Transcript of the above video: 

As the title of this video suggests, we are discussing a lot of really heady topics. The first question is, what is the thumbnail about? Well one, is I did another video on this, I do want to apologize - not apologize - but I want to put some recent hyperbole into perspective. I'll apologize if I will to the viewers if it's been tough to watch me the last few weeks; I've been very frustrated. This part of the year is always tough. I discussed it at length in another video but long story short, I've noticed some people have said, "hey are you okay? You're getting a little frustrated and crazy? We're not trying to watch Alex Jones here." Fair enough. I get it, that's not the purpose. The hyperbole I get it and I'll apologize for that. My thinking, my problem here, I'm not going to apologize for that. In my heart of hearts I think that some really inappropriate stuff has gone on here as it pertains to the law in Thailand but sort of set that aside. So the purpose of the thumb though is this great scene from Star Trek: First Contact where Captain Picard says, "The line must be drawn here. This far, no further." It's a great scene but it also shows that you can get overwrought with emotion too, so it's kind of the purpose of the meme if you will, for the thumbnail for this video is to sort of convey that if I may. 

Now that said, there's also the issue of inappropriate lawfare for lack of a better term and that's the point of the title. Again this "refractive legalism". This is what I have come up with to call this brand of lawfare in an international context. So first of all if you're a Trekkie, I think also the thumbnail is appropriate because there's a different scene in that same movie Star Trek: First Contact where they have to build and I quote: "An "Interplexing Beacon" - only Star Trek speak can come up with such terminology - "interplexing beacon". And the point is these Borg, these people that are like this cancer, they basically are like cyborgs that just, they colonize and they just take over everybody. They're trying to take over Earth in the past and they have got to build this interplexing beacon and they have to put up these different panels. They all operate together to then beam out this signal that then brings in more Borg, so that's the underlying sort of premise if you will. Well the tactics used by the OECD and by the purveyors of this Supra-National Neo-colonialism - because that's the only word for it - that's what this is, it's globalism in the Alex Jonesian sense of the term, in a very real sense, it's globalism but I think a good legal terminology is it's neocolonialism via supra-nationalism; it's Neo-colonialism 2.0 is what it is, okay, and much like the Borg in that movie, where they had to put these different panels up to build a greater structure that then pulls in more Borg to then completely overtake the target, that's what's happening here, okay. The OECD, much like the interplexing beacon panels, uses this "refractive legalism", so Yellen could send IRS agents around the world based on Biden's announcement of an intention to possibly promulgate OECD legislation in the future. So now he directs Yellen - but he didn't do anything because clearly the auto pen was doing everything - so Yellen it looks like was kind of running this, except then you have to ask how much was she doing because one, I don't know what's going on much up in that woman's head. If you watch that interview where that Senator was talking about banking matters with her and then she was with Xi Jinping tripping on mushrooms, whatever, so then she comes down with this and says okay we are going to do this OECD thing based on the notion that we are eventually going to pass the law. Then over here in Thailand, they set up another panel of the "interplexing beacon" to bring in the Borg of the OECD in the form of coming over here and saying, "oh Thailand is now “exploring” OECD and so it's our intention to be in line with this, so now we're going to change some things to be in line with that." 

Now Trump - perhaps through divine intervention on a certain level, and I don't think that's hyperbole frankly - but Trump comes in and says, "cut, no, no OECD in America. Affirmatively this thing we are recapturing our sovereignty, which is very relevant in a Thai context, this is extraterritorial, we can't have this", he cuts it. So now it is not the presumption of the United States that we are ever going to pass his legislation. So again, in an American context I don't know where tax analysis has much changed okay. And again, it's going to depend on the specifics in given cases. I have already said I am doing a moratorium on publicly talking about Tax matters on this channel; that should not be viewed that way. I'm simply pointing it out from a legislative perspective, legally speaking in America we have this non-legal colour of law “thing” and Biden saying they were planning on trying to pass this law, which never came to pass, and Trump just said well forget that either way. So where does that leave us legally? It leaves us nowhere. All of that stuff was superfluous and irrelevant, okay.

But again the point I am trying to make is to put this in the broader perspective of what is going on, they are trying to build this "interplexing beacon" to bring in supra-nationalism which will much like a coup effectively, it will limit Thailand's sovereignty with regard to certain policies that she can make. That looks to be the intent of this supra-nationalist structure, and is that good for Thailand? I don't see where it is. Clearly the President of the United States said it's not good for America so I think it needs to at least be re-examined or examined - I think the right word is "examined”; we're still examining it - I think we should examine these data points in the totality of all of the examination to come to a final decision. I think you can probably guess what I think the conclusion should be. But that being said, I think it's important to point out what is going on here because it is very subtle, and if you can't see it both broadly, both at the macro and micro level, it can be hard to understand what exactly is happening but clearly to me, clearly this is Neo-Colonialism 2.0 infringement of sovereignty via supra-nationalism.