Many thanks to Flavio von Witzleben for his kind permission to broadcast the following interview!
Trump is primarily concerned with Donald Trump and always has been.
And we are now confronted with new mRNA, with a more sophisticated censorship network.
We're getting AI for general mass surveillance and - we'll talk about Musk later - if you then look at OpenAI with Sam Altman,
and what kind of guy that is, and how that relates to SpaceX's partnership with WISeKey in Switzerland, for
example... There are eID solutions for governments "out of the box", i.e. these industry-ready eID solutions.
I don't know to what extent this is in line with my idea of freedom and why people don't look at it.
So, one time the Democrats are the Deep State, the other time it's the Republicans.
When it was George Bush's turn, it was the Republicans, they were the Deep State.
Then came the good Democrats and Obama with his Hope program and all that.
Then the Democrats were the good guys and won.
And now the Democrats are Deep State again. Now the Republicans are anti-Deep State again.
So that's always very nice to see there, this Hegelian dialectic of domination.
Interview: Dear viewers, welcome to another interview on my channel.
Today I would like to focus on two dazzling and powerful people:
US President Donald Trump and the richest person in the world, Elon Musk.
I would therefore like to welcome journalist and publicist Tom-Oliver Regenauer, who is
known for his critical and investigative research.
Good morning, Tom, welcome to Switzerland.
Good morning, Flavio. Thank you for the invitation.
Yes, thank you very much for taking the time today.
The reason for our conversation is your new book, which will be published on February 5.
It bears the title "Hopium".
And in this book you also published two articles in which you dealt very intensively with the people I
just mentioned, namely Elon Musk and Donald Trump.
But before we get into your spectacular background research on the current US president,
what exactly is this Hopium all about, Tom?
Hopium is a composite of Hope and Opium, the basic substance for heroin, which was patented by Bayer at some point.
And is, of course, a term that is ambiguous.
There is a nice Nietzsche quote in the book's intro:
"Hope is the worst of evils, because it prolongs the torment of man."
And I think that's quite right, because of course many people place hope in things that are happening now, in the current
developments, some of which are actually positive or something to be happy about - but then in the intoxication of
"hopium", if you call it a drug, they quickly overlook the facts or the things that are happening in the background.
So from that point of view, we record this the day before it's published, so by the time we
broadcast it, the book will probably already be out.
And yes, if you then read the articles in the book, you can also see relatively quickly that a presidential election,
you mentioned Donald Trump, doesn't ultimately trigger anything, that it doesn't change anything significantly.
No matter how many decrees he signs and executive orders he issues, in the end the big agenda, i.e. the meta-level of the UN
sustainability goals, the eID, the technocratic developments, will not change as a result of a presidential election,
even if it is nice that the DEI is abolished somewhere.
That was all announced, we can talk about it again.
Hopium - basically a combination of hope and a drug - and unfortunately a sedative that has affected many people who were
thought to be critical of rule and tyranny as a whole, but now we realize that this was obviously
only the case until their own bubble is back in power.
And that's always very noticeable in America.
One time the Democrats are the Deep State, the other time it's the Republicans.
While George Bush was on, it was the Republicans to be the Deep State.
Then came the good Democrats and Obama with his Hope program and so, then the Democrats won and were the good guys.
And now the Democrats were the Deep State, and now the Republicans are anti-Deep State again.
So that's always this Hegelian dialectic of domination.
--
Yes, and now you've brought up something very controversial. Namely your assessment of the situation,
that Donald Trump will not bring any essential change.
You also explained the whole thing very detailed in an article with the headline "Trump Reloaded" from mid-November.
But if we look at the current situation at the beginning of February, around three weeks since Donald Trump took office, it
is fair to conclude that he is driving forward a significant change, a historic change,
with the more than 200 decrees he has now signed.
Most recently, the federal agency USAID has been closed down.
At the time we recorded the interview, there were huge demonstrations taking place in the USA because of this.
He has announced that he will release the Kennedy files, he has announced that he wants to withdraw from the WHO.
There was a decree banning state censorship and there are now officially only two genders.
I could go on and on with this list. And now you come along, dear Tom, and say, no,
Donald Trump won't change anything significantly.
How did you come to this conclusion?
Well, the question is how long the lecture should be.
So the article does pick up on a few things.
I'll try to go through them one by one.
Yes, first of all, it's not true that USAID is being dissolved.
The correct headline should read CIA front company merges with ministry.
In fact, this should simply be transferred to the State Department and become a part of it.
And USAID is a front company for the CIA, as we have known for decades.
And many regime change activities had been carried out by USAID and the National
Endowment for Democracy especially in South America.
And so, the actual headline is: CIA front company merges with State Department.
I doubt whether this is the way to defeat the Deep State.
On the other hand, of course, the censorship-issue, they say 'we no longer censor'...
The fact-checking network will somehow be disempowered, the fact-checking industry will be disempowered.
On the one hand, this is pleasing, but it negates the fact that the fact-checking industry is no longer needed.
In a technocracy it works, as we know from Twitter: don't confuse Freedom of Reach and Freedom of Speech.
So, the reach is simply restricted.
In other words, you no longer have to censor things because the algorithms and AI are so advanced that in the end
you manage to automatically algorithm away the voices you don't want to see in the discussion room.
So, I no longer have to go and say that Mr. Regenauer should be censored and put on a blacklist, then cancel the
account and delete him, because that looks totally undemocratic.
I can make sure that everything is set up in the background so that, even if he had tens of thousands of followers on Twitter
or X, he only ever gets 20 likes or nobody sees it at all.
This is actually the modern form of technocracy that we are seeing now and you no longer need fact-checkers for it.
And if we then see that he wants to publish some files on Kennedy, that may be all well and good.
But of course the question is, every American knows, I was in America a lot, I worked there a lot, every American
knows that John F. Kennedy was killed by the American state.
If any document actually comes out now, as is postulated, which says that it was Lyndon B. Johnson who gave the order.
To what extent does that change the realization that we already had that the system killed him?
It's not a revolutionary big revelation. Neither is the Epstein customer list.
Firstly, there is no customer list, because the customers have all been known for a long time.
But the question is, when will someone be charged or prosecuted, apart from Ghislaine Maxwell, who is in jail
somewhere and whom Donald Trump wished "all the best" when he was asked about her at a press conference.
So, if you look at all this, all these decrees, also that the DEI is being abolished, that satisfies his bubble, that Ross
Ulbricht was released. He invented Silk Road back then, such a deep web platform, darknet platform, where drugs were then sold.
Of course, he didn't actually make himself liable to prosecution, but people obviously forget that he also sat in a cell for four
years while Donald Trump became president for the first time.
Nor has Edward Snowden or Julian Assange been pardoned today.
So, the people who actually deserved it too, if you follow their story, still haven't gotten any pardons and Ross Ulbricht served
the entire four years of Donald Trump's first term in prison.
Nobody thought of it either.
To me, of course, that seems like I'm throwing candy around, I'm handing out bonuses, I'm giving people something to celebrate,
while at the same time, on the second day of the inauguration, I'm announcing that I want to invest 500 billion in
AI and set up an AI mRNA platform with Sam Altman and OpenAI and Ellison from Oracle , also a CIA company.
So that's not necessarily what I understand by Defeat the Deep State.
Therefore, if you look at it in detail and the article goes into much deeper entanglements and the history of Donald Trump, then
you can see very quickly that Donald Trump is primarily concerned with Donald Trump and always has been and we are now confronted
with new mRNA with a more sophisticated censorship network.
We get AI for general mass surveillance.
And we'll talk about Musk later on - if you take a look at OpenAI with Sam Altman and what kind of guy he is, and how that relates
to SpaceX's partnership with WISeKey in Switzerland, for example, there are eID solutions for governments out
of the box, i.e. they are industry-ready eID solutions.
I don't know to what extent this is in line with my idea of freedom and why people don't consider this.
So it's actually very obvious, the information is all on the table and in the end, people are behaving in this good faith in a
new ruler just as thoughtlessly and gullibly as the people did during Corona, who blindly followed the state when they
were told: it's safe and effective, the vaccination works.
In the end, it's the same behavior.
So, of the people who were thought to be for the freedom of all people, for a slim government and no tyranny, no authority,
one must now realize in large parts that this was not the case, but that they accept authority when the right king is in power.
And in this article you have also dealt very intensively with Donald Trump's CV and questioned a very central narrative of
Donald Trump, namely that he only received a small loan of one million US dollars from his father
Fred Trump as start-up money when he was young.
You have researched that this narrative doesn't hold any water.
How do you come up with that and what, according to your research, were the key events in Donald
Trump's career as a real estate mogul in the 70s and 80s?
Yes, so in principle, of course, the story begins at a young age with a lie.
He always likes to say that he is the great entrepreneur who built the big empire with this one million.
That is Donald Trump's story.
But it was actually the case - and this is not my research, I basically just dug it up again, I think it was the New York Times
that wrote a long article about it at the time - that Fred Trump, the father, earned most of his money with housing
projects, which today are mainly the ghettos of America or New York, and then basically with subsidies.
So these were public building projects and that's how he made the big money.
And he has been transferring money to Donald Trump from the age of eight, monthly
amounts to blocked accounts or something similar.
This meant that Donald Trump was actually already a millionaire at the age of eight.
And in his early twenties or when he was 18, I can't remember exactly, it says in the article, Fred Trump
gave him a real estate complex, a building complex with condominiums, which he then managed.
So he had already had millions, or rather several millions, for a long time before he really
succeeded as managing director of his father's company.
Then a second station is the New York mafia.
So that was common in New York, of course, that in the 70s and 80s you couldn't become a building tycoon unless you somehow
got along with "Fat Tony" Salerno and the other families.
Otherwise you either didn't get any cement or the buildings burned down quickly or they had the union, the Teamsters and so on
under control to the extent that you wouldn't have any workers.
So you had to cooperate with the mafia and that's what all the real estate lions actually did.
But Donald Trump to an extent that is significantly larger and unusual compared to other
competitors, which has given him a market advantage.
He has always denied having met with "Fat Tony" Salerno.
That was the capo di tutti i capi , yes, back then in New York.
I believe of the Genovese family.
There are these Five Families and the collaboration is rather obvious, because if he hadn't made friends with "Fat Tony"
Salerno or somehow collaborated with him, he wouldn't have gotten any cement, which he then had to buy at very
inflated prices, but at least his buildings were finished.
So that's also a station, this mafia collaboration with this "Fat Tony" that you also know from The Simpsons, then
at the end, that's the template for the Simpsons character.
And a second station that has already emerged is Roy Cohn, the mafia's lawyer.
He basically represented all the Mafia families at the time and had a dissolute life in New York, orgies, parties, drugs, but in
addition to the Mafia he was also very well connected and linked to the FBI and CIA, so
also to the directors, to the management level.
Not for nothing, this man is a central character in the investigative books by
Whitney Webb: "One Nation Under Blackmail".
This is a central character who formed the link between the upper and underworld, between
organized crime and the secret service complex.
And that was Donald Trump's lawyer for decades.
So that's a very close connection.
They were very well connected and friends.
And if you then go further, where he had his first major projects and was actually already on the Forbes list as
one of the richest Americans, then at some point, things didn't go so well with the casinos.
Some people still remember, some older readers and listeners will remember, that the Taj Mahal
and other casinos were on the verge of bankruptcy.
In principle, Donald Trump was then actually bankrupt and no bank wanted to give him money.
And then came Wilbur Ross, an investment banker who 24 years earlier had been a senior director at
Rothschild Inc, Rothschild Bankruptcy Consultants.
And in the interview with Forbes magazine he said, at some point he saw on the street how Donald Trump as a
character, that people stand at his limousine and applaud and somehow want to have a piece of Donald.
And then, according to Forbes magazine, Rothschild Inc., i.e. Rothschild Bank, was the only one to give Donald
Trump a loan, saving his business complex and his real estate.
He was allowed to keep 50 percent.
But that means 50 percent went into the administration of Rothschild Inc. and Wilbur Ross is basically the
man, according to the headline in Forbes magazine, to whom Donald Trump has been obliged to for 32 years.
And funnily enough, during first term, in the Trump cabinet and acting as Secretary of Commerce was then
Wilbur Ross, who then left Rothschild Inc. and then became Secretary of Commerce under Trump.
So you can quickly see who Donald Trump feels connected to in a certain way, according to Forbes magazine.
I'm not saying that, but facts and Forbes magazine are.
And of course there is the revolving door that someone like that can become a trade minister; that has its reasons.
Of course, that was somehow a thank you for practically saving his career.
Because without this Wilbur Ross, Donald Trump would have simply gone bankrupt with the Taj Mahal complex, gone broke with
his other ventures and never appeared on the Forbes list again.
And shortly after the bank stepped in, he was back on the Forbes list and was able to further
promote his image as the super-rich super-entrepreneur.
And that is just an excerpt.
The article is very long and you can go into various tentacles left and right.
But I think that's enough of an overview.
I could now ask a few more questions, but as we still have so many exciting topics ahead of us, I can
only recommend viewers to simply read this article.
You have also included a lot of sources.
So that is all noted and verifiable.
Let's talk about another, in my opinion, very exciting development, namely the restoration of freedom of speech.
The restoration of freedom of expression in the USA is currently a huge topic, especially in the
discourse in the USA, but of course also in Germany.
With Mark Zuckerberg, who sat with Joe Rogan and recounted how he was censored and suppressed by the Biden administration.
With Elon Musk, who is now trying to regain freedom of expression via Twitter.
And with Donald Trump, who signed a decree on the day of his inauguration, i.e. directly on 20th of
January, entitled, and I quote: "Restoring Freedom of Speech and Ending Federal Censorship".
This decree prohibits federal officials from engaging in any conduct that would unconstitutionally
restrict an American citizen's freedom of expression.
So Tom, do you have anything to counter that?
Are there any counterarguments?
Yes, Idi Amin once said that he could guarantee freedom of speech, but not freedom after speech.
That's sort of what it sounds like.
On the one hand, a decree is issued and the executive order says that freedom of speech is
restored in accordance with the constitution.
A few days later, however, it is then established that people who advocate "anti-Semitic" slogans, i.e. people who campaign against
the genocide in Gaza and say that somehow 62,000 dead, I believe it is now officially close to it, that
this is perhaps no longer quite acting in self-defense.
When there is nothing more left of the land or of the Gaza Strip, that the people are to be deported.
So I don't know to what extent this is congruent, when on the one hand you say, yes, we are establishing absolute freedom of speech
and, on the other hand, you immediately restrict it again and say, people who are against Israel - and then you
have to distinguish between Israel, Judaism and Zionism.
Yes, and people who oppose Zionism - what fascism is in the end, it is a segregative model of rule and thinking - you only have to
read Theodor Herzl or something similar, anyone who speaks out against it, yes, and criticizes the genocide, can be deported.
So that doesn't fit together at all.
In addition, Mark Zuckerberg and his CIA company Facebook, which was just like Google, all these companies were funded with CIA
money, so In-Q-tel or through Harvard University and programs and the Edge Foundation - that's all very close to the state.
And Facebook, as the successor project to LifeLog, actually went online the day after LifeLog.
At some point, I can't remember the exact month, but I think it was February or something, I think it was 2004, I think the 3rd
or the 5th of February or something similar, 2004, this DARPA project LifeLog went offline because
there was a huge shitstorm from the data protectionists.
Because a timeline was to be created for every US citizen with all the photos, credit card bookings and places
they have ever been, and the cell phone or so was logged in and travel bookings etc., rental cars.
That was too much for the data protectionists, then it was officially ended in parliament, in Congress
and stopped it, and the next day Facebook went online with exactly the same functions.
And today, everyone enters their data themselves and voluntarily.
So then all these people are all sitting with Joe Rogan, who always presents himself as a
critical journalist or a critical podcaster.
But if, for example, Peter Thiel is sitting there, the boss or founder of Palantir, the most powerful
surveillance company in the world, whose technology is also used in Germany, nationwide in fact.
When I wrote the article on Thiel last year, which is in the book, there were only two federal states, but now all
federal states of Germany are using Palantir technology.
They do "predictive policing", which is "Minority Report".
These are the people who try to prevent crime before it takes place, and in the USA there is also a new
money laundering law that is intended to prevent money laundering before it is likely to occur.
How do you want to do that?
And if the technology is not accurate either, how do the falsely accused people explain
afterwards that they weren't up to anything?
So how are you supposed to talk your way out of this and defend yourself against "predictive police"?
And that's what Palantir does.
So all this talk of "freedom of opinion or freedom of speech restored" - that's a campaign to manage the image.
Like Thiel or Zuckerberg, people then go to Joe Rogan.
We then spend three hours having nice conversations there, on a "bro and buddy level".
They're really cool with each other and everything somehow seems so cozy, it's always said so nicely, nice and cuddly.
But not a single critical question to Peter Thiel - neither on the subject of the Bilderberg Steering Committee nor on
the management level, of which he has been a member for ages.
No question about Palantir or his dead gay friend who was lying outside the building at some point, who
was found, which is officially considered a suicide.
Not a single critical question. The same with Facebook.
No question about LiveLog to Zuckerberg, no question about the CIA connection in the background, the
permanent surveillance, the data scandal or anything else.
Just the really superficial level of just admitting: "Oh, it was the evil Democrats, they forced
us to censor. And now everything will be fine".
And you can see that from the fact that Joe Rogan's first show after Donald Trump's election started
with Joe Rogan saying "Democracy actually works".
Yes, democracy never worked before, the wrong people were always in power, elections were stolen,
everything was really bad. But now democracy works.
Now the right person has been chosen. Fantastic.
The right person, who then governs outside of all democratic processes, not with legislative procedures.
So if people proclaim themselves to be democrats, they should actually start by criticizing the
fact that Trump is constantly churning out decrees.
So 200 executive orders are anything but democratic.
It's just like when the king kills the old king in the castle, then sits down and signs
one decree after another. It is dictatorship.
And then you go out and it has to be done that way.
Where are the legislative procedure and the democratic processes?
That is completely anti-democratic - if you think democracy is good.
And of course it has to be said that some decrees have already been overturned.
The USA is a federal state. You can't simply rule through it.
But let's perhaps come back to the big picture.
Because I say, or I understand the core message of your article about Donald Trump, that he
now wants to move away from these ESG goals .
From the "left-woke agenda" to a "Responsible Business to Rebuilding Trust" agenda around the WEF and Klaus Schwab.
So can you perhaps expand on that a little for our listeners?
Because it is currently the case, and I have heard this time and again in a number of interviews that I have
conducted for my channel, that Donald Trump will bring an end to the "left-wing woke" rule of the USA.
But now you're saying yes, that's true. You share this premise, this assumption.
But you say it is being replaced by another agenda that is just as inhumane, only under a different guise.
So can you elaborate on that? How is this change of narrative currently taking place?
Yes, of course, I wrote about it back in the summer of 2023, because that's when the first announcements were
made by people who really have something to say, who are the real powerful players in the world.
And as a rule, these are not the presidents who recite agendas to us on television.
So that was Lynn Forester de Rothschild, for example.
She then, I think it was in August 2023, got airtime on Bloomberg and CNN or CNBC and said in interviews that the
whole topic of "ESG", "Environmental Social Governance", "DEI" and so on, has to be "put in the dustbin".
Perhaps you could explain what "ESG" and "DEI" are, what they stand for. I'm not sure if all our listeners are aware of that.
Yes, of course. So "Environmental Social and Governance", that's "ESG".
In principle, this means being environmentally friendly, socially responsible and adhering to principles in the
organizational structures of companies and in politics.
And "DEI", i.e. "Diversity, Equity, Inclusion", there was then the "DEI" index, which in
principle all large corporations have introduced.
This is a kind of points system, or you could say social credit system, for corporations.
If they don't adhere to the "DEI" guidelines, for example that 40% of the directors' board must be women or black women or
homosexuals, all these ideologically influenced guidelines from this "left woke bubble", that we have seen this whole time now,
if you don't adhere to these guidelines, you have a lower rating.
So you get few "DEI" points as a corporation. This means that you lose investments.
Then BlackRock or another major investor says: We'll withdraw money. And then you have serious problems as a corporation.
In principle, this is blackmail that has worked for many years and has forced companies in one direction.
BlackRock used to say that if they didn't introduce this voluntarily on their own, they would have to force them.
Larry Fink said this verbatim at a panel discussion. And he wants to force them with this "DEI" index. But that was before 2023.
The turning point came in the summer of 2023 and you could already see where things were principally heading.
It was not for nothing that two of the last WEF meetings were called "Rebuilding Trust" and "The Great Narrative".
You would need new, big stories to tell people. And now we come back to the Forester de Rothschild interview on Bloomberg, where
she said that "ESG"/ DEI", that this whole woke agenda needs to be put in the dustbin because people are fed up with it.
It would have to go so the conservative circles would no longer continue to rebel, and they would not be further antagonized.
Somehow you could see the torches and pitchforks coming.
And as I said, this is the level at which decisions are really made.
So Lynn Forester de Rothschild is the founder of the "Council for Inclusive Capitalism", a body for inclusive capitalism.
If you take a look at their website, they also have a cooperation with the Vatican. Very
nice pictures there with the Pope and so on.
And they have 10.5 trillion assets under management, i.e. money that they manage to make the world more sustainable.
So that's a trillion euros or dollars, that is more than BlackRock manages in total.
And the "Council for Inclusive Capitalism" is somehow 100 people plus the Vatican.
So this is a very small group of people, whereas BlackRock manages and is involved in half the world's
economy and calculates millions of transactions per second in the Aladin computer in the basement.
These are proportions that really show who holds power.
So this "Council for Inclusive Capitalism" and this Lynn Forrest de Rothschild clearly announced in the summer of 2023 that they
are abolishing this progressively problematic agenda, this "left woke", this "DEI" stuff and
Larry Fink said that in the same time period.
In his investor letter at the beginning of 2024, he removed all of these terms, whereas previously he wanted to force companies
to "DEI" and force them into this sustainability agenda, then, suddenly, all of these terms had
disappeared and one only spoke of "responsible business".
Because both of them said at the time that they were changing the marketing campaign for it.
However, they would of course continue to support the "green economy" and the UN's sustainability goals.
So things would be going exactly as before, but they'd have to stop marketing it like this because otherwise they
would constantly antagonize the conservative circles and then they would lose, they'd have problems at some point.
That's why it was completely foreseeable that the Melonis, Mileis, Trumps would come - also Weidel - who now basically
represent right-wing conservative ideas, and that's what the World Economic Forum announced to us by "The Great Narrative".
And with "Rebuilding Trust", trust levels in politics and elections in America are
on the rise for the first time in decades.
So that was obviously quite successful because people believe that Musk, Trump and Co. are now somehow the benevolent rulers.
But as I said, you could read in my articles over a year and a half ago that this was coming.
And it is clearly understandable that the people who then initiated it are now profiting from it, see the
large corporations in Silicon Valley, Big Tech, etc.
Yes, and now you're also saying that Donald Trump has big sponsors in the background.
You've already named one of them, or two, respectively, Peter Thiel and Elon Musk, of course.
There are also others, such as Stephen Schwarzman, CEO of Blackstone, one of the world's largest investment
companies, and Miriam Adelson, the ex-wife and heiress of Sheldon Adelson, a Jewish real estate mogul.
This legacy has made her one of the richest women in the world. She also co-financed Donald Trump's election campaign.
So what is your research, what do you think are the most important sponsors in the
background of Donald Trump and the Donald Trump team?
So for me, the most important one is Peter Thiel.
You can see that from the fact that his protégé, J. D. Vance, is now Vice President. J. D. Vance would never have had any
professional success in public if it weren't for Peter Thiel, who financed him and opened doors and
opportunities for him, both in political and economic spheres.
And Palantir and Thiel are the most important because, as I said earlier, Peter Thiel has been a member of the
Bilderberg Conference steering committee for years, since 2012, 2014, just like Eric Schmidt and these people.
Yes, it's a body that is much more influential and powerful than a World Economic Forum, which for me is
more of a marketing department for globalist issues.
Bilderberg is a closed conference, a select handful of people somehow get there. There are no more than 150 participants.
They also have a website where you can look up when these conferences take place.
I think its current boss is actually, if I remember correctly, Stoltenberg or the Dutchman, Rutte.
In any case, one of the NATO people is now back in charge.
And that's why Thiel is important, because he basically installed the Vice President.
This gives him a direct line to the White House.
He has been active in the Bilderberg Conference for ages, which makes really influential decisions on
geopolitical and geostrategic issues in the background.
And secondly, Palantir, people often don't know this over here, but Palantir is simply an incredibly powerful company.
It's like the fact-checking industry, which has taken over censorship for the state because the state says:
We have freedom of expression. These are private companies that censor you and block your accounts:
It's not our fault, that's house rules.
The same reasoning applies at the level of the security and intelligence services, because this then is Palantir, a private
company that practically has drones with artificial intelligence select the victims in Israel and shoot them
down automatically, although the accuracy rate is estimated to be somewhere around 50%.
Yes, it's dystopian and this predictive policing is now also being used in America.
People are arrested because of their social media comments and behavior or are convicted of crimes they
didn't commit because they might commit them in the future.
So if I start researching tomorrow about: How do you build a bomb?
Only just because I'm interested - I may well be arrested as a future bomb maker.
And how am I supposed to defend myself then, please?
So this is highly dangerous, and the German police authorities, for example, use Palantir on smartphones or on their
computers to scan people's faces during traffic checks or to have biometric data, fingerprints or similar.
And when they open Palantir's profile for Mr. Max Mustermann, they can then see what data Palantir has on the person.
And in my article on Peter Thiel I quote from, I think it was from the Washington Post or New York Times or a Daily Mail reporter,
who was once allowed into Palantir's headquarters in London.
And he said it would look like with James Bond.
There are these huge screens, like a control room with a thousand buttons.
And then you see a very small image of the earth and then you enter a name, Max Mustermann, and then in just
30 seconds, it shows which satellite is aiming at him or which three are triangulating him.
And then all the entries that Palantir has about this person appear.
And this does mean ALL entries, from the very first search query at the age of 18 on Google to the last rental car booking and
credit card payment in Bali on vacation, Palantir has every data point on this person and also
every photo because Clearview AI is in the background.
This company that can calculate all 100,000 people out of concert photos and make large calculations
about people you don't even recognize on the photo.
There are thousands of photos of people, of which the people don't even know they exist, airport surveillance cameras, gas
station surveillance cameras, everything that is connected to the internet and Palantir builds up a database in the background.
And the authorities can then access and view this database if they pay money for the license.
And that includes all the photos you deleted from iCloud, like those with your girlfriend you once took
naked, secretly at night somehow, quickly, whatever.
Things you have bought, porn magazines, most intimate data, the entire Instagram and YouTube usage behavior.
Everything, they simply have everything. And in just a few seconds, they can tell that this person with this
phone number, social security number and the car is at that location, to within six meters of accuracy.
And that takes 30 seconds - and that's Palantir.
And if you are somehow afraid of technocracy and the global surveillance state, this is exactly the corporation that will
introduce it and Peter Thiel's protégé is now Vice President.
And Open AI with this mRNA platform with Ellison and Oracle, as Catherine Austin Fitts has said, that's Operation Warp Speed 2.0,
because artificial intelligence is then used to set up surveillance networks and
people have no idea how powerful they are.
What was Operation Warp Speed? Perhaps for the context of the Donald Trump vaccination campaign?
Oh, yes, that's right, Donald Trump always likes to call himself the Father of the Vaccine.
And people say, well, he has now learned from this Operation Warp Speed, his militarized mass vaccination
campaign that gave millions of Americans this injection.
And then, when I write that in the article, I'm told that he's learned from it, that he sees things differently now.
And then he posts on Truth Social, his own social network, I think it was on the 17th of November, how proud he is that
after five years he is now somehow celebrating the anniversary of Operation Warp Speed - a great achievement, yes.
Even RFK Junior said in his hearing that this was a great action and Donald Trump's
leadership role in Operation Warp Speed was fantastic.
And as I said, day two of the inauguration, anyone who thought mRNA would now be banned or that there would be a reappraisal
on corona now gets mRNA-AI and Operation Warp Speed 2.0.
And yesterday Howard Lutnik , I think it was yesterday, stood next to Trump and said, yes, we're now setting
up this new fund here so that the government has a stake in private companies and their profits.
If we now sell two billion Covid vaccinations, we want to make a bit of money from them.
Well, as I said, it's all exactly the same overarching agenda.
There will also be no withdrawal from the UN, yes, the WHO, all well and good, the pandemic has also worked very well
without the WHO, i.e. the pandemic treaty or something similar.
If you wanted to change something, you would have to leave the UN, which is what I keep saying, not the WHO.
So from that point of view, it all continues.
And I recommend that people read this Peter Thiel article in particular, because this person has significantly more power,
just like Lynn Forester de Rothschild or Larry Fink, all three of them have significantly more power than the US president.
Would you say that these people, in this case Peter Thiel and Palantir, have more power than Elon Musk?
Absolutely. Elon Musk is actually also just a front figure for me.
I've just presented it in this current article, which will be published in January - it's not in the book,
but you can read it all for free on my website anyway.
People always have this image of the super entrepreneur and inventor.
He didn't invent PayPal, that was Peter Thiel, for example, and Musk then took over the business.
He didn't invent Tesla either, that was two other people.
Nobody can tell me this. How is that supposed to work, purely logistically?
The man spends the whole day on his Twitter account, tweeting one thing after another, posting, but at the same time he runs five
companies, inventing everything revolutionarily new, Neuralink, brain chips against the evil brain chips and the evil AI.
And what is most crucial is the close connection to the Pentagon and the fact that Elon Musk's entire finances, i.e. a large part
of his assets and turnover, are based on government contracts.
SpaceX is basically NASA's extended workbench and a large part of the entire turnover there is generated by
billions in grants from the Pentagon and secret services.
By launching CIA satellites into space and by using Starlink, which makes satellite technology for the Internet
available worldwide, but is linked to the NORAD database.
This means that everyone who uses Starlink is indirectly connected to the database of the American air defense authority NORAD.
You can look up what it stands for, NORAD .
But, in any case, it is the military air surveillance that also failed on 9/11.
Starlink is attached to it and there is also Starshield. This is the CIA version.
There are already 98 satellites in space, and it is said that they could be used for directed energy weapons, i.e. laser
weapons from space, for which patents have been found, and so on.
So Elon Musk is basically trying to sell us this dystopian technology to be a good thing.
You can see that with Neuralink, where brain implants are sold with the idea that they can make blind
people see again and paralyzed people walk again.
And we need to equip ourselves with AI to be able to stand up to the evil, dangerous super AI at some point.
It's just a completely outrageous narrative at the end and goes in the direction of transhumanism.
And if you are the largest contractual partner of the Pentagon and the military-industrial complex with contracts worth
billions, and by the way, in the article you find all the sources, and when you launch surveillance
satellites into space, then I don't really have the feeling that Mr. Musk is a freedom fighter.
And then you could go into the backgrounds of technocracy.
After all, his grandfather Haldemann was the head of Technocracy Inc. in America, i.e. the research
department in America, and then the head of Technocracy Inc. in Canada, the technocracy movement.
And Musk has already posted five or six times on his Twitter profile alone that the alternative form of rule to capitalism
or socialism was technocracy: Let's build Technocracy on Mars.
And then people post underneath it: Yeah, great, Musk. But nobody looks up what technocracy actually means.
This is tech-fascism and much worse than any form of fascism we have ever had in history.
Tom, let's perhaps take another step back in our thoughts and close this great chapter of Donald Trump.
You have already briefly teased one very important appointment, namely Robert Kennedy Junior
as US Secretary of Health and Human Services.
He has announced his MAHA program, Make America Healthy Again.
And Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, if I pronounced that correctly, has become the director of
the National Institutes of Health in the US.
He is a professor at Stanford University and was co-author of the Great Barrington Declaration, one of the most
profound critics of the coronavirus measures at the time.
This also gives many people hope that this appointment will lead to a reppraisal of the corona measures in the USA.
You also have a fundamentally different view, Tom. Would you explain, please, why you're not as positive
about it as the majority of our listeners probably are?
So the Great Barrington Declaration, or Mr. Bhattacharya, I don't know how to pronounce it correctly
either, but Aya Velázquez interviewed him, by the way.
Right, a very worthwhile interview. I highly recommend watching it on their YouTube channel.
Exactly, so I'll grant him that he means all of this authentically and that he's a good man.
But I see RFK differently. He also appears in my Trump article.
On the one hand, because there were Epstein connections there too. He says, he only flew twice on the Lolita Express, Epstein's
famous plane. Like Gates and so on, they were guests once there.
Or Bill Clinton, who flew there 15, 16, 18 times, where orgies with minors took place. So RFK Junior was on this
Lolita Express twice, but says he flew with his family and didn't have such a close connection to Epstein.
Okay, good. But in the same sentence or in the postscript he then says that the flight only came about because his wife had
a very close connection, a relationship with Ghislaine Maxwell, which is basically just as well as Jeffrey Epstein.
Because she has been Epstein's left and right hand for ages.
There's that, and then there's no more explanation as to what kind of relationship RFK's wife has with Ghislaine Maxwell
and why there are flights, it would be interesting to know.
On the other hand, with RFK you have to bear in mind that the Kennedys are not the great freedom fighters.
They are also just an oligarchic family who made their money with opium and then got rich smuggling alcohol.
And then somehow found their way into power. That's also just one of the families that belong to the ruling caste in America,
like the Bushs and others, the Morgans and Rockefellers.
Then you have to look at RFK sitting there at the Senate hearing or whatever and then praising Donald Trump's Operation Warp
Speed or not explicitly speaking out against mRNA as a product.
And in the end, he is also tacitly curating the new AI 500 billion dollar investment in further mRNA against cancer, etc.
You would expect him, as the great reappraiser of the pandemic and "anti-vaxxer", and thus mRNA sceptic or
opponent, to stand up and say: This is not possible at all.
We have to do something else here somehow, mRNA itself as a platform is the problem. And I think everyone who
is a little bit informed knows that by now: Spike proteins, nanoparticles, impurities, DNA impurities.
We're not going to start again with this topic here. And I don't see any clear positioning there.
And two of his intended employees, including those in his immediate environment, were no longer even considered.
To what extent this man can do anything about it, even if he means well - I'm not even denying that he might mean well,
but you can already see from the first developments that he can hardly manage to do anything about this mRNA as a product.
And against Big Pharma, who want to sell it to the people, against the billions in investments and against this bureaucratic
machine standing beside Donald Trump in the form of Howard Lutnick saying that if we somehow sell billions
of Covid vaccinations again, we would finally be making money through the new investment fund.
This is a controversial character, I appreciate he said some critical things during the pandemic, the alleged
pandemic, so he supposedly might say some reasonable things.
In the end, however, it's never what people say that counts, but what they do.
And Donald Trump also said a lot in his first term, but did very little.
The current response to most problems, including the migration problem, is more violence, more
surveillance, more control, military on the inside.
I don't know to what extent people will like this who have stood up for freedom and independence and freedom of speech for years,
and hopefully they did so for the freedom of all people, not just for the buddies in
their bubble, because the opposite is happening.
So from this point of view, I do hope that Mr. Bhattacharya or RFK can do something about the toxic food in
America, the obesity, the various epidemics from heart attacks to ADHD and so on. But I have serious doubts.
Yes, and then, Tom, let's now talk about your latest article.
You've already touched it a few times. And of course, this is about Elon Musk, who you call
"The Eloi" as a kind of collective movement.
Perhaps you could say something about how this article got its title.
And he is now on everyone's lips. He was also on the front-page of the magazine 'Der Spiegel' some time ago
with a statement by Robert Habeck, who openly attacked him.
He is now the AfD's best-known supporter. He has now posted several times on his Twitter
channel that only the AfD could save Germany.
The well-known conversation between him and Alice Weidel, I think he recently also
attended a party confernce of the AfD via video.
The whole thing is of course making headlines again, not only in the alternative and free media, but also of course in the
mainstream media, which are massively criticizing the AfD for having this prestigious support
from the USA. So what can you say about Elon Musk?
And what is he up to with the new DOGE department, i.e. the Department of Government Efficiency, which he is planned to head?
Right, so the title of the text you mentioned is "The Eloi".
And that's only funny because there was the movie "The Time Machine", based on the novel by H. G. Wells.
And there is this people living as the successor species of Homo Sapiens, they are
basically bred as the main course for the Morlocks.
These are monsters that live underground and the Elois running around on the surface, who of course look like humans in
the movie, and they are basically the useful humans, the food.
And whenever a siren goes off, the utility man has to run into such a gate, as if hypnotized, apathetic, they all
run into this gate until it closes and then they never come back, because they are eaten by the Morlocks.
It's actually a cool movie. Many people will probably remember it from their childhood,
and it also comes out around Christmas time.
I only found that funny because in the description of the characteristics of these Eloi, they are
described as lazy, gullible, sluggish, lazy thinkers.
And then I don't remember exactly what it says in the introductory paragraph of the text.
They have lost centuries or millennia of thinking, logical reasoning, culture and critical
thinking, etc., and are actually just existing.
They are content to exist. So they vegetate, eat, celebrate orgies, drink and then, when the siren
goes off, they go to slaughter, to the slaughterhouse.
And if someone falls into the water and drowns, they stand next to them and just watch.
But no one has the empathy to jump in and help.
And I think that's actually a very fitting parable for our society, where everyone has their face stuck in their phone.
If the stupid woke neighbor is now beaten up and picked up, then that's perfectly fine.
He's been annoying us for four years now with his wokeness and DEI, so it's okay to give him a slap on his fingers.
And so it's okay for our billionaire to get involved in politics.
Imagine Bill Gates getting airtime on public broadcasting and interfering in pandemic policy or something similar.
Unthinkable, an evil billionaire, extra-parliamentary influence.
But if our billionaire does it, that's great. Elon Musk is the George Soros of the
right-wing conservatives as far as that's concerned.
So if you believe in democracy, I don't know how you can applaud the fact that billionaires get involved.
Not just in Germany with the AfD, but also in the UK, where he then rants about how Keir Starmer has to go and the migration
policy somehow and the grooming gangs and what's going on there.
He interferes in the same way in the UK as he does here in Germany with the AfD.
That's one of the double standards of the right-wing conservatives. They suddenly think it's okay when the billionaire
gets involved, but when Bill Gates somehow spends 15 minutes on the news talking about vaccinations and
his Gavi and stuff, everyone thinks it's terrible.
And these are the people who also think it's okay when Antifa is beaten up by the police at rallys.
But when the anti-vaccination campaigners are beaten up, the critics of the measures, that's terrible, this is about freedom.
But they don't think that Antifa should have an opinion. So that's a double standard. If there
is freedom of opinion, it applies to everyone.
And then especially for people whose opinion you don't share. Because if you don't see it that way,
then you haven't understood freedom of opinion at all.
And freedom neither. Because it applies to everyone.
And if you then look at what else Musk is up to, you can read the article.
It's 12 or 13 pages, I can't even summarize it all now.
But one of the most interesting projects, as I mentioned briefly at the beginning, is the collaboration between
SpaceX, i.e. his space agency, and the Swiss company WISeKey.
WISeKey is based, I think, as a holding company in Zug and then has a subsidiary in Geneva called
WISeSat, W - I - S - E Sat or W - I - S - E Key.
And you can have a look at their website, WISeKey. Interestingly, the company has been around for decades.
It is listed on the NASDAQ, on the stock exchange and on Six. Yet it has no Wikipedia entry. That is suspicious.
Because usually the small partner companies that supply technology, which are much tinier
and more insignificant, have Wikipedia entries.
If you then look at the WISeKey homepage, at industry solutions, you see all kinds of "know your customer", i.e. biometric
identification, as we already know it, from cell phones or for bank access or stuff like
that, it's all infrastructure that we already know.
But if you then look at the tab on the "Government" page, i.e. government solutions, there is a complete E-ID, i.e. electronic
ID package solution available, the large-scale implementation, i.e. which can now be delivered ready for use for large-scale
implementation in countries "out of the box", i.e. ready to use.
And this company launched the first joint rocket into space with SpaceX on January 14.
They launch Pico satellites into space. These are satellites that are the size of a Tupperware
container and fly in a low orbit around the earth.
And you have to imagine it like a flying Wifi router or a flying 5G mast, i.e. they provide real-time connectivity, are somehow
quantum-encrypted, i.e. high-security technology in low orbit, which then pings all cell phones, i.e. real-time
connection from the cell phone to such satellite networks, which can then offer an E-ID solution out of the box.
So if tomorrow Germany says we want to introduce the E-ID locally and order it from WISeKey, then in principle, once the satellites
have been launched into space, they will not only be able to link it to the smartphone in real time connectivity or ping and track
the smartphone, but of course also the new car, which has enough technology and chips and monitoring
modalities so that it can be permanently tracked.
So what is being built there by SpaceX, by Elon Musk's Mars space agency, which also advertises freedom and space exploration like
NASA, and this company WISeKey, whose Chief Digital Transformation Officer is a corrupt Geneva State Councillor who
had to resign in 2021 because of corruption and then, two or three months later, he was on the board of WISeKey and then he
was re-elected to the State Council in Switzerland, in Geneva.
You have to take a look at what kind of collaboration that is, and WISeKey has also signed a cooperation
agreement with the Swiss army for security technology, etc.
These are all links in my article, so if you just look at the last project, these E-ID solutions.
It's a surveillance grid, a low-orbit control network with satellites that provide real-time connectivity anywhere in the
world for continuous, uninterrupted monitoring of the population, so it's really the utility person living on a plantation, anytime,
any day, with a network like this and the Palantir databases.
In contrast, the transparent citizen is a joke that people used to fear.
First of all, it's been around for a long time. By now, you'd be happy to be a transparent citizen again, in comparison.
Yes, Tom, then, perhaps as a final question from me:
Elon Musk and Donald Trump are now being celebrated partly as saviors and liberators.
You say that with Elon Musk and Donald Trump heading the USA, the US empire that may be in decline, we are not on the
path towards democracy and diversity of opinion, but towards oppression and totalitarian surveillance.
Can this be left as a finale, as a summary?
Yes, as a technocracy. I recommend that people who haven't looked into it read up on what technocracy is.
This is the model of domination, this is full-time surveillance everywhere and the automated control
of society via its individual energy consumption.
This means that each individual will then - and Elon Musk is just as much in favor of the CO2 budget as he is of an
unconditional basic income - at some point, everyone will be centrally controlled via their energy consumption.
In other words, the smartphone tells you when you can go where, how much you can drive and what you can
still eat because your carbon footprint allows it or not.
Technocracy is what I always call a faceless empire, where nobody is responsible for anything because in the
end the AI has calculated what is the right thing to do.
AI knows everything and is much more intelligent than humans, we are told. And then you have to stick to it.
Whether it is predictive police-work or the AI-defined CO2 footprint or the AI-calculated basic income according to
housing needs or the size of the apartment - in fact, you see again and again that you have to downsize - That is technocracy.
In the end, we will be ruled by a machine. That's what they always painted so darkly on the wall in
Terminator as Skynet, when robots rule over humans. And unfortunately, that's where we're heading.
If you look at the facts, it may take another five years for everything to mature, but they've
obviously stepped on the accelerator pedal in America.
You can see that from the fact that people like Sam Altman OpenAI, on DARPA project, a continuing military project,
that people like Musk with Neuralink, with WISeKey, SpaceX collaboration, the mRNA etc., Thiel with his Palantir...
Forbes magazine also recently wrote that the PayPal mafia has taken over government business.
So, people should actually find out what the PayPal mafia is, what Palantir is, what Peter Thiel is up to,
then look at the sources in the articles and then consider whether they want technocracy.
Because that is what actually governs us, it is technocracy.
And this is getting worse and once everyone has the E-ID, it will be over at some point.
So, now is the time to ask the right questions and be skeptical, and that's where the book ends, I
had the dystopian Nietzsche quote at the beginning.
And on the final page there's a nice quote from me: "Once you've recognized hope for
what it is, you can start living your dreams."
And I think that's the point people should arrive at.
Dear Tom, that's a strong closing statement on your part.
Thank you for your time, for the really very exciting background information on perhaps the most important, most
influential, most powerful people on this earth at the moment.
I wish you all the best for these truly historic times, stay well and I look forward to meeting you here again soon
for another conversation, for more background information.
Thank you, Flavio.
Dear viewers, thank you for joining us again today.
I wish you all the best, stay well and see you soon here on my channel. Bye!
I wish you all the best too, stay well and until the next conversation here on my channel. Ciao!