For the last decade, I've been advocating how and why BTC is a US tool through social media posts and hundreds of relevant articles and publications. It is hard to accept if you profit from it, promote it, or your salary depends on it one way or another (eg, you write about it, analyze it, trade it, etc.).

The official narrative of Bitcoin is one of cypherpunk idealism, a decentralized, anonymous tool for financial liberation created by a phantom financial messiah, Satoshi Nakamoto. However, an alternative analysis, grounded in geopolitics, intelligence tradecraft, and economic history, suggests a far more deliberate and controlled origin. This analysis posits that Bitcoin was not an organic creation offered to the world, but a strategic asset deployed by US interests to manage the decline of the US dollar and preempt the rise of any geopolitical rival's currency.

Here is the case, broken down by evidence vectors:

In an era of unprecedented digital surveillance, the enduring anonymity of Satoshi Nakamoto is a statistical improbability. State-level actors possess the signals intelligence (SIGINT) and analytical capabilities to de-anonymize almost any target.

The ability to locate and eliminate high-value targets in fortified bunkers stands in stark contrast to the inability to identify the creator of a multi-trillion-dollar global asset. This suggests that "Satoshi" is not an individual to be found, but a cover to be maintained.

The name itself has been noted for its linguistic resemblance to "Central Intelligence" in Japanese (中 naka, 本 moto; an interpretation, but one that fuels the hypothesis). The complete operational security (OPSEC) maintained by Satoshi—vanishing without a trace after establishing the project—is more characteristic of a state-level intelligence operation than a lone coder or a disparate group of activists.

The core of Bitcoin's security architecture is built on technology developed by the US National Security Agency (NSA).

The SHA-256 (Secure Hashing Algorithm 256-bit) algorithm, which is fundamental to Bitcoin mining and transaction integrity, was designed by the NSA and published by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), a US federal agency.

While the algorithm's specifications are public, deploying a global financial system on a cryptographic standard developed by a premier signals intelligence agency is, from a strategic standpoint, a significant risk unless you are the agency that developed it. The perennial concern among cryptographers about potential, undiscovered mathematical backdoors or weaknesses in NSA-designed standards cannot be dismissed. As Edward Snowden's revelations demonstrated, the NSA has a documented history of weakening or building backdoors into cryptographic standards.

The early history of Bitcoin includes events that contradict its decentralized ethos and instead demonstrate a capacity for centralized, decisive action.

The Value Overflow Incident (2010): A critical bug in the Bitcoin code allowed a transaction to create 184 billion BTC out of thin air. The "decentralized" network was rapidly patched, and the blockchain was forked by a small group of core developers with Satoshi's guidance.

This event, often cited as a success story of community response, can also be interpreted as a test of the system's "override" capabilities. It proved that a small, influential group could unilaterally alter the ledger, a power structure antithetical to true decentralization but essential for a controlled system.

The early adoption by darknet markets like Silk Road provided the network with liquidity and a clear use case when it had none. This can be viewed as an intentional "gray zone" launch, allowing the network to grow and prove its resilience outside the purview of mainstream finance and regulation, only to be brought into the regulatory fold later. Do not forget, that the first users of Bitcoin outside Silk Road, were people of a particular ethnicity, using it to store, distribute, and sell child-abusive media (which are still on chain btw).

The ultimate irony, or perhaps the ultimate plan, is Bitcoin's absorption by the very institutions it was supposedly designed to destroy. Remember, Bitcoin was given to people so that people can avoid banks, taxes, governments, and whatnot from the centralized box.

The proliferation of Bitcoin ETFs by asset management giants like BlackRock and Fidelity, the increasing regulatory clarity from the SEC, and the holdings of Bitcoin by public companies and even governments (including the US, through seizures) signify a complete institutional capture.

This was not a failure of the Bitcoin project but the successful completion of its "infiltration" phase. The asset was presented as an outsider rebellion, gaining popular and ideological support, only to be sold back to the masses by the financial-governmental complex. The power remains concentrated with the custodians, the exchanges, and the regulated financial vehicles, the same players who control the legacy system.

Read the financial history of the last 500 years. It shows a cyclical pattern of dominant empires: a rising economic power, the establishment of its currency as the global reserve, followed by over-extension, massive debt creation (money printing), and eventual decline, that is signaled by pandemics (C19, political decay (Biden was literally a President and similar picture all over the west), and global scale physical conflicts (open wars across almost all contitents). The US is arguably in the final stages of this cycle.

Naturally, the natural successor to the USD would be the Chinese Yuan for a plethora of good reasons. For US strategists, this is an unacceptable outcome. A direct transition would mean ceding global economic control to a primary geopolitical adversary.

The Solution is to introduce a "neutral," third-party asset that can become the new global reserve layer. An asset that is secretly under your control. By orchestrating the rise of Bitcoin, US interests can perform a controlled demolition of the dollar-based system and pivot the world onto a new standard. This standard, while appearing decentralized, would be built on US-designed cryptography, dominated by US-based financial institutions, and ultimately surveillable by US intelligence.

Don't forget that most of BTC is mined by only 2 companies. Don't fork the Ethereum hard fork (demonstrating once again there is no immutability), Calvin Ayre, Pelossi, and nVidia top-shelf people piling it like there is no tomorrow, and Grayscale buying casually 80% of all Ethereum ever minted. Vitalik was concerned at his interview with TIME where he hinted that he no longer can do what he wants with Ethereum, and that saddens him, without, of course, mentioning who is really in control of it.

This narrative frames Bitcoin as the most sophisticated act of asymmetric economic warfare ever conceived. It's a system designed to look like the ultimate freedom, which, once global adoption is critical, becomes the ultimate instrument of control (pseudonymous is not anonymous, and there is no decentralization without decentralized hardware), a digital panopticon on a US-controlled foundation, ensuring another century of American dominance without firing a shot.

It is ok to use new tech. I highly encourage it. Bitcoin is good and all, but try also AI, Quantum Computing, Bioinformatics and Genetic Engineering, Brain to Machine Interfaces, and so on. Sure, it's fancy tech, but it's far from the pinnacle of possibilities, and it is definitely not a revolution anymore. Blockchain will take over the internet infrastructure simply for practicality and efficiency reasons.

Keep in mind, the centralized authorities never had your interest in mind across the entire history of mankind, and most likely never will by design. Bitcoin is not a reason for them to start carrying now. As a matter of fact, it's quite the opposite.

For the last decade, I've been advocating how and why BTC is a US tool through social media posts and hundreds of relevant articles and publications. It is hard to accept if you profit from it, promote it, or your salary depends on it one way or another (eg, you write about it, analyze it, trade it, etc.).

The official narrative of Bitcoin is one of cypherpunk idealism, a decentralized, anonymous tool for financial liberation created by a phantom financial messiah, Satoshi Nakamoto. However, an alternative analysis, grounded in geopolitics, intelligence tradecraft, and economic history, suggests a far more deliberate and controlled origin. This analysis posits that Bitcoin was not an organic creation offered to the world, but a strategic asset deployed by US interests to manage the decline of the US dollar and preempt the rise of any geopolitical rival's currency.

Here is the case, broken down by evidence vectors:

In an era of unprecedented digital surveillance, the enduring anonymity of Satoshi Nakamoto is a statistical improbability. State-level actors possess the signals intelligence (SIGINT) and analytical capabilities to de-anonymize almost any target.

The ability to locate and eliminate high-value targets in fortified bunkers stands in stark contrast to the inability to identify the creator of a multi-trillion-dollar global asset. This suggests that "Satoshi" is not an individual to be found, but a cover to be maintained.

The name itself has been noted for its linguistic resemblance to "Central Intelligence" in Japanese (中 naka, 本 moto; an interpretation, but one that fuels the hypothesis). The complete operational security (OPSEC) maintained by Satoshi—vanishing without a trace after establishing the project—is more characteristic of a state-level intelligence operation than a lone coder or a disparate group of activists.

The core of Bitcoin's security architecture is built on technology developed by the US National Security Agency (NSA).

The SHA-256 (Secure Hashing Algorithm 256-bit) algorithm, which is fundamental to Bitcoin mining and transaction integrity, was designed by the NSA and published by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), a US federal agency.

While the algorithm's specifications are public, deploying a global financial system on a cryptographic standard developed by a premier signals intelligence agency is, from a strategic standpoint, a significant risk unless you are the agency that developed it. The perennial concern among cryptographers about potential, undiscovered mathematical backdoors or weaknesses in NSA-designed standards cannot be dismissed. As Edward Snowden's revelations demonstrated, the NSA has a documented history of weakening or building backdoors into cryptographic standards.

The early history of Bitcoin includes events that contradict its decentralized ethos and instead demonstrate a capacity for centralized, decisive action.

The Value Overflow Incident (2010): A critical bug in the Bitcoin code allowed a transaction to create 184 billion BTC out of thin air. The "decentralized" network was rapidly patched, and the blockchain was forked by a small group of core developers with Satoshi's guidance.

This event, often cited as a success story of community response, can also be interpreted as a test of the system's "override" capabilities. It proved that a small, influential group could unilaterally alter the ledger, a power structure antithetical to true decentralization but essential for a controlled system.

The early adoption by darknet markets like Silk Road provided the network with liquidity and a clear use case when it had none. This can be viewed as an intentional "gray zone" launch, allowing the network to grow and prove its resilience outside the purview of mainstream finance and regulation, only to be brought into the regulatory fold later. Do not forget, that the first users of Bitcoin outside Silk Road, were people of a particular ethnicity, using it to store, distribute, and sell child-abusive media (which are still on chain btw).

The ultimate irony, or perhaps the ultimate plan, is Bitcoin's absorption by the very institutions it was supposedly designed to destroy. Remember, Bitcoin was given to people so that people can avoid banks, taxes, governments, and whatnot from the centralized box.

The proliferation of Bitcoin ETFs by asset management giants like BlackRock and Fidelity, the increasing regulatory clarity from the SEC, and the holdings of Bitcoin by public companies and even governments (including the US, through seizures) signify a complete institutional capture.

This was not a failure of the Bitcoin project but the successful completion of its "infiltration" phase. The asset was presented as an outsider rebellion, gaining popular and ideological support, only to be sold back to the masses by the financial-governmental complex. The power remains concentrated with the custodians, the exchanges, and the regulated financial vehicles, the same players who control the legacy system.

Read the financial history of the last 500 years. It shows a cyclical pattern of dominant empires: a rising economic power, the establishment of its currency as the global reserve, followed by over-extension, massive debt creation (money printing), and eventual decline, that is signaled by pandemics (C19, political decay (Biden was literally a President and similar picture all over the west), and global scale physical conflicts (open wars across almost all contitents). The US is arguably in the final stages of this cycle.

Naturally, the natural successor to the USD would be the Chinese Yuan for a plethora of good reasons. For US strategists, this is an unacceptable outcome. A direct transition would mean ceding global economic control to a primary geopolitical adversary.

The Solution is to introduce a "neutral," third-party asset that can become the new global reserve layer. An asset that is secretly under your control. By orchestrating the rise of Bitcoin, US interests can perform a controlled demolition of the dollar-based system and pivot the world onto a new standard. This standard, while appearing decentralized, would be built on US-designed cryptography, dominated by US-based financial institutions, and ultimately surveillable by US intelligence.

Don't forget that most of BTC is mined by only 2 companies. Don't fork the Ethereum hard fork (demonstrating once again there is no immutability), Calvin Ayre, Pelossi, and nVidia top-shelf people piling it like there is no tomorrow, and Grayscale buying casually 80% of all Ethereum ever minted. Vitalik was concerned at his interview with TIME where he hinted that he no longer can do what he wants with Ethereum, and that saddens him, without, of course, mentioning who is really in control of it.

This narrative frames Bitcoin as the most sophisticated act of asymmetric economic warfare ever conceived. It's a system designed to look like the ultimate freedom, which, once global adoption is critical, becomes the ultimate instrument of control (pseudonymous is not anonymous, and there is no decentralization without decentralized hardware), a digital panopticon on a US-controlled foundation, ensuring another century of American dominance without firing a shot.

It is ok to use new tech. I highly encourage it. Bitcoin is good and all, but try also AI, Quantum Computing, Bioinformatics and Genetic Engineering, Brain to Machine Interfaces, and so on. Sure, it's fancy tech, but it's far from the pinnacle of possibilities, and it is definitely not a revolution anymore. Blockchain will take over the internet infrastructure simply for practicality and efficiency reasons.

Keep in mind, the centralized authorities never had your interest in mind across the entire history of mankind, and most likely never will by design. Bitcoin is not a reason for them to start carrying now. As a matter of fact, it's quite the opposite.