If you are new to the Equibit story, please read The Assassination of Equibit, originally released in 2023.

When the Berlin Wall fell in November 1989, the world celebrated the end of one of history’s most oppressive regimes. East Germans stormed the headquarters of the Ministry for State Security — the infamous Stasi — desperate to seize and protect the mountains of files that documented decades of tyranny. What they uncovered was more horrifying than most could have imagined.

Among the archives was Directive 1/76, issued in 1976 by Stasi chief Erich Mielke. This document formalized Zersetzung — “decomposition” or “corrosion” — a systematic program of psychological warfare designed to destroy “hostile-negative” individuals and groups without the messiness of arrests, trials, or overt violence. The goal was simple and demonic: fragment, paralyze, disorganize, and isolate the target so completely that they could no longer function as a threat — all while maintaining the appearance of normal life.

The Sheer Evil of Zersetzung

Historian Hubertus Knabe, one of the foremost experts on the Stasi, described it chillingly: “The Stasi didn’t try to arrest every dissident. It preferred to paralyze them… by damaging their reputation, by organizing failures in their work, and by destroying their personal relationships.”

Tactics included:

• Covert home invasions to move furniture, change alarm clocks, or swap everyday items (classic gaslighting)
• Systematic smear campaigns using true, false, and twisted information
• Engineered professional and social failures
• Provocation, anonymous threats, and orchestrated “coincidences”
• Destruction of marriages, friendships, and family ties through rumors and planted evidence
• Sabotage of careers, vehicles, and medical care

Victims often had no idea the Stasi was responsible. Many believed they were losing their minds. Mental breakdowns and suicides were common outcomes.

One victim, Jürgen Fuchs, a writer and dissident, called it “psychosocial crime” and “an assault on the human soul.” Many survivors suffered lifelong trauma, paranoia, depression, and shattered trust. Some received modest compensation decades later, but for most, the damage was irreparable. Families were torn apart. Careers evaporated. Lives were slowly, methodically erased from within.

The Stasi built an enormous network of civilian informants — the Inoffizielle Mitarbeiter (IMs). By 1989, there were roughly 91,000 full-time Stasi employees and between 173,000 and 189,000 unofficial informants. This meant roughly one in every 50 to 60 East German citizens was actively collaborating with the secret police — an astonishing level of societal penetration. Some estimates, including occasional informants, run as high as one in six or seven adults.

These informants came from every walk of life: neighbors, colleagues, friends, even family members. Recruitment methods ranged from ideological appeal and bribes to blackmail and threats against loved ones. Once enlisted, they were used to spread rumors, provoke conflicts, sabotage opportunities, and report intimate details for the creation of detailed “psychograms” — psychological profiles used to exploit every weakness.

From East Germany to Canada: The Equibit Case

What happened to Chris Horlacher and Equibit Group bears unmistakable hallmarks of this same strategy — updated with 21st-century digital tools and operating within a Five Eyes democracy.

As documented across the Equibit Factum, technical forensic reports, live videos, court filings, and interviews on equibitlawsuit.com, the campaign against Horlacher and his company included:

• Prolonged surveillance and contact by prime-suspect Marc Godard beginning as early as 2010 — when Chris was engaged in online liberty activism.
• What appears to be the recruitment and corruption of Sergei Sachkov, lead Core developer at Equibit Group, by CSIS.
• Intense and malicious harassment by the Ontario Securities Commission, and demonstrable entrapment efforts.
• Marc’s attempts to involve Chris with questionable individuals post-Equibit, more entrapment schemes via financial crimes.
• Router compromises via the TR-069 protocol, with logs showing impossible 1981 timestamps and persistent remote access.
• DNS man-in-the-middle attacks rerouting traffic through U.S. servers.
• Microsoft ecosystem intrusions where private memos were observed copying themselves in real time.
• De-banking, institutional pressure, and coordinated defamation campaigns.
• Insider betrayal, code forking, rebranding (OCEAN → Tesseract), a coordinated effort to dismantle Equibit Group from within.

Marc Godard’s background in Cognitive Science would have been particularly useful in constructing the kind of detailed psychograms the Stasi relied upon — mapping personality weaknesses, relationships, and pressure points for maximum psychological effect.

This was not random crime or bad luck. It was a sustained, multi-vector operation designed to isolate, financially ruin, discredit, and psychologically break a founder who dared to become a fierce advocate for limited, constitutional government.

Zersetzung Has Gone Global

The Stasi needed a vast human network because they lacked today’s digital omnipresence. In the Five Eyes countries (Canada, USA, UK, Australia, New Zealand), agencies no longer need millions of informants on the ground. They have tools that allow remote, deniable, scalable decomposition: compromised routers, operating system-level access, financial system cooperation, and institutional capture.

What Horlacher has experienced — and meticulously documented — strongly suggests that modern Zersetzung is not only possible in Canada and its allies, but is likely already being deployed against innovators, dissidents, and threats to the established order throughout the country.

A Call to Global Conscience

This is cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment. It is extrajudicial psychological torture dressed up in the language of national security. It violates every principle of human dignity and the rule of law.

We call on readers to take immediate action:

1. Visit https://equibitlawsuit.com — read the evidence, watch the videos, review the technical reports.
2. Submit a detailed complaint to the UN Special Rapporteur on Torture (sr-torture@ohchr.org), including all available documentation and requesting an urgent inquiry into the use of modern Zersetzung-style tactics by intelligence agencies in democratic nations.
3. Contact appropriate NGOs and oversight bodies:  Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, the Canadian Civil Liberties Association, Privacy International, and the National Security and Intelligence Review Agency.
4. Share this story relentlessly. Public awareness is the greatest threat to these shadow operations.

What was done to Equibit and Chris Horlacher must not be allowed to become the new normal. If governments in the West can wage silent war on their own citizens — innovators, thinkers, builders — using the refined cruelty of the Stasi, then none of us are safe.

The Berlin Wall fell. The files were opened. The world saw the evil and recoiled in horror.

Today, new walls are being built in the digital realm — invisible, pervasive, and far more sophisticated. We must tear them down with the same courage and determination.

The time for silence is over. The time for exposure, outrage, and accountability is now.

Demand an international inquiry. Demand justice for the victims of digital Zersetzung. Demand that this hideous violation of human rights ends.

Because if we do not act, the decomposition will spread — until freedom itself is nothing but a memory.

Stay tuned to equibitlawsuit.com for more updates on the Equibit lawsuits against CSIS and related actors

If you are new to the Equibit story, please read The Assassination of Equibit, originally released in 2023.

Chris Horlacher has documented multiple sophisticated intrusions through his Microsoft ecosystem. These incidents go well beyond ordinary malware and align with key moments in his legal activities. They indicate a close collaboration between Microsoft and the Five Eyes to deliver undetectable spyware onto targeted devices in order to steal information and interfere with the normal functions of the computer.

Key Incidents of Unauthorized Access

• July 19, 2025 – Unauthorized Sharing of Sensitive Memo
  A confidential memo was suddenly made publicly shareable via OneDrive using Chris’s own Microsoft account. He did not perform this action. During the event, his computer’s built-in screen recorder was disabled. Luckily Chris was able to capture the event with his cell phone’s camera.

Watch the incident:

• August 27, 2025 – Spontaneous File Movement
  A critical security report analyzing router compromises was mysteriously moved to the desktop.
• October 27, 2025 – Camera Roll Breach
  OneDrive logs showed someone browsing the Camera Roll folder containing images taken directly by the device, as well as two files related to psychology that provide insight as to the hacker’s identity (more on that in later posts!)

Watch the Camera Roll intrusion:

Mass Windows & BIOS Updates – Highly Suspicious Timing

On August 18, 2025, immediately before a strategy call with his lawyers about upcoming discovery sessions, Chris’s computer began installing an unusually large wave of updates — including Windows, BIOS, and more than a dozen other components. He described it as one of the largest simultaneous update pushes he had ever experienced. Call quality then rapidly deteriorated and the connection was terminated exactly when the discussion turned to sensitive topics.

This event is especially concerning in the context of Bill C-22, Canada’s proposed Lawful Access Act. Part 2 of the bill would require electronic service providers (including software and operating system vendors) to build and maintain technical capabilities to facilitate authorized access to information by law enforcement and CSIS. Critics argue this could effectively compel companies like Microsoft to enable mechanisms for delivering signed updates or payloads that Windows would trust by default. Because Microsoft-signed updates are automatically trusted by the operating system, they represent a powerful and nearly undetectable vector for delivering targeted tools to specific users.

For more on Bill C-22:

• Department of Justice Backgrounder
• Michael Geist Analysis

Nightmare Eclipse Zero-Days and Browsergate

These incidents occurred against the backdrop of major Microsoft security controversies. In 2026, researcher Nightmare-Eclipse (also known as Chaotic Eclipse) publicly released several high-impact Windows zero-days, including exploits targeting Windows Defender and privilege escalation mechanisms. Some researchers have speculated that certain vulnerabilities may have been known internally for extended periods before public disclosure.

Additionally, Browsergate exposed serious allegations against LinkedIn (owned by Microsoft). According to a detailed report by Fairlinked e.V.:

• LinkedIn allegedly injected JavaScript that scanned users’ browsers for over 6,000 Chrome extensions.
• The script reportedly collected detailed device telemetry and extension data without clear user consent or prominent disclosure in the privacy policy.
• This allowed LinkedIn to build extensive user profiles, potentially identifying competitors, corporate tools, and other sensitive software.

The revelations led to privacy lawsuits and widespread criticism. You can read the original report here: BrowserGate.eu

Broader Implications

These events demonstrate deep access into Chris’s systems, precise timing aligned with legal activities, and the ability to manipulate core operating system functions. When combined with other documented technical attacks, they highlight growing risks around proprietary platforms and the potential for state-level exploitation.

Further Reading & Updates:

• Additional technical evidence and interviews in the Media section
• Ongoing lawsuit developments at equibitlawsuit.com

This case raises important questions about digital privacy, corporate responsibilities, and the balance between security and individual rights. Share this post if you believe these issues deserve greater public scrutiny.

Stay tuned to equibitlawsuit.com for more updates on the Equibit lawsuits against CSIS and related actors.

If you are new to the Equibit story, please read The Assassination of Equibit, originally released in 2023.

In the ongoing campaign of digital harassment and sabotage documented by Chris Horlacher, one of the most technical and intrusive episodes involves repeated compromises of his home routers in Mexico. These incidents directly affected Chris Horlacher’s ability to work, communicate securely, and access the internet—targeting only specific devices while sparing others on the same network.

This pattern aligns with advanced persistent threats, often linked to state-level or ISP-enabled capabilities.

Background: Part of a Broader Pattern

After fleeing Canada due to chronic digital intrusions and other events stemming from what he believed to be the lawsuits he just filed, Chris continued facing disruptions. VPN instability, selective device blocking, and unexplained connectivity issues prompted deeper investigation. Factory resets provided temporary relief, but problems returned rapidly—classic behavior of persistent malware or remote management exploits

The Attacks: Huawei HG8145V5V3 and ZTE F670L Routers

Key Anomalies Observed:

• 1981 Timestamps: Multiple log entries show dates like 1981-01-01. This is a strong indicator of Real-Time Clock (RTC) reset or deliberate log tampering/manipulation, often seen when firmware is altered or during boot-level interference. Security analysis reports explicitly flag these as “Backdated logs to 1981 (RTC reset or tampering).”
• Custom Firewall Rules & Selective Blocking: Firewall settings changed to “user defined.” Specific devices (Chris’s and his wife’s) lost internet access while others worked, consistent with targeted rules or a Remote Access Trojan (RAT).
• Rapid Re-infection Post-Reset: Issues returned within hours, even on a replacement router from the ISP (Telmex).

From the ZTE Log (August 2025, post-reset):

2025-08-04T16:16:01Z [Error] |dnsmasq| bind interface socket failed 99
2025-08-04T16:16:01Z [Error] !!!!!![high Alert for send msg in POWERON]...
[Warning] RunPCB process[omci] Event[0x3e81]...

High-priority OMCI/GPON messages immediately after boot, IPv6 route injections before full WAN negotiation, and MultiAPD errors point to remote provisioning activity.

From Huawei Logs (July 2025):

Numerous 1981-01-01 entries alongside PPPoE renegotiations, deprecated SSL methods, and DHCP NAKs (potential MAC spoofing or rogue activity). Frequent PPPoE sessions suggest possible DoS or disruption attempts.

Expert Security Analysis

Independent analysis by a professional (using SIEM-style detection) on both routers confirmed:

• TR-069/OMCI remote provisioning activity.
• Backdated logs and tampering indicators.
• Potential RAT presence and DoS patterns.
• Recommendations: Replace/reflash router, disable TR-069, scan devices, and isolate vulnerable hardware (e.g., older Smart TV).

Huawei Router Analysis Report (PDF)

ZTE Router Analysis Report (PDF)

TR-069 (CWMP) Vulnerabilities: This Broadband Forum protocol enables ISPs to remotely manage Customer Premises Equipment (CPE) like routers via an Auto-Configuration Server (ACS), often over port 7547. While intended for legitimate management, it is notoriously exploitable. Compromised ACS servers or weak implementations allow attackers full remote control, DNS redirection, firmware backdoors, and persistent access. It has been weaponized in botnets (e.g., Mirai variants) and enables exactly the selective targeting and re-infection seen here. Many ISPs do not allow users to fully disable it.

Video Evidence: Router Investigations

Watch Chris document the issues in real-time:

Part 1: Initial router access and strange behavior.

Part 2: Firewall changes, selective blocking, and admin interface interference.

Part 3: Factory reset, log downloads, and post-reset observations.

Part 4 (Short): Post-reset functionality vs. actual device connectivity failure.

Implications

These attacks go beyond typical criminal hacking. The precision (device-specific blocking), persistence across hardware swaps, use of ISP-managed protocols, and alignment with other documented sabotage (e.g., Microsoft OneDrive tampering, email spoofing, bank disruptions) point to sophisticated actors with significant resources—potentially leveraging intelligence or ISP cooperation.

Combined with the broader evidence in the Factum (honeypot hits from government networks, Keybase anomalies, etc.), this leaves little doubt that Chris Horlacher’s infrastructure was under targeted surveillance and disruption.

What You Can Do:

• Demand transparency from ISPs on remote management (TR-069/OMCI).
• Support calls for accountability in intelligence oversight.
• Share this post—stories like this highlight risks to innovators and due process.

Full logs and analysis reports (Huawei and ZTE PDFs) are available for review upon request for credible researchers/journalists.

This is not paranoia. This is documented technical evidence of invasive digital warfare against a Canadian entrepreneur and litigant, across national boundaries, violating the property of a foreign ISP.

Stay tuned to equibitlawsuit.com for more updates on the Equibit lawsuits against CSIS and related actors.

Financial Nihilism
& the Flight Out Of Fiat

A couple weeks ago I tweeted about that “Duct-Taped Banana” art, that sold on auction at Sotheby’s for $6.2 million:

Normies: “Duct-taped banana sells for $6.2 million on auction at Sotheby’s”

Memecoin crypto: “Hold my beer” pic.twitter.com/ykPje2XFt0

— Mark Jeftovic, The ₿itcoin Capitalist (@StuntPope) November 24, 2024

The punch-line was that a memecoin based on the duct-taped Banana artwork had itself reached a market cap of $144 million (and still holding steady at $146M as I type this nearly two weeks later).

The art piece (dubbed “Comedian”) was bought by Justin Sun, Tron founder, owner of the Poloniex exchange, owner of Rainberry (who invented BitTorrent) and all-around “crypto billionaire”.

On Friday, November 29th, Sun ate the banana.

We are witnessing a flight out of fiat, accompanied by a distinct twinge of “financial nihilism”, a phrase once coined by podcaster Demetri Kofinas.

While there may be no name for the global monetary system on which the world runs today, Russell Napier’s “Non-System” if you will, there is a term for the terminal phase we are in, and the entire world is in it.

Once again, it comes from the Germans – who gave us “Notgeld” (“emergency money”), from the Weimar chapter in history when cities and towns issued their own scrip in an effort to escape the ravages of hyper-inflation; this one is “Katastrophenhausse” – literally “Catastrophic boom”.

It was introduced into the lexicon by Ludwig Von Mises and has been popularized as “crack-up boom”.

The key characteristic of a crack-up boom is that people lose faith in money itself and scramble to convert their money into alternative assets – not because they need those assets, but because they want to get out of the currency.

This creates a self-reinforcing cycle where the increased spending drives prices higher, which causes more people to spend their money faster, driving prices even higher.

You may remember my (horrific) thought experiment analogy of the “burning balloon”:

A group of tourists embark for a hot air balloon tour in India (as I originally heard the story); just after the mooring ropes are released, the pilot sees that the canopy has caught fire and he, realizing the stakes, immediately jumps out of the gondola to safety.

However, this reduces the weight of the balloon, so its rise accelerates. The passengers who grasp what has just happened immediately follow the pilot, deftly jumping overboard while the balloon is still close enough to the ground to do so… however, that reinforces the feedback loop: the even lighter ballon is now rising  faster – the lucky laggards who are next to figure it out abandon ship while they still can, which further accelerates the ascent of the fireball; however soon it will be too high to safely jump, and doom is assured for all those left aboard who did not act quickly enough.

Those are the dynamics of a hyperinflation.

Mises described it as a situation where the “masses wake up” to realize inflation isn’t temporary but rather that the currency is doomed to keep losing value. At that point there’s a rush to convert money into goods, any goods – what he called a “flight into real values.”

In our era, a banana meme coin may not, objectively, be something with real value – but if it’s going up faster than the currency is disintegrating, then it’s a winning trade, if you can time it right (I’ve had no position in BAN and wouldn’t recommend it).

The interesting thing about crack-up booms is that on the surface they can look like prosperity – asset prices soar, there’s lots of activity and spending, and money velocity is robust – but it’s actually the last gasps of a currency system.

What makes it tricky is that as the currency collapses against myriad assets (some faster than others) people think they’re bubbles, but there’s a cheat code that can help you tell the difference:

There is a secret cheat-code that will jailbreak your brain out of “Bitcoin is a bubble” mode and help you understand what is really happening.

One click can literally change your perspective.

People are trying to tell you that this is unsustainable

Hence, this must be a… pic.twitter.com/jiaFWWvTHl

— Mark Jeftovic, The ₿itcoin Capitalist (@StuntPope) November 16, 2024

What’s particularly relevant to our Bitcoin as a “Monetary Regime Change” thesis is that crack-up booms tend to happen in the later stages of a fiat currency decline – which is where we believe we are in the current global monetary system. The rush into Bitcoin, precious metals and other crypto assets is the same “flight into real values” of our era that Mises described in his.

Today’s post was from the “Concluding Thoughts” of The Bitcoin Capitalist Letter, my premium newsletter that covers Bitcoin, crypto stocks and the digital asset space. Our Black Friday / CyberWeek sale is over, but you can still catch the deal here »

Sign up for the Bombthrower mailing list and get a free copy of the Crypto Capitalist Manifesto here »

File between “No Sh*t Sherlock” and “You Don’t Say?”

The IMF’s “Chart of the Week” just dropped, promising a glimpse into how carbon taxes can be “less regressive”, “socially fair” and “economically efficient”.

Citing a new research paper, the chart of the week comes from research findings that carbon taxes inordinately penalize the poors,

“lower-income groups are affected disproportionately, because they spend a smaller share of their expenditure on products that benefit from exemptions than their higher-income counterparts.”

Finding that low-income households pay anywhere between $1.26 USD  and $4.95 USD more per tonne of CO2 than the rich and affluent,

“Our incidence calculations for the EU in 2020 show that average price paid for carbon across all emission sources were around 11.35 USD, which was 60% lower than the EU ETS price of that year (28.22 USD). The difference between this average price paid for carbon and the EU ETS price is due to incomplete carbon  price coverage in the value chains behind the products that EU consumers buy.”

The paper is called Distributional Impacts of Heterogenous Carbon Prices in the EU and looked at European countries, however, the findings around the discrepancy apply anywhere – why?

Because “incomplete carbon price coverage in the value chain”, and numerous other references throughout the paper to that “heterogeneity” all mean the same thing:

Carbon taxes aren’t uniform across all countries, and aren’t uniformly applied across all industries – and that leaves differentials and gaps that the IMF claims are being exploited by rich people to the exclusion of low income households.

The solution? A global carbon tax.

“Therefore, imposing uniform carbon prices both within and across countries would reduce carbon pricing regressivity on household expenditure in the EU”

Even better:

“A global price would be most effective in this regard, as it would raise carbon prices embodied in EU imports. Further, because EU economies are open and apply higher average carbon prices than their trade partners, the domestic revenues exceed the costs embodied in EU household consumptions bundles. This increases the scope for reducing the burden of carbon pricing on lower-income households through revenue redistribution.

Our results would imply that the ongoing extension of carbon pricing to more sectors through the EU ETS II and the introduction of the EU’s CBAM should make carbon pricing less regressive, all else equal”

The EU ETS II is the European Union Emissions Trading System II, the current carbon “cap and trade” system, while the CBAM is the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism – which is an existing mechanism that tries to “adjust” the price of goods coming into the Eurozone from places where the carbon taxes aren’t high enough, or don’t exist at all.

In other words, the IMF is recommending a global carbon tax, across all industries – to alleviate carbon price “heterogeneity” (which simply means: not all the same), under the guise of helping the poor, who are disproportionately affected by carbon taxes.

“Revenue Recycling”: Turning regressive policies into progressive taxation

The paper goes on to posit that when member nations have higher carbon taxes than their trading partners – a kind of “surplus” revenue accrues – which can be redistributed to lower income households and in most cases, exceed the amount paid in carbon taxes:

The mechanism we apply is a lump-sum redistribution system, according to which all fiscal income generated from carbon pricing policies applied on domestic sectors are redistributed equally across households within the country at hand. 

Those groups who emit above proportion would incur a net positive cost. Those groups who emit below proportion would incur a net surplus, meaning negative cost, as the lump sum transfer exceeds the money spent on paying for carbon.

In a closed economy (the models say) the carbon taxes paid across income groups would net out to zero, but we don’t really lived in a closed economy.

In open economies such as those of EU countries where consumers buy products that are imported as well as domestic products that result from international value chains, the total carbon costs paid by households are not equal to the carbon costs that accumulate in domestic sectors. As soon as household expenditure bundles are affected by production abroad that is subject to lower carbon prices than those applied domestically, the carbon pricing revenue collected domestically may exceed the carbon costs that households are incurring through their consumption of products.

The result is most households will get back more than they pay in carbon taxes:

The main finding is that in all EU countries in 2020 in the baseline scenario, carbon costs for the lower- income household groups become net negative, implying that the redistribution mechanism returns more money to these households than the costs they incur from carbon pricing.

And  after a global carbon tax comes in, everybody gets back more money than they pay in, except the top decile of households.

“As soon as we price carbon uniformly across the globe, all tenth decile household groups with the exception of Estonia, have positive carbon costs, but the lower-income household groups continue to receive more revenue than their incurred costs.”

Here in Canada, we’ve seen this movie already. It’s The Big Lie of carbon tax rebates.

The Big Lie of carbon tax rebates is that you end up with more money than you paid in carbon taxes. pic.twitter.com/LeXwSHC27y

— Mark Jeftovic, The ₿itcoin Capitalist (@StuntPope) September 27, 2024

The ruling Liberal/NDP coalition incessantly attacks any notion of “axing the tax” as something that would make Canadians poorer – because doing away with the reviled carbon tax would eliminate the need for rebates.

However, multiple studies including one from Canada’s own Parliamentary Budget Office in 2023 and another from the Frasier Institute in 2021 found that most Canadian households lost money, even after the rebates, IMF “models” aside.

If it were true that a uniformly applied global carbon tax could give net rebates to all but the very wealthiest households, then after we distill everything down past the climate rhetoric, what we are left with is basically an elaborately camouflaged wealth redistribution scheme called carbon communism.

That may work on whiteboard, but in reality it’ll just continue to hit low income families the hardest, as increased taxation always does (and that includes inflation).

This came into my inbox just as I was working on the upcoming issue of The Bitcoin Capitalist, and I’ll have more to say about this in there,  particularly around how I see the findings and recommendations will relate to future deployment of CBDCs (which I’ve already said, will most likely be a UBI scheme based on personal carbon emissions quotas).

Sign up to the Bombthrower Mailing list today and get a free copy of the aforementioned Crypto Capitalist Manifesto – I’ll also send you my forthcoming e-book The CBDC Survival Guide when it drops this fall.

Follow me on Twitter here, or Nostr: npub1elwpzsul8d9k4tgxqdjuzxp0wa94ysr4zu9xeudrcxe2h3sazqkq5mehan