There is only one kind of men who have never been on strike in human history … the men who have carried the world on their shoulders, have kept it alive, have endured torture as sole payment … Well, their turn has come. Let the world discover who they are, what they do and what happens when they refuse to function. This is the strike of the men of the mind. -John Galt
Going Galt has become a central theme of the burgeoning manosphere, a nascent corner of the web which is typically subdivided into traditionalists, MGTOWs, PUAs, and MRAs. The subdivisions aren’t as important as what unites us: the philosophical and literal pushback against a society that marginalizes men and uses us as expendable, exploitable drivers of the economic engine of the West for the pleasure and comfort of women and elites, not ourselves.
The term Going Galt, according to The Atlas Society means productive people go on strike, withdrawing their services in protest against a society that damns them for being productive and expropriates (siezes) the fruits of their labor. The term Going Galt originated in Atlas Shrugged, the most well-known of Ayn Rand’s novels, in which a man swore he would stop the economic engine of the world, and he did.
The United States Psychiatrists have weaponized Psychiatry as a political weapon against “sovereign citizens.” The Term “Sovereign Citizen” is a legally dubious label of gibberish. One cannot be a sovereign and a citizen at the same time. A Citizen is a legal presence corporation, and a sovereign doesn’t have/need a legal presences to be present. World Citizens would need to join the United States to then be able to claim to not be a member of the United States as a Sovereign Citizen. World citizens are definitively legally NOT Sovereign Citizens.
Adding to the pressures on bitcoin early this morning, the Sydney Morning Herald reported that bitcoin users across Australia are reporting that their accounts have been abruptly frozen by the country’s “Big Four” banks. And while the banks have remained largely tight-lipped about the closures, many angry account-holders are jumping to conclusions and blaming the banks for punishing them because of their involvement with bitcoin.
Bitcoin investors are claiming Australia’s banks are freezing their accounts and transfers to cryptocurrency exchanges, with a viral tweet slamming the big four and an exchange platform putting a restriction on Australian deposits.
According to the Herald, cryptocurrency trader and Youtuber Alex Saunders called out National Australia Bank, ANZ, the Commonwealth Bank of Australia and Westpac Banking Corporation on Twitter for freezing customer accounts and transfers to four different bitcoin exchanges – CoinJar, CoinSpot, CoinBase and BTC Markets.
via The Economist – A HUNDRED-DOLLAR BILL is lying on the ground. An economist walks past it. A friend asks the economist: “Didn’t you see the money there?” The economist replies: “I thought I saw something, but I must have imagined it. If there had been $100 on the ground, someone would have picked it up.”
If something seems too good to be true, it probably is not actually true. But occasionally it is. Michael Clemens, an economist at the Centre for Global Development, an anti-poverty think-tank in Washington, DC, argues that there are “trillion-dollar bills on the sidewalk”. One seemingly simple policy could make the world twice as rich as it is: open borders.
via Zero Hedge – Another dip to be bought as the weekend’s pump’n’dump in Bitcoin has led to yet another new record high this morning at $11,850.
Bitcoin’s market cap is now $200 billion…
This resurgence comes after a week of considerably more active propagandizing from the establishment.
As we noted previously, this week has seen a new group of establishmentarians jump on to the offensive against anti-decentralization, de-control, pro-freedom cryptocurrencies – urging bans, crackdowns, fatwas, taxation, creating their own cryptocurrencies, demanding citizens sell, and outright confiscation (this group includes governments world wide and their mainstream media mouthpieces)…
(e) “United Nations Headquarters District” defined For purposes of this section, the term “United Nations Headquarters District” means the area within the United States which is agreed to by the United Nations and the United States to constitute such a district, together with such other areas as the Secretary of State may approve from time to time in order to permit effective functioning of the United Nations or missions to the United Nations.
As per the phone message, here are my questions in writing- as follows:
A) What is the EXACT present Definition of UNITED NATIONS HEADQUARTERS DISTRICT?
B) What are the various laws, codes, and most particularly the ORDERS/PERMITS between the United States, Secretary of State, and United Nations that have let to the present definition of UNITED NATIONS HEADQUARTERS DISTRICT?
C) It appears that the Secretary of State is authorized to “approve” orders and permits that effectuate the borders between the United States and the United Nations according to 22 U.S. Code §4309a (e). Is this in-fact true that the Secretary of State can change the border with the United Nations of the UNITED NATIONS HEADQUARTERS DISTRICT?
D) It appears that the UNITED NATIONS HEADQUARTERS DISTRICT is in-fact and in-law constituted of Manhattan, Bronx, Queens, Brooklyn, Statin Island, U Thant Island (each “listed”), and possibly other land areas. Are these areas part of the UNITED NATIONS HEADQUARTERS DISTRICT? What other areas not listed are part of the UNITED NATIONS HEADQUARTERS DISTRICT?
E) City of New York appears to be a separate entity from the UNITED STATES, entirely. The City of New York issues their own Birth Certificate – legal presences outside of the UNITED STATES. If the City of New York is defined as the UNITED NATIONS HEADQUARTERS DISTRICT -as it appears to be- then anyone born in the CITY OF NEW YORK is NOT a UNITED STATES CITIZEN and is not qualified to be a US PRESIDENT. PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP was born in the CITY OF NEW YORK making him a NON-US CITIZEN, and thus not eligible for Presidency. What treaty authority does a UNITED NATIONS CITY OF NEW YORK CITIZEN have to be/become a US Citizen and then US President?
Please answer these questions in full as per the office’s responsibilities and/or forward these questions to the appropriate office that handles the orders and permits between the US-SoS and UN. NOTICE TO PRINCIPAL IS NOTICE TO AGENT; NOTICE TO AGENT IS NOTICE TO PRINCIPAL.
Then, by signing a Power of Attorney (“POA”) over the Birth Certificate, we become the Attorney-In-Fact for the legal presence corporation. Each state has a standard POA form. The “Legal presence” Principal should give-up as many powers as possible to the Agent. The Agent (you) are a “non-person” of non-“limited sovereignty” in a self-governing body, such as the World Government of World Citizens.
Birth Certificates are NOT trusts/estates, but held in trust/estate due to us not claiming it. It’s the same as if we get a coat checked and get a receipt in return; but then never return to pick it up. Under their rules, they can use the coat we left there in any way they want. We must pick it up.
The United States was lost to King George in 1783 when the peace treaty was signed with the colonies, providing:
“It having pleased the Divine Providence to dispose the hearts of the most serene and most potent Prince George the Third, by the grace of God, king of Great Britain, France and Ireland, defender of the faith, duke of Brunswick and Lunebourg, arch-treasurer and prince elector of the Holy Roman Empire etc., and of the United States of America…”
The American Sovereignty Experiment only lasted 7 years until King George “won.” In December 1800, the United States of America was first incorporated. It had several iterations before it went bankrupt under President Lincoln, the First Temple Crown BAR Attorney to ever be president. He was apparently murdered for issuing his own debt called Greenbacks. JFK was also apparently murdered for going against the City of London Debt as Money Franchise as well.
A recent exposé on the many Sovereign Earth City-States shows that such status was never limited to the Vatican City, City of London, and DC. Where the Vatican City tried to control the spiritua -the dead Earth hologram, conveyed in trust-, The City of London tried to control the “debt/dead as money” franchise with unlimited underwriting/undertaking/rehypothecation, and DC tried to control the war/murder franchises, there are several other nation states that are new challengers to these positions. FYI- DC has also tried to be the franchiser of “magic” as well, despite obvious conflicts between church and state on such esoteric ideals. The World Government of World Citizens is outside these systems, and -where necessary- uses the systems to vacate/renounce without them.
As human beings, we should all be interested in basic human rights. Rights cannot be pre-defined by their very nature nor can the be taken away. They can be overstood, exercised, and even unlawfully threatened -usually under color of law with unannounced prejudice- into non-use. As such we are all free! um… no?
The Money Laundering Act conceptually declares digital crytpo-currency mining, usage, and holding an act of money laundering and counterfeiting, particularly in regards to Federal Reserve Notes maintaining their fictitious Valueless Perception of Worth. Requiring the registration of all digital currency holdings and transactions in the U.S. is an attempt to brazenly legalize (fictionalize) the all digital currency networks under the “legal jurisdiction” of a criminal government. After the United States succeeds, all UN Member Nations interested in continued debt slavery could act to implement such measures, in kind. It is a power grab of the Commons by the United States Corporation over a Constitutionally First Amendment Protected Freedom of Speech Medium (digital currencies) and non-legal trade that governmental corporations cannot control nor profit from (with debt mechanisms).
The “Terrorist Financing” label being used by US Senators was to undermine all legitimate commentary on the topic. Indeed, the Act itself is an act of terrorism upon the Digital Commons and Digital Rights. It is a usurpation of value, rights, and property. The Act violates legal precedence in converting a basic digital right into a “license”, regardless of fees, to outright ban digital currencies. The Money Laundering Act only points out the laundering of worth via valueless debt by the Federal Reserve and seems to merely be an attempt to protect the unlawful DEBT-AS-MONEY Racketeering of Central Bankers.