Bitcoin thus spontaneously developed a price, as do all things in
an open market if they are sufficiently useful and sufficiently
scarce. Let's look at value a little further, because it's a contentious
issue with Bitcoin. There are many (including Paul Krugman) who believe
Bitcoin isn't worth anything and is no more than a speculative bubble
fad.I wouldn't expect Krugman to "get it," but wiser/real economists
need only observe metals to start understanding why Bitcoins have
value. Link
What an idiot, as usual.
If Bitcoin goes to zero then it will be due to the unforeseen emergence of a better crypto currency and not due to the fact that it's just some "bubble fad" of the sort created by central bankers.
Without violence, what incentive did whites have to end apartheid?
The same sort of MLK incentives that whites in America had to end it.
It’s curious how most people justify terrorism while playing pretend
that it’s always wrong simply because it’s terrorism. Turns out that’s
not the case.
Even Mandela apparently wasn’t all rainbows either, as he kept on justifying terrorism against other terrorists:
In 1990, Mandela likened Israel to a “terrorist state”
and declared that “we do not regard the PLO as a terrorist organization.
If one has to refer to any parties as a terrorist state, one might
refer to the Israeli government because they are the people who are
slaughtering defenseless and innocent Arabs in the occupied
territories”.
Mandela should have raised Jewish eyebrows when in 1990 he embraced
Arafat in Lusaka, Zambia, likening the Palestinian-Israeli conflict to
the struggle against South African apartheid. “If the truth alienates
the powerful Jewish community in South Africa, that’s too bad”, said
Mandela.
During a trip to Libya, Mandela declared that “we consider ourselves
to be comrades in arms to the Palestinian Arabs in their struggle for
the liberation of Palestine. There is not a single citizen in South
Africa who is not ready to stand by his Palestinian brothers in their
legitimate fight against the Zionist racists”. Link
I’m not sure how a man that at one point seems to have been
surrounded by Jewish “antisemitic” in some racial way. I guess
antisemitism means different things to different people depending on
their perceptions of “race” and understanding of rabbinic ideas in which
ideologies and religions can supposedly be wrapped around or based on
perceptions of race and tribe.
Ironic:
As some 100 heads of state were gathering in South
Africa to honor Nelson Mandela at a massive memorial service Tuesday,
leaders of South Africa’s Jewish community were expressing
disappointment with the fact that Israel would not be represented by
President Shimon Peres or Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu at the
tribute. timesofIsrael.com
At least Netanyahu didn’t say that he wouldn’t go because Mandela
was a “”"”"terrrorist.”"”"” Whatever happened to the war on terror,
anyway? It seems like it’s never going to end.
Ramble:
Netanyahu on terrorism: “We tried to call ahead when we were going
to blow people up. That’s the type of stuff we do, probably because
we’re superior.” Arguments like that show the extent of the ideologies
of supremacy and racism involved in Netanyahu’s terrorism. I’m not sure
what Mandela’s excuses were for his but they could probably be as good as
Netanyahu’s.
In any event, at least Mandela apparently changed his mind
later or was willing to engage in the theatrical production of changing
his mind with the rainbows of tolerance and all the rest of it. Ironic
that he actually remained on a terrorist watch list in the
Masonic/Talmudic U.S./Israeli Conglomeration Inc. of a “JudeoChristian
nation” until 2008.
I wonder if he had to have his underpants checked for WMDs. There again, we all did thanks to Chertoff:
Chertoff Group, LLC is a registered corporation in the State of Delaware
formed on February 2, 2009. The firm is lead by Chertoff and Chad
Sweet, who served as Chertoff’s Chief of Staff during his tenure as
Secretary of Homeland Security. Mr. Sweet worked in the CIA until the
early 1990s, when he began a career in investment banking. He initially
worked at Morgan Stanley and was later recruited by Goldman Sachs.
Google
Lol. And there’s the fusion of financial terrorism, banksterism
and the supposed prevention of terrorism through the financing of the
warfare side of the welfare/warfare state again. At least Americans can
stand back and let $afety First Inc. or representatives of Israeli
corporations (That kept saying “We won’t outsource our national
security.” after the Syria/Iran situation went kaput.) stop any future
underwear bombers. Safety. Shew.
There are probably a few patriots left in the NSA/CIA/FBI somewhere.
Here’s to hoping that they try to do their jobs WITH THEIR FELLOW
AMERICANS IN MIND and not their careers in mind, not Turkish interests
in mind, not Saudi interests and not even Israeli interests either.
I.e. Israeli interests that apparently have more “dual citizen”
representation in America than any other foreign interest, etc. The
FBI/CIA/NSA need to do their actual jobs like Sibel Edmonds and other
whistle blowers have been trying to… etc. It’s already having an effect
on the corrupt degenerates within the oligarchical structures being
produced by the Federal Reserve Inc. and the banking cartel. (I.e.
structures that tend to put foreign interests and global corporations
before the interests of the American people, etc.)
Of course, it's also prevalent among everyone. Although perhaps one could look at calls for deception, usury and lying being aspects of a religion or tribal tradition as throwing gas on fires that already tend to burn on their own anyway.
It doesn't hit the corporate media much anymore but Greek peasants are
now "anti-semitic" thanks to Blankfein doing "God's work." It would
probably be best if people dropped the focus on racial perceptions that
only verify the rabbinic scam of telling people that they're Special
Victims of Hate and moved on to being directly and ideologically anti-Talmudic.
Almost forgot I need to save this, given the way Mick is.
Saving the comment above mine also:
Hello Jay,
When you have time, I'd appreciate a response to the points I made
above. I think for the thermitic theory to even have a faint fighting
chance, there would have to be enough Fe and Al by % for a thermitic
reaction.
And yet,
It ignites at 430C.
It produces iron microspheres.
It has a greater energy density than conventional thermite.
It is composed of nanoparticulate Fe2O3 and elemental Al.
It was in all the WTC dust samples studied by the Harrit team.
Yet, the substance in question has no known manufacturing correlate.
I appreciate your confidence in this knowledge claim, but how do
you account for the fact that the substance contains free Al, relatively
uniform 100 nm Fe2O3 particles and produces iron microspheres as a
by-product? You cannot simply leave these facts unreconciled. That is
your current stance, which indicates you have no interest in doing
science. You like to sound scientific, yet you fail to take into account actual experimentation.
If you don't think the label "thermitic" should not apply to the
material because it was burned in an ambient atmosphere, that's fine.
It's still unlike any paint known.
Again, a very confident-sounding claim, but have you taken a piece of dried primer (of a LaClede formula variant) and tested to see what temperature it ignites at? Or if it produces IRON MICROSPHERES upon ignition?
That would be a DECISIVE VICTORY to put to bed the notion that the
red-gray chips are some unexploded, experimental military-grade thermal
bridge material FOREVER! But we both know the reason no one has done
that is because that's not what dried paint or primer paint does when it
ignites.
If they were just some "variant of the LaClede formula," why was Dr. Millette unable to make that connection?
So, any material with organic binder is like any other material
with organic binder? That's so clearly not true, it pains me to have to
point it out.
Again with your "Anybody who knows can tell you..." argument from
authority. And yet, why has not a SINGLE EXPERIMENT been done to confirm
what "any decent materials scientist" can spot right away? Maybe
because it's not true. Maybe no one has done an experiment to show how
the LaClede formula burns at 430C and produces IRON MICROSPHERES because
it simply doesn't do that. Maybe you have to stuff your posts with so
much bluster and fluff about how "obvious it is to any expert" because
you don't have a real argument to stand on.
People who are paying attention can see the difference between an
argument with no substance and an argument with real empirical tests
underpinning it. You can quote all the percentages of material
composition, but it gets you no closer to dismissing the red-gray chips
as evidence of a criminal conspiracy attempting to hide underneath the
hijackings.
Except you don't mean "empirically." You mean it has detractors, such as yourself, who have no empirical basis WHATSOEVER to make claims of the insignificance of this evidence.
And yet again, you make my point by trying to make the red-gray chips,
as well as their by-products unimportant in the framework Official
Conspiracy Theory.
If you take away all your appeals to authority, all your bare assertions
stated with nothing but a salesman's confidence, there is no substance
behind anything you say. You can't expect anyone to take your position
seriously if you have nothing to back up your claims.
I see you bowed out of the discussion already, and that's the only smart
move you can make at this point. The science clearly undermines your
position. Your official theory is no help. All you can do is say things
with a sense of authority and disappear--hoping some weak-minded
individual who doesn't have the will to think for himself will agree
with you. That's what "victory" looks like to you.
This is why I don't engage with people whose clear purpose is to
persuade--not to disambiguate. I'm of the opinion that when facts are
laid bare, people can tell the difference between bull and sense. I'm
not selling a goddamned thing. If you have a problem with the arguments I
make, let's take a look at them and break it down to the most
understandable pieces we can. I don't fear that. I relish it.
What if they just simulated some of the chips weakening steel
columns and changed variables until their simulation weakened them
enough to "explain" everything else that was observed? Apparently that
would be a scientific investigation, from some perspectives. And from
your simulated perspective it seems clear that you wouldn't need a "red
layer of the chips" painted on during asbestos abatement work, given
that all you would in some cases would be "office fires." Perhaps when
NIST demonstrates, experimentally, that office fires can essentially
"cut through" thick structural steel columns then AE911 types will be
obligated to put a "red layer of the chips" or thermite on some columns
to demonstrate that it can "cut through" them in the same way?
Ironic: "If you insist on experimental testing to prove anything...."
(There again, maybe that's not really evidence of irony and it's just a
simulation of being ironic.)
Is it possible for "experimental evidence" to prove anything about
thermite in the first place? If they did take some of the chips and
weakened steel with it (perhaps to the same extent as apparent furnaces
of fire that can be generated with office furniture alone, etc.), then
what? I suspect that your quasi-magical standard for supposed
experimental evidence ("Office fires... yeah." vs. "Thermite,
impossible!") and verifiability/falsifiability isn't what you seem to be
imagining it is.
So what are you supposedly imagining that you would conclude if they
actually did take a "red layer of the chips" and "cut through" or
weakened steal with it? It seems unlikely that you would necessarily
then be capable of imagining that thermite was used on 911 and therefore
begin to be able to look for or at lines of evidence that it was, in
fact, used.
You also added claims about the hijackers and all the rest to try
to show that a simulation of an investigation has been entirely
sufficient, case closed. The conclusion of the official story being
that evidence of thermite or any other incendiary or use of explosives
generally need not or cannot be looked for in the first place. Yet
those claims were basically all false, so false assumptions seem to be
shaping your view of any evidence that thermite may have been used.
With respect to thermite and the technical details of finding evidence
of its use, what would be a reason to look for evidence of thermite in the first place and what would subsequently look like evidence that it had been found?
Right. You argue that if they "cut through" a beam with it then the
official story would be falsified. Curious that you don't have the same
experimental standards for the imaginary furnaces of fire that can
apparently be created out of office furniture and donuts, though. Would
you also want NIST to stop running simulations long enough to
demonstrate their claims experimentally as well?
That's it from Metabunk.
But here is some investigative journalism on the same topic: As the application of the
super-thermite must have occurred during the months prior to 9-11, I
have used FOIA and other means to try to find who could have been doing
such work in the towers during 2000-2001. There was one significant
clue at the very beginning. Two days after 9-11, Engineering News-Record
(ENR) reported that an asbestos abatement and demolition company
called LVI had done extensive asbestos abatement work in the World
Trade Center:
AMEC
Inc., Turner Corp. and Bovis Lend Lease were set to assume "lead
roles" in the cleanup effort, says Lee Benish, AMEC vice president.
"From the very beginning, we've been deeply involved with the city
department of emergency services," he says. "They're sorting through
who will be doing what." LVI Services Inc., New York City, which has
done extensive asbestos abatement work on the towers in the past, is
involved in similar work now as well as other cleanup efforts.
LVI
was immediately a suspect because it does a great deal of
pre-demolition work in which it prepares buildings for demolition. LVI
has done several large demolition jobs with Controlled Demolition, Inc.
of Maryland.
Partin concluded: “The Murrah Federal Building was not destroyed by one sole truck bomb. The major factor in its destruction appears to have been detonation of explosives carefully placed at four critical junctures on supporting columns within the building. The only possible reinforced concrete structural failure solely attributable to the truck bomb was the stripping out of the ceilings of the first and second floors in the ‘pit’ area behind columns B4 and B5. Even this may have been caused by a demolition charge at column B3. It is truly unfortunate that a separate and independent bomb damage loads of debris were hauled away, smashed down, and covered with dirt behind a security fence . . . All ambiguity with respect to the use of supplementing demolition charges and the type of truck used could be quickly resolved if the FBI were required to release the surveillance camera coverage of this terribly tragic event.” (www.whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/POLITICS/OK/PARTIN/ok2.htm)
Soon after the explosion, Controlled Demolition Inc. was called in to destroy those parts of the building which had remained standing, and to speedily dispose of all the rubble of the building.
This, of course, prefigures the blatant tampering with a crime scene which became the hallmark of Mayor Giuliani’s approach to the World Trade Center, again using CDI.
The reason Bitcoin will fail as a currency is that Fonestar is
kind of right; were BTC to become remotely widely adopted, it would need
to trade to 7 figures and beyond. The # of available bitcoins is too
scarce. There's no way late adopters of Bitcoin are going to support
such a valuation, as way too much value would have to accrue to the
early adopters. Bitcoin will never become widely adopted; it is simply
yet another penny stock that will fly as far as the speculators will
carry it, until it is abandoned and the hangers-on are left with a mess
of losses.
A penny stock? Man I thought the people on CNBC blog were dumb! Bitcoin is a currency and it is gaining massive adoption in case you weren't paying attention.
I assure you the wealth distribution of bitcoin is much better
than any presently used currency. And it only stands to be more
dispersed as the other currencies become more concentrated. As a wealthy
bitcoin holder you spend your coins to increase their adoption and
therefore their value. As a wealthy fiat holder you print more money for
yourself and your circle of friends.
You could be correct, no one knows the future for sure. The
hilarity here though is that the bank now all of the sudden sees fair
value some 20% higher than the 900% run it just had.... That's like me
predicting in February that January WAS cold.
So this isn't about offering market advice by the bank on BTC, it's
about controlling its advance, because if it gets away on them, they
lose.
BofA just released a personal desperation piece, that's all. And its feckin' hilarious.
The same sort of MLK incentives that whites in America had to end it. It’s curious how most people justify terrorism while playing pretend that it’s always wrong simply because it’s terrorism. Turns out that’s not the case.
Even Mandela apparently wasn’t all rainbows either, as he kept on justifying terrorism against other terrorists:
I’m not sure how a man that at one point seems to have been surrounded by Jewish “antisemitic” in some racial way. I guess antisemitism means different things to different people depending on their perceptions of “race” and understanding of rabbinic ideas in which ideologies and religions can supposedly be wrapped around or based on perceptions of race and tribe.
Ironic:
At least Netanyahu didn’t say that he wouldn’t go because Mandela was a “”"”"terrrorist.”"”"” Whatever happened to the war on terror, anyway? It seems like it’s never going to end.
Ramble:
Netanyahu on terrorism: “We tried to call ahead when we were going to blow people up. That’s the type of stuff we do, probably because we’re superior.” Arguments like that show the extent of the ideologies of supremacy and racism involved in Netanyahu’s terrorism. I’m not sure what Mandela’s excuses were for his but they could probably be as good as Netanyahu’s.
In any event, at least Mandela apparently changed his mind later or was willing to engage in the theatrical production of changing his mind with the rainbows of tolerance and all the rest of it. Ironic that he actually remained on a terrorist watch list in the Masonic/Talmudic U.S./Israeli Conglomeration Inc. of a “JudeoChristian nation” until 2008.
I wonder if he had to have his underpants checked for WMDs. There again, we all did thanks to Chertoff:
Lol. And there’s the fusion of financial terrorism, banksterism and the supposed prevention of terrorism through the financing of the warfare side of the welfare/warfare state again. At least Americans can stand back and let $afety First Inc. or representatives of Israeli corporations (That kept saying “We won’t outsource our national security.” after the Syria/Iran situation went kaput.) stop any future underwear bombers. Safety. Shew.
There are probably a few patriots left in the NSA/CIA/FBI somewhere. Here’s to hoping that they try to do their jobs WITH THEIR FELLOW AMERICANS IN MIND and not their careers in mind, not Turkish interests in mind, not Saudi interests and not even Israeli interests either. I.e. Israeli interests that apparently have more “dual citizen” representation in America than any other foreign interest, etc. The FBI/CIA/NSA need to do their actual jobs like Sibel Edmonds and other whistle blowers have been trying to… etc. It’s already having an effect on the corrupt degenerates within the oligarchical structures being produced by the Federal Reserve Inc. and the banking cartel. (I.e. structures that tend to put foreign interests and global corporations before the interests of the American people, etc.)