Topic: Operation Chokepoint 2.0 (Biden's administration quitet ban on crypto) (Read 317 times)

You are correct and this massive erosion of common values is called demoralization. This is done through the use of years of a common tactic we very much know within the cryptospace community called fear, uncertainty and doubt. The real enemy who wants to create a division uses different media outlets for fakenews, clickbaits and information manipulation to cause the people question their own beliefs. If they begin to question their own beliefs, they are starting to be demoralized. I reckon the Russians and Chinese have been doing this tactic in America.

Hm, this is indeed an interesting recipe for the coming years:

- Soft ban on Bitcoin and altcoins

- Implementation of CBCD

- Reduction of the cash in circulation

The SEC is already tackling against Paxos and BUSD, calling a security when we all know it does not make sense to call a stablecoin a security. This is about the government of the United States wanting to have the monopoly not only over the dollar and any other dollar-pegged asset, but also digital payment systems.

Let us remember that markets are about pairs. In the case of BTC/USD, they cannot touch BTC, so they go all in against the liquidity of the pair in USD, both in form of stablecoins and banking services. Things may get messy.

Thank You to everyone contributing to this discussion, it makes me wonder wonderful the World could truly become if we were truly unblocked from co-operating with each other...........I tend to agree though we have to Idealogically find the balance, due to the corrupt nature of this Earth and recognize we can't fix everything with just crypto!

However the forces against any types of Freedom are enormous!  1 Point I would like to add is the Honey Pot Trap.............Most people go through their lives if they so happen to excel enough to compensate for the corrupt downwash from the Fiat Printing Systems of the World!  

They will eventually arrive to a position of reasonable power which the Top Dogs have a whole host of Psychological Tools in their Arsenal to entice and trap such Souls!  Too many to list!

But I just want to Highlight the Psychology of how they make decisions the Big Decision Makers like Jeffrey Epstein were so entangled with having any desire he could want he was the one running the show!

His decisions were not at all effected by "Desire" for sex, money, ect..........as he had it all in unlimited amounts.............he was "gifted" the largest Mansion in NYC for $1 USD!  He was "allowed" to operate an "unregulated" Ponzi network working with and creating Non-Profit Organizations to launder "Deals"

So, people need to be aware the temptations we are all faced with are enormous in current times and the lack of knowledge of it is even greater a danger!  

We truly need Jesus to comeback and start Whipping "The Money Changers", but in reality we need to rely on God that he gave us the tools and his "Holy Spirit" to communicate with us the difficult path we are REQUIRED to take and learn how to individually Whip "The Money Changers" from our lives!

I have to leave it at that for now!

But the Bankers only Real "Chokepoint" is the Grave, but they establish literally thousands and thousands of chokepoints against the masses of which they themselves are seemingly able to not be held accountable to any Rules whatsoever!

It's truly past time to overthrow them!  But humans are a truly sad state in reality!  Divided and Conquered "DIVOC-2019" DIVOC means divide and conquer in Hebrew!

NexusFlavor!

I think the problem is deeper than "them" creating divisions. That would suggest that if "they" (however you define them) stopped doing that, everything would be fine.
What we witnessed in recent decades is a massive erosion of what used to be common values that kept societies and communities together.
To not be divided means to be united, and for that, you need to unite around something. If people can't agree on basic values or agree on any principles and on what's right or wrong - you're ending up with a low-trust society where everyone cares mostly about themselves. Such a society is very easy to control.

I'm still stuck in that 2009 rhetoric, but that's probably because in my early days I read and watched a lot of Andreas, Max, and now Michael Saylor and a few others.
I think that shitcoins like XRP that call themselves bridges between traditional finances and bitcoin managed to fool a lot of people into believing their "2023" logic.

That is basically roman times tactic and has worked for 2 thousand years. When romans failed to beat an enemy, they would create chaos somewhere else to get their attention to that. Biggest example has been Hannibal, when he was roaring through roman empire, and beating everyone, they caused him to go back to Africa and beat him there, and created chaos within his consul. Because they couldn't beat him on open field.

All in all, I would guess that for the past 2 thousand years, this has been used a lot, and media does the same thing now. I can rephrase a news topic 10 different ways to make you think 10 different things about the same subject, all depends on how you write it.

They also use other tactics to divide the people and create a setting where communities will fight against each other to make it much harder to see the real enemy. A divided community is easier to manipulate because they only think that their enemy is from the opposite side of the argument, however, the real enemy is the one creating the division.

This is very head shaking because there might be such occurences in the cryptospace community.

Most people don't have strong convictions about anything really. You can shift their "opinions" just by phrasing the question differently. If you present a question of more regulations emphasising safety etc, they'd be for it, but if you point that the banks/authorities will limit their freedoms and have ability to censor them - they'd be against it.

Another black pill is that what people think is completely irrelevant to what type of legislation is being passed. As evidenced by a "Gilens' flatline", aka "The most terrifying graph on democracy" (a big study compiling nearly 2,000 US polls, conducted in 2014).

In my opinion, the governments of almost all countries are not interested in the development and prosperity of Bitcoin.

Satoshi Nakamoto created the first cryptocurrency as an antagonist to the traditional financial system of his time.  

Why would this financial system destroy itself?  

Governments are forced to put up with bitcoin because they fear that if they ban the first cryptocurrency, more anonymous and private protocols (such as Monero) may come to the fore.  It is dangerous to ban Bitcoin, it is much more profitable to slowly deprive it of its ideological appeal and the possibility of development and scaling.  

In particular, one of the tactical goals may be its maximum isolation from the modern banking system.

BAN all "crypto" keep "Bitcoin"

--Coffeezilla

2009 Banks are evil and need to disappear!!!!
2023 We need access to banks and to have our own government regulated banks !!!!

Seems like the witch hunting is back, is always this irresponsible blame game from people that seek attention every single moment, on one side we have the ever-triumphant march of the government being unable to stop us, of crypto defying every obstacle and the next day like a bunch of pussy crying over one line of regulation that foils their mastermind plans.
Oh for god's sake, just stop with this.


So in short, you have no problem with blood money as long as it's not your blood and the money is in your pocket not somebodies else!
You hated the government and politicians because they weren't throwing a bone, that's what it was?

Much ado about nothing is what I'd call this article.


A crypto "bank" that nobody in the space seems to need, wanted to become an officially recognized bank, join the ranks of the masters of fractional reserve and was denied. Who would've thought that they won't like an entity that deals in as they call it "sound money" to become one of them. Bitcoiners and banks don't use the same principles.

A crypto company that wants to become accepted by the Federal Reserve money printer must be nuts.

I agree with others that it is not as big of a deal as people make it out to be. However, my main counterpoint to this is the fact that big banks and all those rich folks control USA, from media to politicians to many other industries, look at how they still allow oil companies to get paid help, when they make billions, all because of narrative control and bribery to politicians. So nothing bad could happen to crypto, since these banks are involved with crypto as well and they want it to be left alone, so they can easily pay billions to politicians to make it as legal as possible and go with our direction, which for the first time ever, would help us too.

It is obvious that crypto is a global thing and doesn't care what US government wants to do or not. I get that they want to control it or at least control the citizens who use it, but that doesn't mean that they will be capable of doing that, they will most likely end up with nothing at all on their hands if they tried to pressure the public too much about this.

People in crypto care about their freedom from the government and that means they are not going to let the government get involved too much, they may do something about it, but they won't let it get that further down the line. Even if there were laws about it, they would just find ways to work around it.

They can't unbank Coinbase because they are a publicly traded company and that would hurt the US stock market as well (and at this point they might as well be talking about unbanking Kraken as well).

And they also cannot unbank Binance because they already did that when they banned Binance from operating in the US a long time ago. The only thing they actually can regulate is their US arm which is irrelevant to the rest of the world.

what people are calling "bidens law"
is not about "banning bitcoin"

its about businesses operating as financial services without registering they are:
a business
  -this affects the personal bank account holders that do too many wire transfers on
   localbitcoins and de-fi, breaching their personal banking terms&conditions
   - yep processing say 100k a year for random strangers has been a personal bank
     account red flag for many many years before bitcoin even existed

a financial business
  - this affects both personal and business accounts where they dont have a
    MSB/PSP/PF licence to operate as a financial service. again a rule that predates bitcoin

the detail people forget is that bitcoin became a currency in 2013 thus standard banking policy
began applying to bitcoin businesses after 2013

which isnt about biden/obama. it was the "mainstreaming" of being defined as a currency

yep it was the "bitcoin got allowed" celebrations by many that caused the jurisdictions to then get their fingers into deciding what certain entities can do in crypto

---

as daveF said. if your just doing $100(small amounts) to friends or strangers infrequently. its not going to hit thresholds of red flags

doing the banking limits thresholds of $1k+ $10k+ $xxk+ expect questions
wire transfer thresholds existed pre-bitcoin
but became applicable for bitcoins doing wire transfer. when bitcoin became a currency

We have seen this coming for a while now and we know they are doing this to pave the way for a "cashless" economy, where they can fully track all transactions on their digital cash technologies.

We know most criminal activities are not done with Crypto, but rather with physical cash. (How many drug dealers on the street are accepting crypto as payment for their drugs.... right?)

So, they will eliminate their competition and replace it with their own centralized digital version of cash, which they control. 

But it was also late in 2013 when Bitcoin made an all time high. It was probably a strong enough statement that Bitcoin doesn't care at all. Whether it was more of the effect of the first halving in 2012 isn't the point. It still means Bitcoin is stronger than the development under Obama's administration.

If Obama failed a decade ago, Biden will fail more today. But the point is Bitcoin doesn't care. It's interesting to note that Bitcoin creates an ATH in every administration. It had one during Obama, another during Trump, and another during the current administration.

Agreed! Every move made by governments that impose strict rules and regulations on the people are only made to protect itself and those who financially support their political campaigns. I am not quite certain why there are still people who are not very skeptical on the actions of the government. Everyone should be concerned everytime there is a new bill that passes into law.

Decentralised exchanges don't operate with fiat money. They could replace it with stablecoins, but at the end of the day, stablecoin issuers also would need access to banking to hold fiat deposits and process transactions.

We need people to be able to buy/sell for fiat.


They won't ban it outright, the time for that has passed a long time ago. Now, when crypto is pretty much mainstream, they can only slowly cripple trading and other crypto-projects to keep it contained and not pose a threat to the financial system.