Pentagon Mobilized to Support Tech Startups After Bank Failure
March 16th, 2023Via: Defense One:
In the hours after Silicon Valley Bank collapsed on March 10, Pentagon officials who work directly with startups that develop national-security technologies grew increasingly concerned.
Would startups that had money in the bank need to stop work? If that happened, would there be supply-chain disruptions? Would a company under financial stress put its intellectual property at risk?
Officials prepared different courses of action to get cash to companies, if needed.
“It was a busy weekend, for sure,” Michael Madsen, acting director of the organization that acts as conduit between startups and the military, said Tuesday at a Reagan Institute event in Washington.
No immediate action was needed. The Treasury Department stepped in on Sunday and said depositors with funds at Silicon Valley Bank would have access to their money.
…
Had the Biden administration not acted quickly to back up account holder funds at SVB, the United States—and the national-security community in particular—would have faced a major challenge in supporting and growing innovative new technologies, Michael Brown, a venture partner at Shield Capital and former head of the Defense Department’s Defense Innovation Unit, told Defense One.
“The #Bankcollapse is the setup for the upcoming attempt at #Cryptocollapse.
The One World Government and their central banks are now targeting all decentralized crypto such that they can institute their hyper-centralized CBDC.
And what is the CBDC but the crypto version of the Special Drawing Rights (SDR) singular ‘world currency’ that the IMF has been developing and normalizing since long before this Rothschild-owned The Economist issue was released (note the cover date was 1988 and the date on Ten Phoenix SDR coin was 2018):
. . .
The IMF’s TEN 10 PHOENIX coin was set for deployment in 2018, or one year before COVID-19. The latter allows for the former, and the former allows for the WEF’s Great Reset to rise from the ashes of a world that they are desperately attempting to burn to the ground.
The CBDC component, or crypto SDR, or crypto PHOENIX coin requires that all small banking institutions fail, and that all depositors are herded into the too big to fail banks, which also happen to be part owners of the Fed.
Once every person and corporation is forced into these handful of big banks, and once the crypto exchanges are put out of business such that the only on and off ramps for current crypto tokens are these big banks, it becomes far easier to institute the CBDC.
All fiat and all crypto is then valued in terms of the singular ‘world currency’ CBDC.
Which is precisely why FDIC regulators are requiring prospective buyers of SVB and Signature Bank to agree to give up all cryptocurrency business at those banks.”
From:
https://www.2ndsmartestguyintheworld.com/p/psyop-market-crash-social-engineering
Lots to chew on with those two articles—Pookie, that article was brilliantly written, thanks for posting it—especially liked the last bit—good always defeats evil (GADE)
It’s clear there are factions within the Deep State, and I’m wondering if the following paragraphs reveal a couple of them (DOD vs Banksters/CIA):
“But the SVB debacle is not just an alarm bell” “it also presents an opportunity for the Defense Department.” “SVB occupied a very particular role in the start-up ecosystem, one that could be filled by the federal government or even the Defense Department.”
“The bank provided “a mechanism where you don’t need to go find investors, you can work with an institution like Silicon Valley Bank to finance that transition from prototyping to production. I think this is a huge opportunity for DOD and the federal government to find new forms, new mechanisms for financing that bridge” ”
The one detail that gave me a bit of a question—Peter Thiel, instead of intentionally causing a run at SVB—maybe he’s in the camp of the DOD and was in this case just trying to rescue he and his associate’s/friend’s $$. An example of another DOD aligned person may be Elon Musk.
With short seller Marc Cohodes—it’s interesting to think of him as working for the Banksters when you watch the first of the following two videos. He gets into hammering on FTX and its founder SBF as being puppeteered by some shadowy group—but he does so in such a broad-brush way that the Banksters and CIA are the first to come to mind as being the shadowy group—at minute 34:40:
https://app.hedgeye.com/insights/122943-marc-cohodes-ftx-is-dirty-rotten-to-the-core-hedgeye-investing-s?with_category=17-insights
Cohodes in a recent interview:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X538TJSsaHM
In the following long article it details how the Cohodes firm ended up paying out 5 million to Patrick Byrne’s company, Overstock, for naked short selling (using stocks created out of thin air)—a second Byrne lawsuit also prevailed against many big brokerages including Goldman Sachs, who had been the ones creating stocks out of thin air:
“As the stock market crashed, Overstock and Copper River, still fierce antagonists, independently concluded that Goldman Sachs, which held Copper River’s accounts, had lent Copper River and other hedge funds shares for shorting that did not exist. This discovery led Overstock to file an even larger case, against eleven brokerage firms, including Goldman Sachs and Merrill Lynch. Byrne’s father later said that, after “much initial skepticism,” he had decided that Patrick had been “right all along.” In 2009, Byrne and Cohodes agreed to a settlement of their case in which Copper River paid Overstock five million dollars. In 2010, some of the big banks that Byrne had named in his second lawsuit settled their cases, too. (In 2015 and 2016, the remaining two defendants, Goldman and Merrill, settled with Overstock.) “
http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2020/12/14/a-tycoons-deep-state-conspiracy-dive
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/31/business/case-sheds-light-on-goldmans-role-as-lender-in-short-sales.html