TruthArchive.ai - Related Video Feed

Most of the time, when we send money as donations to developing countries, they spend it by employing Chinese, Turkish, or Russian companies, rarely French ones. However, some claim that 50% of the calls for tenders are won by French companies and that 50% of the money given for development aid is used by French companies. But there is a cosmetic effect in the way development aid is accounted for. For a French company to be counted in a project, for example, a water supply project, it is enough for a French company to have been involved in the project. For example, in a project worth two or three million euros, if a French company has invoiced, say, ten thousand euros of the total, the French Development Agency considers that the market has been filled by a French company. As you can see, it's a huge sleight of hand.

Since 2017, France has spent a staggering amount, allocating 25 billion euros to multilateral funds. This includes contributions to UN agencies, Bill Gates-sponsored vaccine NGOs, and organizations involved in reforestation efforts in the Amazon rainforest. However, according to the Court of Auditors, there's a lack of clarity regarding the allocation and expenditure of these funds, as we're unable to effectively track where the money goes.

Canada's debt stems from a collusion between the government and private banks. The government borrows money from these banks and repays it with compounded interest, leading to increased taxation on Canadians to cover the growing national debt. This cycle results in inflation, as the government allows banks to create money digitally without actual reserves. Currently, banks have only $4 billion on reserve while having loaned out over $1.5 trillion. This situation raises concerns about financial freedom and the need for change. Remember, a small group of people can indeed change the world, as history has shown.

The speaker argues for a movement to deflate what is termed “the parasitic system,” describing it as large-scale states and corporations that siphon wealth from grassroots communities. The core idea is to live independently and locally—growing, preparing, fermenting, storing, foraging, hunting one’s own food and medicine, and swapping within local networks—so as to reduce support for large governments and big corporations. This shift, the speaker claims, destroys inflation, corruption, and power abuse allegedly used by “rich elites” to steal money and power. Key premises include: - Deflating the parasitic system is necessary because people must “start living independently locally and no longer feed and support large scale states and companies.” Otherwise, the decay repeats itself. - Large-scale states and corporations are described as parasitic and destructive by nature due to their excessive scale, which enables wealth to be siphoned upward and concentrates power among an “extreme parasitic sociopathic elite.” - The relationship between parasite and host is invoked: in a healthy parasite-host dynamic, the parasite remains subordinate and non-destructive toward its host. - The speaker characterizes the system as an overarching “multiple host cancer” driven by parasitic sociopathic elites, enabled by the scale of the elites and institutions. - The National Jamming of anti-monopoly or anti-government sentiment (referred to as “NJAM”) is presented as a more gradual return to local living, or a collapse with significant suffering, depending on outcomes. On justice and resistance: - The speaker claims that seeking justice through courts within the parasitic system—described as “the parasitic monster, biggolfpluscorp”—will fail, equating this to asking justice from the parasites that feed on you. - The recommended response is to “starve the parasitic monster” and instead “feed yourself, your household and your local community.” Geopolitical note: - The speaker issues a warning to Belgium to brace for the process described as deflation, citing specific 2024 Belgian debt figures and extrapolations: “Belgian national debt 2024 in billions of euros. Federal Janapr, plus 29.6 to 534.89, sub governments, plus 22%, 652.57, equals 113% of bbp. Extrapolation 2024, plus 108.3 to 724.79, = 125% of BBP.” Source attribution: - The message references Source2mia.org and ends with a request to “Please like and follow.”

The Federal deficit is much larger than reported due to the way Biden's team hid student loan cancellations. The deficit for the previous fiscal year was $1.7 trillion, a 20% increase from the previous year. However, the actual increase was $600 billion, making the deficit $2 trillion. This puts the US on track to be $45 trillion in debt by 2033 and $144 trillion by 2053. Debt service, recessions, and wars further contribute to the deficit. Debt service costs are rising, recessions increase spending and decrease tax revenue, and wars add to the financial burden. With additional plans for global warming funds, corporate welfare, and welcoming illegal immigrants, the Treasury will continue to be looted until there are consequences.

Speaker 0 presents a call to “deflate the Parasitic System,” arguing that growing, preparing, fermenting, storing, foraging, hunting one’s own food and medicine, living off grid, and swapping with local communities—while avoiding big government and big corporations—creates deflation that destroys inflation, corruption, and power abuse by “rich elites.” The goal is to deflate the parasitic big government and corp more and more. Why deflate the parasitic system? The speaker asserts people must begin living independently locally and cease feeding and supporting large-scale states and companies; otherwise decay reoccurs. States and companies are described as parasitic and destructive due to their excessive scale. In a healthy parasite-host relationship, the parasite remains subordinate and non-destructive toward the host. The speaker claims large-scale states and corporations rise above and destroy their hosts until the entire system collapses, characterizing the elites and their parasitic system as an overarching multiple-host cancer that sucks life from common people while enabled by large-scale systems. The NJAM is presented as a more gradual return to independent, local living, or a collapse with significant suffering. The parasitic destructive behavior is attributed to the opportunity their excessive scale provides to siphon wealth from the grassroots to higher levels, creating an increasingly extreme parasitic sociopathic elite. The speaker claims attempts to obtain justice from courts within the parasitic monster (referred to as “biggolfpluscorp”) will always fail, equating seeking justice from parasites that feed on you. Therefore, the recommended strategy is to starve the parasitic monster and instead feed oneself, one’s household, and the local community, with a note to “Brace yourselves in Belgium.” Debt data are provided to illustrate systemic deflation: “System is set to deflate by itself.” Belgian national debt 2024 in billions of euros. Federal Janapr, plus 29.6 to 534.89, sub governments, plus 22%, 652.57, equals 113% of bbp. Extrapolation 2024, plus 108.3 to 724.79, = 125% of BBP. The speaker concludes: “Therefore, let's deflate the parasitic system even more!” The message ends with a source attribution: Source2mia.org, and a call to like and follow.

There's significant fraud in USAID, with radical groups receiving funds they don't deserve. A staggering amount, like a hundred million, is being misallocated. It's crucial to investigate the kickbacks associated with this spending. Who would invest such sums in questionable projects? It's likely that those who received the funds are not returning any to the government, indicating a high level of corruption. The key issue is understanding the extent of these kickbacks.

This wastefulness needs explaining. How was such a squandering of money possible when we ourselves are borrowing from financial markets to finance an ever-increasing debt? Why didn't anyone stop this? The answer lies in ideology. If you question those involved in public development aid, they'll accuse you of opposing gender equality, climate change efforts, and being okay with world hunger. There's a moral blackmail and arguments from authority that paralyze my fellow members of parliament.

They tell us that with our money, they finance global public goods, like replanting trees in Indonesia or the Amazon. Deforestation in Brazil and Indonesia is authorized by these very states. Multinational corporations are profiting from deforestation. Then, French development agencies, authorities, President Macron, the EU, and the UN try to guilt us, holding out the begging bowl, citing climate change. Those countries and corporations profited, but they won't pay. Instead, taxpayers like you will pay. People have been paralyzed by the fear of being seen as pro-climate change, so they say nothing. But it's scandalous! Brazil, Indonesia, and the deforesting multinationals should pay, not French taxpayers. This fleecing must stop immediately.

The transcript presents a call to deflate what is termed the parasitic system, described as large-scale governments and corporations that drain wealth from locals and enable parasitic elites. The speaker, identified as Speaker 0, advocates growing, preparing, fermenting, storing, foraging, hunting food and medicine, living off-grid, and swapping with local communities to avoid big government and big corporations. This approach is framed as deflation that destroys inflation, corruption, and power abuse attributed to rich elites who purportedly steal money and power. Key rationale: large-scale states and companies are parasitic and destructive due to their excessive scale, which concentrates wealth and power away from grassroots, creating an extreme parasitic sociopathic elite. In a healthy parasite-host dynamic, the parasite remains subordinate and non-destructive toward the host. The speaker argues that large-scale systems rise above and destroy many hosts until the entire system collapses, characterizing the elites and their parasitic system as an overarching multiple-host cancer. The NJAM (presumably a model referenced by the speaker) is described as either a more gradual return to independent, local living or a collapse with significant suffering. The central claim is that attempting to seek justice through courts within the parasitic system will fail, likened to asking justice from the parasites that feed on you, hence the exhortation to starve the parasitic monster and instead feed oneself, one's household, and the local community. Geopolitical and financial specifics are introduced to illustrate the systemic scale of parasitism and the necessity of deflation: in Belgium, the system is set to deflate by itself. The transcript provides Belgian national debt figures for 2024 in billions of euros, with a breakdown that includes federal debt and sub-government debt, followed by a stated percentage of 113% of bbp (likely GDP). An extrapolated 2024 figure is given as plus 108.3 to 724.79, equating to 125% of bbp. The numbers are presented as evidence supporting the argument to continue deflating the parasitic system. The speaker references “System is set to deflate by itself,” and repeats the call to deflate the parasitic system further. A source is cited as Source2mia.org, with a request to “Please like and follow.” The message emphasizes a locally oriented, self-sufficient lifestyle as a countermeasure to the parasitic system and urges Belgian audiences to brace themselves.

France must pay the $20 million debt installment to us as promised, with no legal justification for not doing so. While there is no international mechanism to enforce debt collection, it is often more practical for creditors to negotiate with defaulting entities, such as important corporations. The same approach should be taken with France, rather than resorting to force or reprisals.

Most of these projects never actually materialize, often leading only to investigations or studies. French companies, NGOs, associations, and businesses connected to the Agence Française Développement, including international consultants like McKinsey and French consulting agencies, travel to distant countries. They get paid handsomely, sometimes €500 to €1,000 per week, or even €500 per day. With studies lasting weeks or months, the bill can reach €10,000, €100,000, or even €150,000, all paid by French taxpayers for projects that never come to fruition. This not only brings no benefit to France but, more importantly, it also fails to help the countries it's intended for.

In 1994, the New York Fed and the Federal Reserve bought shares in the Bank of International Settlements (BIS). The BIS is described as the central bank of central banks in Sweden/Switzerland, said to operate above the law, with sovereign immunity, the ability to receive and hold money secretly, and to keep money on its balance sheet secretly. The Fed’s purchase allegedly made their relationship with the BIS closer. In 1995, a budget deal “crashed and burned,” and in October there was a claim from the president of the largest pension fund that “they, whoever they are, have given up on the country and moving all the money out starting in the fall.” It was around October 1997 that money purportedly began to go missing from HUD and the Department of Defense. The speaker asserts that from 1998 to 2015, $20,000,000,000,000 was missing from COD and $1,000,000,000,000 missing from HUD. With money going missing, the speaker describes the onset of the “great poisoning.” The argument continues that the next month after the budget deal collapse, OxyContin was approved, HUD predatory lending began, pill mills started, and targeting of low-income neighborhoods intensified, with roundups from the private prison movement. The speaker notes undocumentable adjustments rising sharply. By 09:11, the speaker claims, a reporter had been covering missing money and a large spread was planned for Insight magazine about $3,300,000,000,000 missing, demanding accountability and identifying which private corporations and banks ran the payment systems. The story was expected to run on 09/15/2001. On 09/10/2001, Donald Rumsfeld held a press conference at the Department of Defense stating that the DoD was missing $2.3 trillion (or $3 trillion, depending on version). The next day, 9/11 occurred. James Corbett later released a video, “Nine Eleven Trillions,” describing how offices blown up at the Pentagon and World Trade Center related to securities and financial operations connected to the missing money. The speaker asserts that the Pentagon office blown up housed the Office of Naval Intelligence Research Group investigating the missing money. The Patriot Act followed, DoD received large appropriations, and attention to missing money diminished. Fast forward to 2015, the financials allegedly showed the greatest missing money in one year: the DoD was missing $6.5 trillion in that year. Dr. Mark Skidmore, a budgeting expert at Michigan State University, investigated, and, after reviewing DoD financials, confirmed substantial undocumentable adjustments. He contacted the speaker to help conduct a complete survey of all financial statements from fiscal 1997 to 2015. The survey yielded figures increasing from $12 trillion to $21 trillion missing. When Skidmore published his 2017 report (at missingmoney.solari.com), it was found that the amount missing from the U.S. Treasury matched the total outstanding debt of the United States on the books—$21 trillion. Authorities reportedly pressed the DoD to produce audited financial statements; DoD refused. The Kavanaugh hearings are cited as the moment when the Federal Accounting Standards Advisory Board (FASB) Statement 56 was issued, allowing the government to keep books secret as a matter of administrative policy, extending to private companies and banks doing business with the government. The result, according to the speaker, is that much of the disclosure in the U.S. securities market is meaningless due to government secrecy. The speaker notes that COVID-19 operations could not have happened without FASB 56, claiming it enabled access to unlimited secret money. A quoted anecdote is that one month after FASB 56 passed, Moderna reportedly raised $500,000,000.

The shocking part of investigating government-funded NGOs is that small decisions lead to massive, multi-billion dollar outcomes. I saw one instance of $1.9 billion being sent to an NGO that was formed a year prior and had no prior activity. Government-funded NGOs are essentially a loophole, allowing actions that would be illegal for the government directly but become permissible through nonprofits. These nonprofits are then used for personal enrichment, with individuals cashing out and paying themselves exorbitant sums. It's a giant scam where people can establish an NGO for a relatively small investment and then lobby politicians to funnel vast sums of money into it. There might be some good that comes from them, maybe 5 or 10%, but the rest is not.

The speakers discuss a sharp warning signal they see in precious metals and the implications for the broader economy. Speaker 0 notes that gold prices have more than doubled in the last year and silver prices have nearly tripled. They interpret this as a major warning of an impending financial and economic crisis. They compare this to the subprime crisis warning in 2007, when Ben Bernanke said the issue was contained to subprime and many did not grasp its significance. The speaker explains they were short the market and anticipated the crisis, which subsequently materialized about a year later. Based on the current situation, they believe gold and silver’s rise signals a forthcoming dollar crisis and a US Treasury crisis, suggesting it could hit next year and emphasizing that people need to take action while there is time. The core message is that the metal price increases are not merely inflationary signals but warnings of structural vulnerabilities in US sovereign credit and the dollar, with a potentially tight timeframe for response. Speaker 1 adds that a significant portion of our debt remains sustainable in part because we can trade global currencies, which allows politicians to continue spending more than would otherwise be possible. This point underscores how the international currency system enables higher debt levels and ongoing fiscal expansion, contributing to the conditions that the speakers warn about. Key assertions include: 1) gold and silver surges reflect a looming US dollar and US Treasury crisis rather than just typical commodity inflation; 2) the crisis could emerge within a short horizon, possibly next year; 3) historical parallel to the 2007 subprime episode is used to support the claim that seemingly contained problems can escalate into a major crisis; 4) the global currency system’s flexibility enables continued high spending, contributing to fiscal vulnerabilities. The overall message is a warning to prepare for a potential financial crisis tied to sovereign credit and dollar stability, emphasizing swift consideration of actions in light of the perceived urgency.

The Department of Finance was questioned about the lack of recent evaluation reports on debt management, with the last one being in 2015 despite the debt doubling since then. The Department promised to provide a written response to clarify if evaluations have been conducted but not reported.

We've uncovered some unusual financial discrepancies. Several bureaucrats with modest salaries have amassed tens of millions of dollars in net worth during their employment. One example involves a woman who walked away with approximately $30,000,000. This is particularly notable in USAID. We're investigating the source of this wealth. Perhaps they are skilled investors, but it seems more likely that this wealth accumulation is occurring at the expense of the organization. We're looking into it and trying to determine where this money originated.

It's crucial to address what's called tied aid, which is allocating development aid to friendly countries and exclusively to French companies. For example, when funding transportation upgrades or water access in developing nations, ensuring French companies benefit from these contracts is paramount. I was told this is not allowed by the OECD, an international organization that tracks and compares development aid amounts across countries. If we restrict our development aid to French companies, the OECD won't count it. So what? There are no real consequences. We can still do it; the OECD will just exclude it from their count. Is it better to support French companies, promote France through development aid, and control how we assist countries in need, or appease OECD officials? I don't understand the issue.

We spent $9 billion to resettle around 90,000 Afghan refugees since the fall of Afghanistan, averaging about $100,000 per person, which seems excessive. My question is, why are we providing any funds when we don't even have an embassy or diplomats in Afghanistan? The funds we provide come through partners like UN agencies and NGOs. We could apply that reasoning to all foreign aid, including funds going to foreign adversaries.

The speaker discusses various financial contributions made by France to different countries and causes. They mention that France has given 138 million euros to Papua New Guinea and Congo for forests, 500 million euros to Brazil for forest preservation, and 1.5 billion euros to the Sea Summit. Additionally, they mention that France has given 50 million euros to the Pas-de-Calais municipalities and 100 million euros to Gaza. The speaker expresses confusion about why President Macron would allocate such large sums of money to these causes and asks for an explanation.

Speaker discusses deflating the parasitic system by growing, preparing, fermenting, storing, foraging, hunting your own food and medicine, living off grid, and swapping with your local community to avoid big government and big corporations. This, he claims, destroys inflation, corruption, and power abuse by rich elites who steal money and power, and serves to deflate the parasitic big government and corporate systems more and more. He argues the reason to deflate the parasitic system is that people must start living independently locally and no longer feed and support large scale states and companies, otherwise decay reoccurs. He states that such states and companies will always be parasitic and destructive due to their excessive scale, noting that in a healthy parasite-host relationship the parasite remains subordinate and non-destructive toward the host. The speaker contends that large scale systems rise above and destroy their many hosts until the entire system collapses. He characterizes the elites and their parasitic system as an overarching multiple-host cancer, sucking life from common people at the same time, driven by parasitic sociopathic elites and by people being enabled by large scale systems. He mentions the NJAM as either a more gradual return to independent local living or a collapse with significant suffering. The reason given for parasitism is that excessive scale allows wealth to be siphoned away from the grassroots and concentrated higher up in the system, creating an increasingly extreme parasitic sociopathic elite. He also asserts that seeking justice from the courts of the parasitic monster, biggolfpluscorp, will always fail, equating that to asking justice from parasites that feed on you. Therefore, he advocates starving the parasitic monster and instead feeding oneself, one’s household, and one’s local community. He adds a regional cue: Brace yourselves in Belgium. The speaker cites Belgium’s system as evidence and claims the system is set to deflate by itself. He provides debt figures: Belgian national debt 2024 in billions of euros; Federal Janapr shows an increase from 29.6 to 534.89; sub governments plus 22% totaling 652.57 equals 113% of BBP; extrapolation for 2024 plus 108.3 to 724.79 equals 125% of BBP. He concludes, therefore, to deflate the parasitic system even more. Source noted as Source2mia.org, with a request to like and follow.

Where's the money going? $520 million for environmental, social, and governance investments in Africa. $25 million to promote biodiversity in Colombia. $40 million to include sedentary migrants. $42 million for Johns Hopkins to research social change in Uganda. What about us? $70 million for Purdue to research solutions to developmental challenges. Then, $10 million for circumcisions in Mozambique, $9.7 million for UC Berkeley to develop Cambodian youth enterprise skills. $2.3 million to strengthen independent voices in Cambodia, $32 million to the Prague Civil Society Center, $14 million to improve public procurement in Serbia, $486 million to strengthen elections, including $21 million for voter turnout in India. It continues: $20 million for fiscal federalism in Nepal, $19 million for biodiversity in Nepal, $1.5 million for voter confidence in Liberia, and $47 million for improving learning outcomes in Asia. This involves hundreds of billions of dollars, and I could continue reading examples all day.

France must pay the $20 million debt installment they owe us, as they promised to do so without any conditions. However, there is no legal means to enforce international debt collection. Typically, it is more practical for creditors to negotiate with defaulting corporations rather than resorting to force or retaliation. The same approach should be taken with France.

The cost of corruption in France has been estimated by the European Parliament to be 120 billion euros per year, which is more than tax evasion. This corruption is not only limited to France, but also exists throughout the European Union, with a total cost of 980 billion euros. The citizens are often unaware that they are victims of corruption, as it leads to fewer public services, higher taxes, and injustices in accessing jobs and assistance. It is important to inform citizens about the impact of corruption and hope that they will vote differently in the future.

We're spending massive amounts of money in other countries on things nobody's ever heard of. $520 million for environmental, social, and governance investments in Africa. $25 million to promote biodiversity in Colombia. $42 million for Johns Hopkins to research social change in Uganda. $10 million for circumcisions in Mozambique. $9.7 million to UC Berkeley for enterprise skills in Cambodia. $32 million to the Prague Civil Society Center, and $14 million for public procurement in Serbia. We're giving $21 million for voter turnout in India, while Nepal gets $20 million for fiscal federalism. Millions more are going to biodiversity in Nepal, voter confidence in Liberia, social cohesion in Mali, and learning outcomes in Asia. It's fraud, and I could go on all day.