You've seen the Epstein files drop. You've seen the names. But you're not connecting the dots.Look at the timeline. In 2014, Epstein invests $500k in Blockstream. In 2015, when the Bitcoin Foundation collapses, who swoops in to pay the salaries of Core developers? The MIT Media Lab, funded by Epstein. This is the same year the blocksize war kicks into high gear.Think about that. The very people who controlled the codebase were on the payroll of a convicted pedophile intelligence asset. The argument was always "we need to keep blocks small for decentralization." The real reason was to cripple the chain's utility, to keep it as a speculative toy, not a global settlement layer. A system that could handle real-world data and volume was a threat. So they neutered it.The claims that up to 75% of Bitcoin's code was written after Epstein took over as a benefactor to Core devs aren't just FUD. It's a statistical indicator of a hostile takeover. They didn't just invest; they steered the entire ship.This isn't about BTC vs. ETH. They're two sides of the same compromised coin. The question you should be asking is: what was the original plan before the fork? What protocol was so dangerous that it had to be sabotaged and its community splintered?The resources are out there if you want to fall down the rabbit hole. The history is all public.bitcoinsv.itthatsbtcnotbitcoin.comDo your own research. Or don't. Stay on the plantation.
>This isn't about BTC vs. ETH. They're two sides of the same compromised coin.>They didn't just invest; they steered the entire ship.sage
the funniest part of this saga has been the grifter rats coming out of their holes to try and sell their bags again.
do these turd worlders really think we cant recognize chatgpt writing?
>this againfuck off craig
If you look closely you can see where OP replaced em dashes for commas to appear more human.
>>61792179Die, jew!
