Topic: Who is the brain of Craig S. Wright's crusade? (Read 355 times)

For over 13 years, I have talked weekly to a CIA officer.  We mostly talk about girls, life, aerospace, endangered animals and drones.  

A few months ago, I read longer emails from Satoshi to someone, and noticed similarities.  I personally think Satoshi Nakamoto was a project by NSA and CIA via OGA/SAD/PAG.  

I think the original Satoshi is a girl from Mill Valley.  Then the "2nd Satoshi" was Laurie Law, the first name on the 1997 NSA paper (likely a pseudonym).  Then NSA contractors Satoshi Obana, Junko Nakajima & Takeshi Okamoto.

I think the bitcoin white paper, emails and posts were written by a CIA officer and the original Satoshi.  My mysterious Japanese friend Hiro and our friend OT were from the Sovereign Individual movement based on the 1997 book, which predicted bitcoin in general.

You can see from my reddit account, I reference Nick Szabo saying, "That's why I created bitcoin...bitgold" 3-years ago on Tim Ferriss' podcast-

https://www.reddit.com/user/krushcoins/comments

My point is I think Nick Szabo, Hal Finney, Bear/Cryddit, were likely read in on a program with Emin Gun Sirer, the NSA contractors and my friend from CIA.

I don't really know and my interest is limited.  The only times I have discussed bitcoin with CIA employees is in reference to clemency requests for Ross Ulbricht.  And defending it vs Cash App, Venmo where most drugs are sold.

If you know so-called "Illuminati brothers" in Puerto Rico, ask them about me.

I'm just posting a lot of details because I have limited time.

A

---

The Secret History of Bitcoin 2021

https://bitcoincore.lol

The Holy Grail of Banking 2004

http://web.archive.org/web/20060222074839/http://unitedelite.net/holygrail.html

"Evolve the banking system to a global currency with intrinsic value and with individual economic value in the respective country" 2005

http://web.archive.org/web/20050528005454/http://unitedelite.net/globalization.html

No, I do not think he is Satoshi Nakamoto.  It seems reasonable that Hiro could know Satoshi, considering he reached out to me in March 2008 from my blog about a global currency.  

I promoted ideas for global currencies schemes to Joby Weeks in 2007.  I called it the Amero and defined it by 371 grains of silver.  Joby's a legit anarcho-capitalist who never filed incomes taxes ever.  He's an idealist and a salesman, so he got caught up in Bitclub, and seems to have escaped the fate of a long prison sentence.

I own 0 bitcoin and 0 crypto.  What am I promoting?  CSW is the reason I randomly read the old emails with Hiro.  I forgot they existed.  And I randomly seen his video about the CIA/SAD and bitcoin, which were very strange comments to make.

***

I work on exotic research, macroscopic quantum phenomena, UAVs and portals that act like a 'biological time machine'.  Like I told Hiro in March 2008, with room temperature glass superconductors, we will not need money, not gold, not bitcoin, not anything.

Bitcoin is based on the Sovereign Individual.  The 'prophecy' is to free the individual and destroy all banks, all corporations, all intelligences agencies, all governments and all religions.

https://news.bitcoin.com/how-bitcoin-applies-to-the-sovereign-individual-thesis

https://news.bitcoin.com/twenty-years-ago-two-men-predicted-bitcoin

https://jedi.lol/revolution.pdf

I've never posted here or promoted any bitcoin company or project.  I mined bitcoin and bought it when it was $1 but own 0 now.  Since Bank of America seized my accounts in 2017, I have owned 0 bitcoin.

As for the modern Illuminati, that's other bitcoin people in Malta and Texas.  I'm not involved with them or anyone.

Akihiko


***

"There's nothing to fear from globalism, free trade and a single worldwide currency." - Ron Paul 2007
International Reserve AG
Aeschenvorstadt 71
CH-4051 / Basel Switzerland

Amero-
https://www.flickr.com/photos/captivating/3754775220/

The Indefinite Perfectibility of Man - the Goal of Jesus - Letter by President Thomas Jefferson
https://www.flickr.com/photos/captivating/84826106/

She made a mistake by accepting that he’s the real Satoshi Nakamoto without asking for enough proof that shows that he is what he claims to be. Things like this can get one into problems they know nothing and it can cause the community to hate her for doing such a thing, there are already lots of people who don’t like Craig White for playing such a foolish game with the cryptocurrency community, so when they get to know stories ,they are going to also despise those who started this lie by first introducing CSW and giving him the opportunity to make such a false claims about being the real Satoshi Nakamoto.

We have seen a lot of people wo have claimed to be the real Satoshi and none of them has been able to prove that they are really what they claim to be, just bunch of criminals trying to take credit for a work that they didn’t do.

Sorry dude. Your bs will stay here forever

I just assumed by your writing that you are interested in Bitcoin for a longer time, than your date of registration on this forum might suggest. A big part of your posting is looking more like a self promotion, than a straight contribution to this CSW topic.
So you want to say, you believe that this was probably Satoshi Nakamoto asking you for help?

Interesting read. Why didn't you use your original account to post this?

As the World Turns.

The players behind the scenes will be a question mark, and Gavin Andresen is the key to opening the blinds. but we all know that nothing can penetrate how the information was leaked. Regardless of who is trying to be the brains of bad ideas have just been tricked to big impact until now.
and to clarify all of these scams, Wright and Andresen had to open their voices in public. and we also need to know for sure.

I don’t think for one second Gavin believed CW was/is Satoshi. CW & Ayre probably paid Gavin to say he believed CW to be Satoshi. It’s amazing what money can make people do, abandon all principles. I reckon Gavin took a bribe for sure.

It seems the intention is to bog people down in legal fees rather than having any legitimate claims. I have not seen him try to enforce patent rights, which I see he has got some US ones issued. I see he is trolling people with the copyright claims already on the White Paper. Some of this stuff does not seem novel.

Here are some method patent Craig now owns:
US1071533
Claim 1: A computer implemented method of encrypting data at an electronic device (S), the electronic device being associated with a key device (C), wherein the electronic device is further associated with a first asymmetric cryptography pair having a first electronic device private key (V1S) and a first electronic device public key (P1S), and the key device is associated with a second asymmetric cryptography pair having a first key device private key (V1C) and a first key device public key (P1C); the method comprising:
determining, at the electronic device, a deterministic key (DK);
receiving, at the electronic device, the first key device public key (P1C) from the key device;
determining, at the electronic device, a second electronic device private key (V2S) based on at least the first electronic device private key (V1S) and the deterministic key (DK), and
determining, at the electronic device, a second key device public key (P2C) based on at least the first key device public key (P1C) and the deterministic key (DK);
determining a secret based on at least the second electronic device private key (V2S) and the second key device public key (P2C);
encrypting the data at the electronic device using the determined secret or an encryption key that is based on the determined secret; and
sending information indicative of the deterministic key (DK) to the key device where the information can be stored.

US10659223
Claim 1:A computer-implemented method of controlling access to a resource, the method comprising:
    splitting a verification element into a plurality of shares;
    determining a common secret at two or more nodes in a network; and
    using the common secret to transmit at least one share of the verification element between the two or more nodes, wherein: the common secret is determined by first (C) and second (S) nodes in the network, wherein the first node (C) is associated with a first asymmetric cryptography pair having a first node master private key (V1C) and a first node master public key (P1C), and the second node (S) is associated with a second asymmetric cryptography pair having a second node master private key (V1S) and a second node master public key (P1S); and wherein the method further comprises: determining a first node second private key (V2C) based on at least the first node master private key (V1C) and a Generator Value (GV); determining a second node second public key (P2S) based on at least the second node master public key (P1S) and the Generator Value (GV); and determining the common secret (CS) based on the first node second private key (V2C) and the second node second public key (P2S), wherein the second node (S) has the same common secret (S) based on a first node second public key (P2S) and a second node second private key (V2S), wherein: the first node second public key (P2C) is based on at least the first node master public key (P1C) and the Generator Value (GV); and the second node second private key (V2S) is based on at least the second node master private key (V1S) and the Generator Value (GV).

US10579779
Claim 1: A computer-implemented method of verifying integrity of a computer software for installation using a distributed hash table and a peer-to-peer distributed ledger, the method comprising:
    determining a metadata (M) associated with a transaction record stored on the peer-to-peer distributed ledger;
    determining an indication of an entry stored on the distributed hash table from the metadata (M);
    determining a third hash value (H3) based on the computer software;
    determining a fourth hash value (H4) from the entry on the distributed hash table;
    comparing the third hash value (H3) and the fourth hash value (H4); and
    verifying the integrity of the computer software based on the comparing of the third hash value (H3) and the fourth hash value (H4).

I am not sure on Copyrights, but in the case of Patents it is actually quite common to get them "thrown out". The simplest way probably, in this case, is to show prior art existed on any of the said subject matter. Likewise, something that is already in the public domain could also invalidate a patent. He has gotten quite a few granted.

Maybe he did this until the time when he disappeared.

No, that would clearly mean another change of ownership, so they could have bought it, hacked it, socially-engineered customer support or used other means to get ahold of the email account.

OTOH, wouldn't Satoshi periodically delete emails anyway if he was really privacy-conscious?

What could be the content of this contract? Payment to Gavin for supporting the story or maybe the revelation of something that would compromise Gavin? Does somebody else know the content? What could happen if the contract was broken by one party?
Interesting ...
I would pay a good price for a proven and authentic copy of that communication. Not to do something with it, but only to know.

Not sure if CSW would write the message 'Michael, send me some coins before I hitman you.' to @Theymos if he wanted everybody to believe that Satoshi is back. More possible that CSW (or one of his associates) bought the access to Satoshis emails later.




Which mailbox are you talking about? You mean the gmx account? So you say at least one of the BCF board members had full access to Satoshis gmx mailbox, just by naming him a board member and he posted emails from this account on their internal board communication?




I would think that Gavin is much smarter. I assume, he knows that claiming random addresses could be a problem and I assume he knows how signing a message with a Bitcoin private key works. If he was the brain behind this plot, he would choose different 'attack vectors'
I would be amazed if Gavin was part of the gang from the start. He must've had strong reasons to risk his image and position in the Bitcoin world.

I've considered that-- esp since we know the account was compromised at one point, but if that happened you would have expected gavin to say that Wright knew about that stuff and AFAIK he never did.

One thing people don't know is that the idiots at the bitcoin foundation named 'satoshi' a board member (without his consent, obviously) and as a result copied the satoshi mailbox on all their board communication.  So perhaps there was an opportunity for a hacker to exploit that information without directly showing that they were aware of it----

At least three BCF board members were bamboozled by (or complicit with) wright, now this might be because BCF's composition was unusually rich in idiots and scoundrels but it could also be because after monitoring years of their presumed private communication wright knew exactly which buttons to press for each person and was able to hack their confidence by echoing their own opinions back to them.

There is a possibility that either CSW or one of his associates were able to hack/take over Satoshi's email accounts and use the info to fool Gavin by referencing the messages the two exchanged in the past.

Thanks! This S. Matthews guy is this one, right? https://www.taal.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/Stephen-Matthews-TAAL.jpg
At least there seems to be a decent group of people with the same agenda, which makes secret hiding difficult in long term. One day they'll tear each other to pieces and we will know more. Have a nice weekend everyone and don't forget to change your clothes.

Thank you gmaxwell for providing the contract information. Reading what you and dkbit98 said about the relationship between the three wild cat I think it could be the plan between them (Gavin, Ver and Craig) just to play with the mind of crypto currency enthusiast maybe they will succeed. Besides, Ver once make a statement this year that "I cant believe some people still think BTC is Bitcoin"  so it loom like a group plan and the last time I check Gavin is the only one I know that could have the knowledge to be yhe brain of Craig.

Yeah, shame on me for being lazy and not linking it.

https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.flsd.521536/gov.uscourts.flsd.521536.647.1.pdf   Items 319, 341.

Hopefully the communication between Wright and Andresen gets made public.

Kinda crazy that Wright is objecting to it on grounds of it being inauthentic, among other things.

Thanks Greg, but you sure know why I'd assume it was hard to trick Gavin. We already had some discussions about this topic. I never read about that contract you are talking about and it is absolute news to me and also to many others interested in this topic. I guess you found it somewhere in the file jungle of this trial. Mind to direct link to the source file?