. It doesn't matter. What matters is what they're gonna do with it."

I am against the U.S. Government issuing a digital currency directly to citizens. It would give the government too much power and control, potentially leading to the elimination of cash and complete control over our lives. I warned the people of Italy about this when they were considering vaccine passports and central bank digital currencies. In China, if you don't meet a certain social credit score, the government can restrict your spending abilities. They can limit your credit cards to only work at nearby grocery stores, preventing you from buying gasoline, traveling, or purchasing items and food from other parts of the country or abroad. This kind of government control is concerning and could lead to serious consequences for all of us.

I just did a Fox News appearance in Washington DC, where I talked about digital currency and Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs). I had a revelation about CBDCs during the truckers protest in Canada. The protesters were peacefully asking for their rights, but the government took pictures of their license plates, used news stories to identify them, and then shut down their bank accounts and credit cards. This left them unable to work, pay their bills, or support their families. This made me realize that freedom of currency is as important as freedom of speech. If the government can starve you financially for dissenting, we are living in a concerning situation.

The discussion centers on the main payments system, referred to as PAM, described as the “payments computer” and commonly called PAM by everyone. PAM is responsible for almost $5,000,000,000,000 in payments per year, which equates to roughly a billion dollars every hour. The speakers indicate that, upon their arrival, they observed what they describe as a severe lack of payment metadata: payments could be processed with no payment categorization code and no description, effectively creating payments that were “untraceable blank checks.” The speakers contrast this situation with how such conduct would be viewed in the private sector, stating that if this were a public company, the company would be immediately delisted and the executive team would be thrown in prison. They emphasize that, in the context they are discussing, this kind of exposure is considered normal within the government. The overall point is that the payments system operates with extremely little traceability or descriptive data attached to transactions, creating a scenario they characterize as highly problematic and unacceptable in the private sector but commonplace in the government.

Speaker contends digital ID would bundle everything you have under one, centrally governed ID that can be shut off at will. He uses a World Economic Forum wheel to claim that health care, financial services, food and sustainability, travel, humanitarian response, e-commerce, social media, e-government, taxes, voting, telecommunications, and smart cities would be encompassed and controlled. Dangers cited include overriding existing authority—so that a speeding ticket could lead to cutting off your cell phone and bank access. Right now health cards are governed by the Department of Health, but digital ID would bypass that. You would not be able to access your bank or book travel without it, and CBDCs would enable nearly total monitoring. He also cites Canada's trucker protests where bank accounts were cut, calling such actions illegal.

It is crucial to avoid being tracked by the system controlled by Mr. Global. The goal is to establish a fully digital system that can be centrally controlled. This would allow for limitations on money based on location and restrict what and when you can purchase. Additionally, it could enable taxation without consent and complete control over individuals. For instance, if a vaccine mandate is issued, disobedience could result in the suspension of financial transactions and access to assets.

The speaker discusses a scenario where banks go offline, digital money disappears, and electromagnetic pulse bombs are used to attack major grids. They mention the possibility of a terrorist attack, Russian involvement, or a simulated alien invasion. The speaker believes it's important to talk about these potential threats, despite being labeled fearmongering. They argue that not discussing these possibilities would be irresponsible.

The speaker describes Thailand’s rollout of a biometric, centralized system as having dramatic and disruptive consequences for ordinary banking customers. Once ID documents and biometric data were consolidated “under one roof,” the system enabled the government to switch individuals off “at the touch of a button.” The speaker asserts that, in Thailand, more than 3,000,000 people suddenly had their bank accounts shut down in unison, with banking transactions monitored and scrutinized for perceived discrepancies, and any fraud flagged and punished without due process. According to the speaker, regulations overwhelmed the system, resulting in a full-fledged banking crisis. Over 3,000,000 Thai bank accounts were frozen instantaneously without warning. Transactions were denied, and when people contacted their banks to inquire why a payment failed, they were told their accounts had been frozen and that the bank was investigating them for suspicious activity, money laundering, or fraud. There was said to be no warning, no call, no letter, and no clarification about which transaction was flagged. People were completely locked out of their accounts, losing the ability to purchase, fill gas tanks, or buy groceries, effectively removing them from the financial system with no knowledge of when or if access would be restored. The speaker notes that millions of Thai bank accounts were affected and that thousands of accounts were frozen each week. This led to panic, with retailers refusing card payments and demanding cash, because they were concerned about being removed from the banking system themselves. Confidence in the government and the entire banking system reportedly evaporated, as people feared their own accounts could be targeted next without warning. The speaker asserts that government overreach backfired and prompted people to remove themselves from the banking system altogether, which the speaker frames as a positive development to see people rely on cash again. The broader point drawn is that the Thai experience serves as a warning and a test case for what digital IDs might do. The speaker argues that the episode demonstrates why people should resist accepting such a system. The closing remark shifts from the specific incident to a broader point: while debates about a public figure’s death may arise, what matters is what will be done with digital ID and control systems going forward.

Speaker 0: I had a guy who worked, very, very, very high up at Citibank. And he told me around 2008, he said, Glenn, you know, don't worry about the financial system. And I'm like, uh-huh. And he said, you know, we're never gonna go broke. I mean, do you know how much just the national parks are worth? And I looked at him and said, are you seriously telling me that we should commoditize the national parks? And he said, it's gonna happen. And I wonder now if this is what he was talking about. If it was just a digital not actually selling them, it's just a digital commoditization of our parks. Speaker 1: Yeah. So apply this now to the the phrase that we all heard during the COVID era, you'll own nothing and be happy. Well Yes. There's certain people that want to own everything, and that includes things that have never been able to be owned before that were considered things like the public commons, like rivers, lakes, the ocean itself, natural forests, all sorts of it. These people want to put all of that into the financial system, fractionalize it, tokenize it, and sell pieces of it around, use it to speculate on. Mean, it's It's very insane. Yeah. And so, this is just one aspect of digital currency play. Obviously, there's a lot more than that just going on as well. I would argue that a lot of this push, particularly in The US for dollar stablecoins supposedly being better than a central bank digital currency, also falls into this paradigm we talked about earlier of, you know, moving from the public to the private of the public private partnership because a lot of these stablecoin issuers, you know, if the the big concerns about CBDCs was that they're seasable, they're surveillable and they're programmable, Well, all of those three things also can apply to stablecoins. The only difference is that you would have a private company issue it and control it. But we've seen time and again how a lot of these private entities are willing to do that. When contacted, just look at how Bank of America behaved with January 6, people accused of wrongdoing on that day, for You know, they have no qualms in doing that and engaging in those type of activities. And the biggest dollar stablecoin issuer, Tether, which just hired Bo Hynes from the White House, they have openly said that they are a close partner of the US government for dollar hegemony globally and have uploaded the FBI, the Secret Service and other aspects of the US government onto its platform directly and have seized tethers from people just because government told them to, and this was during the Biden administration. So they obviously are willing to do that under any administration, and it's essentially functioning as a de facto public private partnership, even though we're being told it's a it's much better than a CBDC, but in terms of its impacts on civil liberties, you know, that's not necessarily true. So, again, vigilance is is important here.

All the great work that you have done in health and all the great work you have done in food to preserve food and health freedoms, the minute they get financial transaction control, they will delete all of it. Financial control and controlling the financial transaction train tracks is the meta control that they will use to control food and health. if these guys get a 100% digital system with a digital ID and programmable money, guess what? They're going to dictate, you don't get your vaccine this month, they're going to turn off your money. And when I read it I couldn't understand how do they think they're going to market this, and that's when I realized, oh, programmable money is how they're going to market.

Debanking occurs when individuals or companies are removed from the banking system, often due to political reasons. This has notably affected right-leaning individuals and businesses, while those on the left seem largely unaffected. For instance, some have been debanked for expressing conservative views or being involved in industries like legal marijuana or firearms. This trend has intensified over the last 15 years, with recent actions targeting tech and crypto entrepreneurs. The government applies pressure on banks to debank these individuals, creating a system without due process or accountability. Many affected individuals are forced to operate in cash or seek alternative means to manage their finances, often leading to significant disruptions in their lives and businesses.

We can scare the global population and gain control by implementing measures like vaccine passports and travel restrictions. There are concerns about a potential bank crisis and the introduction of a central bank digital currency that could allow authorities to control people's ability to purchase goods based on their social credit score, similar to China. Some technocrats in the US may support such measures. It's important to question the guarantee of every deposit, regardless of its size.

Speaker 0: Once you've got everything under one roof and you've got all your ID together in one place, it means you can be switched off at the touch of a button. So they brought this system in in Thailand, and suddenly, like simultaneously, over 3,000,000 people had their bank accounts shut down. Thailand has become a case study for the use of biometric data in every facet of life. Every banking transaction is monitored and scrutinized. Any perceived discrepancies flagged as fraud and punished without due process. Regulations have overwhelmed the system resulting in a full fledged banking crisis. Over 3,000,000 Thai bank accounts were frozen instantaneously without warning as a result of government overreach. Transaction denied, you'd contact your bank to see why the payment failed only to learn that your account has been frozen, all of your accounts for that matter. The bank is investigating you for suspicious activity and potential money laundering or fraud. There was no warning, call, or letter, and there is no clarification as to what transaction was flagged. You're completely locked out of your accounts. You have lost the ability to purchase. You cannot fill your gas tank. You cannot purchase groceries. You've been completely removed from the financial system, and you do not know when or if you will regain access to your funds. This is the reality for millions of people banking in Thailand. That's crazy stuff, folks, and this freaked the entire country out. But the article goes on to say, thousands of accounts are frozen each week. Panic has ensued. Retailers are no longer accepting cards demanding payment in cash as they too are worried that they will be removed from the banking system. Confidence in the government and the entire banking system evaporated. People rationally fear that their account will be targeted next without warning. Government overreach has backfired, and the people are removing themselves from the banking system entirely. And that's a really good thing to see, folks. Yeah. So it backfired, and it caused the people in Thailand to see how much they need to keep cash alive and depend on cash. And it's saying it serves as a test case for what this digital ID is gonna do. Well, it also serves as a test case for why you shouldn't accept it. And so many of us have been warning about this for so long, folks, and it's imperative that people see this because this is what's been going on. All everyone's been arguing over whether Charlie Kirk died or whether he didn't, it doesn't matter. What matters is what they're gonna do with it.

Debanking occurs when individuals or companies are removed from the banking system, often due to political reasons. For example, some right-leaning individuals and businesses, like those in the marijuana or crypto sectors, have faced debanking. This practice has intensified over the past 15 years, with the government exerting pressure on banks to deny services to certain political opponents or disfavored industries. Many tech founders and crypto entrepreneurs have been affected, leading to a significant number being debanked or facing legal threats. The SEC has also contributed to this by issuing Wells notices, which signal potential future charges, creating an environment of fear and uncertainty. Ultimately, this results in individuals resorting to cash transactions and other means to manage their finances, as they navigate a system lacking transparency and accountability.

What if an organization like Ericsson controlled the internet? It raises concerns about non-government actors potentially holding governments hostage through monetary systems. This has already occurred with the Federal Reserve and the private nature of systems like SWIFT. For instance, withdrawing large sums from banks often leads to intrusive questions, and debanking is becoming more common. A personal example is the 2019 Central Bank shutdown in Lebanon, where many lost access to their funds, while local politicians managed to retrieve theirs. People often remain unconcerned until they are personally affected, similar to the 2008 real estate crash, highlighting how governance and private sectors operate until individual interests are at stake.