Topic: Bitcoin created by establishment to enslave the people (Read 2102 times)

This thread is just a conspiracy theory from a conspiracy theorist doing what conspiracy theorists do.

INTERNATIONAL MONETARY FUND
Reserve Accumulation and International Monetary Stability
Prepared by the Strategy, Policy and Review Department
In collaboration with the Finance, Legal, Monetary and Capital Markets, Research and
Statistics Departments, and consultation with the Area Departments
Approved by Reza Moghadam
April 13, 2010


Introduction

1.    The issue. The last comprehensive discussion of reform of the international monetary
system (IMS)—the set of official arrangements that regulate key dimensions of balance of
payments—international reserves, exchange rates, current payments, and capital flows—was
held nearly four decades ago. In light of repeated and costly international financial crises
since then, it is timely to review the structure of the IMS to assess how it can be strengthened
and made more resilient. At issue is the confluence of, on one side, an unprecedented buildup
in global current account imbalances and volatile cross border capital flows, accompanied
by a sharp build-up of international reserves, and on the other side, the concentration of those
reserves in a few reserve currencies facing new challenges in maintaining fiscal and financial
stability. As pre-crisis trends appear set to resume, this tension calls for examining their
broader implications for the stability and efficiency of the current system. While the paper
views the problems of the IMS through this prism in the tension between high reserve
demand and narrow reserve supply, it also inevitably touches on all the components of the
IMS—exchange rate arrangements, capital flows,and the global adjustment process. It
should also be seen in the broader context of the Fund’s recent work on IMS stability, which
started with a paper focused on exchange rate arrangements last summer (Ghosh et al., 2010)
and will continue in coming months with another on capital flows.

- Bitcoin does not encourage people to build local markets

This thread is just a conspiracy theory from a conspiracy theorist doing what conspiracy theorists do.

I don't see why the state would use Bitcoin to enslave the people, when they've already got the vast majority under their spell (even most libertarians, the supposed liberty lovers, still strongly believe in the state and are willing to vote for a libertarian president); if all you've got is speculation and confirmation bias by a few select authors, then I encourage you to do your own thinking.

Bitcoin obviously isnt going to take over national currencies.

Bitcoin obviously isnt going to take over national currencies.

Why is a cashless society the holy grail of total tyrannical control for the Banksters?

Because once your entire financial banking life is under the dominion of these criminals in the form of a card or an implanted chip, you will never again be free. They are already tracking you, building a database about you and monitoring your every move.

But once cash transactions are done away with entirely, if the Banksters (or fascist government) don’t like your point of view or politics, they can just turn your chip off.

    “And no one may buy or sell except one who has the mark or the name of the beast.”

The New World Order end goal is chipping every baby at birth and transferring global currency to a cashless credit-based system, managed via microchips.

Shortly after 9/11 there was a whole family on “Good Morning America” who all got chipped. They interviewed with CFR member Diane Sawyer saying they were scared of the terrorists and felt safer with implanted identification devices. The government is now pushing legislation to chip animals, children, prisoners, and Alzheimer’s patients.

Andy Rooney even promoted the idea in a 60 Minutes editorial:

    “Something has to change, though. They have to find a better way to identify the bad guys, or the rest of us are going to stay home and watch the world go by on television. But we need some system for permanently identifying safe people. Most of us are never going to blow anything up. And there’s got to be something better than one of these photo IDs— a tattoo somewhere maybe.

    The Saudis use an American device to scan the eyes of travelers. I wouldn’t mind having something planted permanently in my arm that would identify me. If we don’t do something, people are going to stop flying. If they stop flying, and I don’t go to the Giants games, it means the bastards have won.”

    Andy Rooney (For more information regarding the frightening reality of microchips, read Katherine Albright’s “Spy Chips.”)

A reply of yours, quoted below, was deleted by a Bitcoin Forum moderator. Posts are most frequently deleted because they are off-topic, though they can also be deleted for other reasons. In the future, please avoid posting things that need to be deleted.

"In 1789; John Robison warned all Masonic leaders in America that the Illuminati had infiltrated into their lodges and on July 19, 1789; David Papen, President of Harvard University, issued the same warning to the graduating class and lectured them on how the influence of Illuminism was acquitting on American politics and religion, and to top it off; John Quincy Adams, who had organized the New England Masonic Lodges, issued his warnings. He wrote three letters to Colonel William L. Stone, a top Mason, in which he exposed how Jefferson was using Masonic lodges for subversive Illuministic purposes. Those three letters are at this very time in Whittenburg Square Library in Philadelphia. In short; Jefferson, founder of the Democratic Party, was a member of the Illuminati which at least partly accounts for the condition of the party at this time and through infiltration of the Republican Party; we have exactly nothing of loyal Americanism today. That disastrous rebuff at the Congress of Vienna created by the Czar of Russia did not by any means destroy the Illuminati conspiracy. It merely forced them to adopt a new strategy realizing that the one-world idea was, for the moment, killed. The Rothschild's decided that to keep the plot alive they would have to do it by heightening their control of the money system of the European nations.

"It was during the Civil War that the conspirators launched their first concrete efforts. We know that Judah Benjamin, chief advisor of Jefferson Davis, was a Rothschild agent. We also know that there were Rothschild agents planted in Abraham Lincoln's cabinet who tried to sell him into a financial dealing with the House of Rothschild. But old Abe saw through the scheme and bluntly rejected it thereby incurring the undying enmity of the Rothschilds; exactly as the Russian Czar did when he torpedoed their first League of Nations at the Congress in Vienna. Investigation of the assassination of Lincoln revealed that the assassin Booth was a member of a secret conspiratorial group. Because there were a number of highly important government officials involved; the name of the group was never revealed and it became a mystery; exactly as the assassination of Jack Kennedy is still a mystery. But I am sure it will not remain a mystery for long. Anyway; the ending of the Civil War destroyed temporarily all chances of the House of Rothschilds to get a clutch on our money system; such as they had acquired in Britain and other nations in Europe. I say temporarily because the Rothschilds and the masterminds of the conspiracy never quit so they had to start from scratch; but they lost no time in getting started.

"Shortly after the Civil War; a young immigrant, who called himself Jacob H. Schiff, arrived in New York. Jacob was a young man with a mission for the House of Rothschild. Jacob was the son of a Rabbi who was born in one of the Rothschild's houses in Frankfurt, Germany. I will go deeply into his background. The important point was that Rothschild recognized in him not only a potential money wizard; but more important, he also saw the latent Machiavellian qualities in Jacob that could, as it did, make him an invaluable functionary in the great one-world conspiracy. After a comparatively brief training period in the Rothschild's London Bank; Jacob left for America with instructions to buy into a banking house which was to be the springboard to acquire control of the money system of the United States. Actually; Jacob came here to carry out four specific assignments.

    And most important, was to acquire control of America's money system.

"Earlier I stated that Jacob Schiff came to America with orders by Rothschild to carry out four specific directives. The first and most important one was to get control of the United States' money system. Let's trace Schiff's step to accomplish that directive. As a first step he had to buy into a banking house; but it had to be the kind of a house that he could absolutely control and mold for that primary objective of entrapping our U.S. money system. After carefully scouting around; Jacob bought a partnership in a firm that called itself: "Kuhn and Loeb." Like Schiff; Kuhn and Loeb were immigrants from German Jewish ghettos. They came to the U.S. in the mid 1840's and both of them started their business careers as itinerant pack peddlers. In the early 1850's; they pooled their interests and set up a merchandise store in Lafayette, Indiana under the firm name of "Kuhn and Loeb" servicing the covered wagon settlers on their way west. In the years that followed; they set up similar stores in Cincinnati and St. Louis. Then they added "pawn broking" to their merchandising pursuits. From that to money lending was a short and quick step.

"As I have stated; the first great step of the conspiracy was to be the entrapment of our money system. To achieve that objective; Schiff had to get full cooperation of the then big banker elements in America; and that was easier said than done. Even in those years; Wall Street was the heart of the American money mart and J.P. Morgan was its dictator. Next in line were the Drexels and the Biddles of Philadelphia. All the other financiers, big and little, danced to the music of those three houses; but particularly to that of Morgan. All of those three were proud, haughty, arrogant potentates.

"In 1912; their man, Woodrow Wilson, was elected to the presidency. Immediately after Wilson was inaugurated; Senator Aldrich railroaded the Federal Reserve Act through both houses of Congress and Wilson promptly signed it and the Federal Reserve Act became law. That heinous act of treason was committed in December 23, 1913; two days before Christmas when all the members of Congress, except for several carefully picked Representatives and three equally carefully picked Senators, were away from Washington. How heinous treasonous was that act? I'll tell you. Our founding fathers knew full well the power of money. They knew that whoever had that power held the destiny of our nation in his hands. Therefore; they carefully guarded this power when they set forth in the Constitution that Congress, the elected representatives of the people, alone would have the power. The Constitutional language on this point is brief, concise, and specific, stated in Article I, Section 8, Paragraph 5, defining the duties and powers of Congress, and I quote: "to coin money, regulate the value thereof, and of foreign coin, and the standard of weights and measures." But on that tragic, unforgettable day of infamy; December 23, 1913, the men we sent to Washington to safeguard our interests; the Representatives, Senators, and Woodrow Wilson, delivered the destiny of our nation into the hands of two aliens from Eastern Europe; Jacob Schiff and Paul Warburg. Warburg was a very recent immigrant who came here on orders from Rothschild for the express purpose of blueprinting that foul Federal Reserve Act.

"Now the vast majority of the American people think that the Federal Reserve System is an United States Government owned agency. That is positively false. All of the stock of the federal reserve banks is owned by the member banks and the heads of the member banks are all members of the hierarchy of the great Illuminati conspiracy known today as the "CFR."

Establishment controlled outlets like Reuters and Bloomberg have an astonishing number of bitcoin stories per week, and most of these stories paint the crypto-currency in a positive light.  We’ve heard about bitcoin’s “unbreakable” cryptography.  Its finite supply.  The inability to duplicate the currency from thin air.  Its rising acceptance in the corporate world.  The Cinderella stories of bitcoin investors buying Lamborghinis and New York brownstones.  Even Ben Bernanke seems to have a soft spot for bitcoin...

One of my first questions to bitcoin representatives back in 2009 was WHO, exactly, founded the operation?  Well, Satoshi Nakamodo, everyone knows that, right?  But who the hell is Satoshi Nakamodo?  Who is the original designer of bitcoin?  Who holds the foundational key to the structure of bitcoin’s cryptography?  Is Nakamodo a person, or a group?  Why should we trust him, or them, to safeguard our wealth any more than the Federal Reserve?  The fact is no one except maybe Gavin Andresen, the chief scientist at the Bitcoin Foundation,  knows who is behind the digital currency.  We actually know more about the banking elites behind the Fed than we do about the founders of bitcoin.

During the first and second Ron Paul campaigns, the mainstream media made a blatant and obvious effort to purposely ignore the candidate, his arguments, and his successes.  Coverage was next to nil.  His expansive crowds of supporters were edited out of news footage.  His high polling numbers were censored.  If not for the independent media, you wouldn’t have known the guy existed.  When someone or something presents a legitimate threat to the establishment, the establishment’s first tactic is to make sure no one knows.

Bitcoin, on the other hand, has received a steady flow of positive media attention, with the random critical piece thrown in for good measure.  Overall, the establishment has embraced, if not directly fueled, the bitcoin trend.  This is rather surprising to me considering the “destroyer of the dollar” has only been around for four years.

When an anti-establishment vehicle suddenly becomes the center focus of establishment affections, and when globalist monsters like Ben Bernanke throw flower petals in its path, I have to wonder if Bitcoin is a real threat, or just a ruse.

Some of the early hype surrounding Bitcoin claimed that the currency could not be confiscated, making it “better than gold” (the better than gold motto has been widely espoused by Gavin Andresen).  This claim turned out to be false when the FBI became the holder of the world’s LARGEST Bitcoin wallet:

http://www.wired.com/wiredenterprise/2013/12/fbi_wallet/

I find arguments that this is only a temporary condition and that the feds will eventually auction off their holdings a bit laughable, but indicative of the denial inherent in Bitcoin culture.

Hackers, or governments could conceivably kill bitcoin by mining a large portion of them out of circulation, artificially hyperinflating the value of the remaining coins (like a speculator would do with commodities), or dumping a large portion and abruptly cutting the value.  Major bitcoin hoarders could use their massive bitcoin stakes to shift values at will. As long a Bitcoin operates on supply and demand, it can be threatened through speculation like ay other commodity (if you consider digitized numbers floating around the web a commodity).

While bitcoins can apparently be stolen or criminally mined by anonymous persons or organizations, honest users are subject to considerable scrutiny.  A disturbing aspect of bitcoin is the group surveillance that goes into tracing transactions, otherwise known as the “proof of work system”.  The bitcoin network is constantly dependent on decoders who track and verify bitcoin trades in order to ensure that the same bitcoins are not used during multiple trades or purchases.  Anyone with the desire could decode the transaction history of the network, or “block chain”, including governments.  Though Bitcoiners are considered “partially anonymous”, tracking the individual identity of a bitcoin trade is not difficult for entities such as the NSA because every transaction leaves a digital trail.

The use of anonymising browsers like Tor also have not produced the kind of privacy that was promised when bitcoin was introduced.

This is exactly the kind of currency system global bankers have sought for some time – total information awareness of all financial transactions and purchases within the system.  While bitcoin proponents claim that their currency is a revolution against centralized oversight of monetary transactions, the truth is they have built the perfect centralized surveillance solution.  Paper dollar purchases are difficult to trace.  Gold, silver, and barter purchases are nearly impossible to track.  Bitcoin, though, is the most traceable form of currency on the planet, and this is basically REQUIRED by the network itself.  The entire trade history of every bitcoin is recorded.   The digital landscape is the ultimate form of privacy invasion, especially for the likes of super computer wielding agencies like the NSA.  Bitcoin aids the development of this intrusive system.

Yes, bitcoins can be stored on physical wallet devices, but the majority portion of bitcoin trading and bitcoin mining requires the continued operation of the web.  The internet is NOT a creative commons, as many believe.  It is in fact a controlled networking system that we have simply been allowed to use.  The exposure by Edward Snowden of NSA activities has proven once and for all that nothing you do on the web is private.  Everything is tracked and recorded.  Period.

Web access can also be easily denied by governments, and power centers around the globe have been utilizing this option more and more.  During a national crisis, whether real or engineered, the continued function of the internet as we know it is not guaranteed.  A currency relying on a government dominated internet is not truly independent.  A grid down situation would also make bitcoin stores virtually useless.

Bitcoin is consistently touted as a superior option to precious metals as a way to decouple from central bank fiat.  Under examination, though, it appears to me that bitcoin is instead a deliberate distraction away from gold and silver, and other tangible solutions; in other words, I believe it to be a form of controlled opposition.

There is nothing particularly special about the bitcoin design, and if someone offered a digital currency tomorrow that was truly anonymous, it could quickly supplant bitcoin.  Though its cryptography makes it difficult to artificially inflate (again, for now), other digital currencies can still be produced out of thin air.  Bitcoiners desperately want to equate cryptography with tangibility, but the truth is that there is no comparison.  Physical gold and silver cannot be artificially produced by anyone, anywhere.  Digital currencies can be produced at will and hyped like Dutch tulip mania.

Bitcoin only furthers the removal of independence and self sustainability from local economies by fooling activists into thinking that buying things without dollars is enough.

If Americans in particular want to pursue any solution to the threat of globalism or dollar collapse, they are going to have to start with themselves, and the community around them.  Online trade is the last thing they should be worried about.  Only when neighborhoods, towns, and counties become producers and self suppliers will they be safe from financial instability.  Only when those same communities band together for mutual aid and self defense will they be safe from tyrannical political entities.  Bitcoin accomplishes nothing in either of these categories, making it possibly the most popular non-solution for liberty to date.