Thank you for the post, however I find even the most basic arguments of it highly illogical. First, you have based your opinion of Bitcoin on the actions and opinions of individuals who are completely unproven to even have a connection to Bitcoin's inception. Secondly, even if this conspiracy theory were true, the individuals which created the technology have nothing to do with it's merits. This means that the basis of your argument is based on a 2 stage false association propaganda technique. The current and future development of Bitcoin rests on the majority consensus of the public network with public code.
"I wont ever look into anything Bitcoin again, as far as I am concerned the whole technology is cloaked in secrecy with many links to Intelligence Organisations and International Crime, this can not be ignored."
I find this argument to be absolutely bizarre for somebody who claims to have researched the technology. The entire basis of the technology is a public ledger. Every transaction that ever occurred can be viewed by any person with an Internet connection. This is in stark contrast to banks dealing in AUD for example, where police would require a warrant and a lot of other legal loops to investigate. For a fiat currency analogy with Bitcoin, this would be the equivalent of police investigating a bank robber with nil leads, and then the bank robber places a giant billboard sign in front of the police station stating the amount he stole, at what exact time, and his bank account details he plans to deposit into. As such, I highly recommend ANYONE engaged in criminal activity to use Bitcoin, but I fear it will remain a haven for the most clueless criminals alive.
"Does Craig Wright even exist, I wouldn't count on it."
Craig Wright almost certainly exists, as he was investigated by the Australian Federal Police last year and it was highly documented. I don't see what this individual has to do with the merits of Bitcoin though. The recent claim he made of being the original developer of Bitcoin "Satoshi Nakomoto" though did make me laugh. Although, he could possibly be Satoshi, the "evidence" (Or, more accurately "Non-evidence") he provided to the public were public keys anyone could look up on the Internet themselves. For an analogy, I could claim that I was Ghandi re-incarnated, and to "prove it" I could state that I knew that Ghandi was born in India.
In conclusion, I'm curious as to your thoughts on the Australian Dollar as a vehicle for criminal activity in retrospect? If you associate criminal activity and secrecy with a type of money entirely based on a public ledger, then what about the Australian dollar? Hypothetically, I could have in my home right now 100's of kilograms of heroin, plutonium and conventional bombs all stored in my home. I could have traded it in a dark alley for AUD and there would be a possibility that the police wouldn't even have a clue. Compare this to Bitcoin.
