Ignoring all the BS in the article, is this argument valid?
It's a stretch as a justification for things like acts of war against some other country (say some country in South America decided to back an anonymous digital currency...) or even just legislation banning crytocurrencies.
Its nearly impossible for terrorists organizations and certainly not anything like ISIS to exist without state support. Its now well know they are being funded by Turkey, Saudis and the US intelligence forces.
So we are funding terrorism on one hand and then spending billions of dollars on to build a surveillance state to protect ourselves from our own actions, both of which benefit the state, intelligence agencies and defence contractors.
I think things are now are farce level and democracy is near meaningless if these state actors are allowed to do whatever they want.