An exceedingly long
rant response was hereby cut, and replaced with the following:
Who appointed the United States and its institutions to supervise Bitcoin?N.b. that I myself despise financial speculation in principle. I think that in a perfect world, there would be no significant financial speculation at all. If I find myself in the unusual position of defending that sort of activity, then that may be a sign that you have stepped into the zone of
HANDS OFF MY BITCOIN and
AMERICA IS NOT THE GODDAMN WORLD POLICE—AMERICA IS NOT THE BITCOIN POLICE.
Surely, that is part of the justification why bitcoiner should NOT be blanketly cheering for BIG government to be taking down Bitmex and its various agents, presuming them to be criminals - even though currently, they are being charged as criminals. There are due process rights in America, even though sometimes those due process rights are NOT fairly applied or allowed, so of course, frequently injustices occur.
I am NOT proclaiming that the various departments of the US justice system (who are purportedly representing the interest of the US people) are without a variety of justifications, but surely they need to have jurisdiction over the matters that they are alleging and charging, and due process of law should be allowed, including in criminal cases there are presumptions of innocent until being proved guilty. Therefore evidence needs to be shown in a court of law, and criminal cases surely have intent elements that must be proven in a court of law, too.
I am more inclined to presume that injustices are taking place on the side of the accused, when I see members posting about the guilt of these various players way before evidence has even been adequately described (and sure in the court of public opinion, we might even be relying upon more flimsy evidence regarding how we might feel about the situation).