June 18, 2018 By Joseph P. Farrell

So many people shared this article that I have to pass it along. Most regular readers here know that I am not a fan of crypto-currencies. Like all cyber-systems, I do not view them as secure, and have blogged about some stories of hacking of crypto-currencies. At a deeper level, and in spite of the hype to the contrary, I've also viewed them as the latest brain child of Mr. Globaloney and Mr. Central Bank as a step to their goal of a cashless global society, with, of course, them firmly in control of that medium. I even blogged about the Bank of England experimenting with the idea. And finally, I've pointed out that it's the perfect vehicle for the hidden system of finance to launder money and to manipulate the crypto-currency markets and make even more money in an example of finance crapitalism on steroids.

Recently the new Italian coalition government sent another monkey wrench into the globalist cogs by announcing that there should be no restrictions on the use of cash. (Perhaps Mr. Modi in India can take a cue, since India's experiment with semi-cashlessness has been ... well, not "good." But now there's another indicator that my concerns are not without merit:

Bitcoin is slipping after a study found signs its 2017 bull run was driven by market manipulation

There are certain paragraphs here that say it all, including, of course, the predictable denials that any such manipulation occurred:

Academics at the University of Texas at Austin on Wednesday published a paper analyzing whether the cryptocurrency Tether "influences Bitcoin and other cryptocurrency prices during the recent boom."

The academics concluded that the price patterns were "most consistent with the supply-based hypothesis where Tether is used to provide price support and manipulate cryptocurrency prices."

Tether is a cryptocurrency supposedly backed by the US dollar one-for-one, offering the stability of the currency but the flexibility and functionality of cryptocurrency. The cryptocurrency was created by many of the same people behind the leading cryptocurrency exchange Bitfinex. (You can read a full explanation of Tether here.)

Bitfinex CEO JL van der Velde said in an emailed statement: "Bitfinex nor Tether is, or has ever, engaged in any sort of market or price manipulation. Tether issuances cannot be used to prop up the price of Bitcoin or any other coin/token on Bitfinex."


Last month the US Justice Department reportedly began investigating bitcoin price manipulation, focusing specifically on spoofing — the practice of placing fake orders to drive up or down a price — and wash trading — the practice of trading with yourself to simulate volume in a market.

The professor John Griffin and his graduate student Amin Shams concluded in their paper: "Our findings suggest that market surveillance within a proper regulatory framework may be needed for cryptocurrency markets to be legitimate stores of value and a reliable medium for fair financial transactions. Additional research is necessary to further understand these markets." (Emphasis added)

This paper highlights another problem I've blogged about in the past, and have raised with former Assistant HUD Secretary Catherine Austin Fitts in her quarterly reviews on, namely, that all markets - from equities to sovereign or corporate bonds, to commodities - are now so driven by computer algorithms that they are no longer accurate reflection of human markets and conditions; if markets seem to make no sense any more, I suspect this is at the heart of it. Algoritmic-computer-driven trading serves but one purpose, to make massive amounts of money by minor fluctuations in the markets that occur within mere seconds. This phenomenon also has been responsible for the occasional "flash crash." This type of trading, and this type of "currency" really is nothing but finance crapitalism on steroids.

This brings up another central problem for me with the whole algorithmic trading phenomenon, and specifically, with crypto-currencies. There have been numerous stories on the internet about the massive amount of electricity and computing power that is required for trading. Which means, in effect, that Mr. or Mrs. John Q. Public with their desktop are at the mercy of the big institutions and investors with access to much more massive computing power, and with access to the "dark pools", the computer trading centers located close to the market exchanges.  In effect, by entering such activities, one is helping make that machine-like, transhumanist, anti-human future closer to reality.

What we need is not more speculation; what we need is real investment in real products, services, and infrastructure locally. Perhaps, just perhaps, it's time for the emergence of local and regional securities markets. As for the "big markets", I can but repeat the adage caveat emptor.

See you on the flip side...