The Banco Central do Brasil has raised gold’s share of reserves from 3.55% to 7.19% in just one year, effectively doubling its exposure and making gold the second-largest reserve asset after the US dollar, while total reserves stand at approximately $358.23 billion and the dollar’s share has declined to about 72%, marking a record low. This is not a marginal adjustment or routine diversification, it is a structural repositioning that reflects a growing unease with sovereign debt markets.
When a central bank reduces dollar exposure while increasing gold holdings, it is not acting randomly but responding to a shift in confidence, and this aligns directly with the broader trend we are witnessing globally as central banks collectively purchased roughly 863 tonnes of gold in 2025 and are expected to remain strong buyers into 2026. The driving forces behind this are not inflation in the traditional sense, but geopolitical fragmentation, the weaponization of reserves, and the realization that sovereign debt levels are no longer sustainable without continued central bank intervention.
Brazil’s move mirrors what we have been warning about for years, which is that capital flows, not trade balances, dictate the strength of currencies, and once confidence begins to erode in government debt, that capital begins to migrate into assets that are not someone else’s liability. Gold fulfills that role because it cannot be printed, defaulted on, or frozen by a foreign government, and this becomes critical in a world where sanctions and financial restrictions are increasingly used as political tools.
The significance of Brazil’s decision is that it is not repatriating gold like France or Germany, but instead reallocating reserves in a way that quietly reduces dependence on the dollar without triggering market disruption. This is often how such transitions begin, as they unfold incrementally until they reach a tipping point. This is not about abandoning the dollar overnight, it is about gradually preparing for a world where confidence in sovereign debt is no longer taken for granted.
The push toward digital currency is being framed as innovation and efficiency, but when you strip away the marketing language, what is unfolding is a structural transformation of the financial system that shifts control away from individuals and concentrates it within governments and central banks. The Bank for International Settlements has confirmed that more than 90% of central banks are now actively researching, developing, or piloting central bank digital currencies, which is not coincidence or experimentation but a coordinated global direction. This aligns directly with what I have been warning, that when governments face a sovereign debt crisis they will turn to mechanisms that allow them to monitor and control capital flows because they cannot solve the debt problem through traditional means.
In the United States, more than 95% of transactions are already digital in some form, whether through credit cards, debit systems, ACH transfers, or mobile payment platforms, which means the infrastructure for surveillance is already largely in place. Cash has not been eliminated yet, but it has been marginalized, and that is the first step because once transactions become digital, every movement of money creates a permanent record. Governments already have the ability to access financial data through banks, but a central bank digital currency removes the intermediary entirely and places that visibility directly within a centralized system controlled by the state.
This is where the real shift takes place because a CBDC is not simply a digital version of existing currency, it is a programmable financial instrument. That means money itself can be controlled, restricted, or directed according to policy decisions. Transactions could be approved or denied in real time, spending could be limited to certain categories, and funds could even be given expiration dates to force consumption. These are not theoretical concerns as these capabilities have already been discussed openly in central bank reports and demonstrated in pilot programs around the world, including China’s digital yuan, which integrates payment systems with state oversight.
The connection to the sovereign debt crisis is critical because governments are reaching a point where they cannot sustain spending without either raising taxes, inflating the currency, or imposing controls on capital. Digital currency provides a mechanism to do all three simultaneously. Real-time taxation becomes possible because transactions can be monitored instantly, eliminating the lag between earning and reporting income. Capital controls can be enforced automatically by restricting transfers, preventing withdrawals, or limiting how funds are used. Inflation can be managed politically by directing spending into specific sectors or suppressing activity in others. This is the level of control that governments have never had before, and it changes the entire structure of the financial system.
The transition is being rolled out gradually because it cannot be imposed overnight without resistance. Digital systems will continue to coexist with cash and traditional banking for a period of time, but the direction is clear. As digital adoption increases, incentives will be introduced to encourage usage while restrictions on cash will slowly expand. Limits on cash transactions, reporting requirements, and regulatory pressure on banks are all part of this process. Eventually, participation in the digital system becomes not a choice but a necessity because alternatives are either restricted or eliminated.
There is also a geopolitical dimension to this shift because digital currencies can be used to bypass existing financial networks such as SWIFT, allowing countries to conduct transactions outside the traditional Western-dominated system. At the same time, within domestic economies, these systems give governments the ability to enforce policy at the individual level. This creates a dual structure where digital currencies are used externally to avoid sanctions and internally to impose control, and that combination is what makes this development so significant.
What is rarely discussed openly is how this ties into the broader expansion of surveillance. Financial transactions do not exist in isolation, they are connected to identity, location, and behavior. Once money is fully digital and centrally managed, it becomes possible to integrate financial data with other forms of monitoring, creating a comprehensive view of individual activity. This is where the line between financial regulation and social control begins to blur, because the same system that tracks spending can also be used to enforce compliance with policies that extend beyond economics.
The issue ultimately comes down to control rather than convenience because while digital systems offer efficiency, they also eliminate anonymity. Cash has always provided a degree of financial privacy because transactions could occur without leaving a trace. Once that disappears, every economic action becomes visible and potentially subject to oversight. That fundamentally alters the relationship between individuals and the state because financial independence is replaced with conditional access to money.
When you look at this within the context of the sovereign debt crisis, the direction becomes clear. Governments cannot allow capital to move freely when confidence begins to decline, and digital currency provides the mechanism to manage that risk. The ability to track, restrict, and direct financial activity ensures that capital remains within the system and under control. This is not about modernization, it is about maintaining authority in a system that is under increasing strain.
The transition is already underway, and once it reaches a critical mass, reversing it will not be simple because the infrastructure will be embedded in everyday life. The real question is not whether digital currency will be adopted, but how it will be used once it becomes the dominant form of money, because that will determine whether it serves as a tool of efficiency or a mechanism of control.
QUESTION: Do you think the blockade will be effective in bringing Iran to collapse? You also said that Iran is winning. Could you explain that?
Will
ANSWER: Regardless of how you might feel about the Iran war, as I previously stated, when I was called in to give me a briefing on Russia, I was told that we would NOT be at war with Russia – it would be with China. As they say, you only know who your friends are in times of trouble. This war has revealed that our supposed allies are really enemies waiting for the opportunity to stab this upstart colony called America in the back. In reality, they were always enemies, jealous that they lost their power to this fledgling upstart. The United States has only been feared – not admired.
Everyone has an opinion. That does not make one right and another wrong. Opinion requires experience – not second-guessing. To think for one minute that this blockade will force Iran to collapse and yield to everything demanded by the Trump administration is rather naive. It is a desperate effort on the Trump Administration because they know that they cannot bomb Iran to end the Persian Civilization. What nobody seems to address is the one major point of Iran – a US guarantee that Iran will NOT be attacked again by the rogue Netanyahu. That is something Trump cannot deliver for Netanyahu, who is also up for election, and he, too, needs a victory. As mentioned, there have been open discussions in Israel about nuking the granite tunnels the Iranians have dug because no bunker-buster bomb can possibly destroy their nuclear program.
Turkish Straits
Then there is what is being presented as absurd, that Iran wants a toll to pass through the Strait of Hormuz. Every other seaway that is a chokepoint, ships must pay a toll from the manmade Panama Canal and the Suez Canal, and between Canada & USA in the Saint Lawrence Seaway. The Turkish Straits are a unique legal exception to the principle of free passage through natural waterways. Comprising the Bosphorus and Dardanelles straits, they form a critical maritime chokepoint connecting the Black Sea to the Mediterranean. Under the 1936 Montreux Convention, Türkiye has the authority to regulate transits and collect fees, which are legally defined as “navigation service costs” rather than tolls on the passage itself. Iran can do the same and not call it a “toll” but “navigation service costs.”
Then an embargo on Iran is an embargo on China, impacting their national security. China must know what I was told in that briefing, which means this is also an indirect confrontation with China. This war has seriously depleted the US capability to wage war since it relies on high-tech. Our Navy has only about 33% of the number of ships the President had back in 1970. For decades, money was shifted from military to social spending, and the US became increasingly sophisticated in its weapons to offset the decline in the raw size of the force.
We have entered a new world of warfare that the vast majority are still blind to. This is a new strategy that can defeat the United States and Israel much more easily than anyone realizes. We do not even see this coming because of the one-sided reporting of the Western Press that constantly prints the Neocon propaganda.
Let’s put it this way. You and I go to war against each other. You want to pretend you are the richest and most powerful. So, you have fancy silver bullets that cost you $100 each. I have cheap copper bullets that cost me $1 each. I can produce 100 bullets to your one. Who do you think will win in a long-drawn-out war?
US air-defense inventories have been significantly drawn down by defending Israel and its own forces from Iranian attacks, but NOT to the point of functional depletion. The U.S. still retains sizable reserves, but the pace of use has exposed a critical gap in its ability to replenish stocks quickly in a major conflict.
Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD)
U.S. forces fired 100 to 150 interceptors (approx. 25% of its inventory) during a 12-day war in June 2025 to defend Israel against Iranian ballistic missiles. This was the most significant operational use of the system to date. Production and replenishment have been a major concern, with only 11 new interceptors produced in 2024, 12 expected in 2025, and a plan for 37 in 2026. To address the shortage, the Pentagon authorized an extra $2 billion to Lockheed Martin to replenish stocks.
Standard Missile (SM) Family (SM-2, SM-3, SM-6)
The Navy’s Standard Missiles have been heavily expended. From October 2023 to December 31, 2024, the Navy expended an estimated 168 SM-2s, 17 SM-3s, and 112 SM-6s in the Red Sea. During the 12-day 2025 war, the Navy increased its destroyer presence in the region from two to five to support Israel, further drawing on these stocks. The fleet has been expending these missiles faster than they can be replaced, with senior Navy officials describing the rate as “alarming”.
Patriot Missiles
Depletion: While specific depletion figures for the Patriot system are not detailed in the search results, it’s understood that the system has faced significant demand. The U.S. produces roughly 600 to 650 Patriot PAC-3 MSE missiles annually, but analysts warn that in a high-intensity war, even a year’s production could be consumed within weeks.
The U.S. still has significant missile stocks for now, but the strategic risk is that the US has moved to high-tech rather than normal weapons, and that has reduced the supply, increased the cost, and reduced the ability to mass-produce such weapons to replenish during a war, as we are witnessing with Iran. Fighting on multiple fronts was a central and decisive factor in the military defeats of both Napoleon and Hitler. While not the only reasons, the immense strain of splitting their forces made them vulnerable to the very thing they tried to avoid: a war of attrition fought against powerful coalitions. Both ultimately collapsed under the pressure of coordinated enemies they could no longer overwhelm with speed and decisive victories. I have warned that the way to strategically defeat even the United States is for a joint coalition of China, North Korea, Russia, and Iran. Waging a war of attrition is a crippling strategy.
The military has seven THAAD systems and eight Patriot battalions, each with substantial interceptors. However, the depletion of THAAD has exposed serious vulnerabilities. The critical issue is the Replenishment Rate. The current U.S. production capacity is far too slow for a high-end conflict. It could take years to replace interceptors used in just two weeks of fighting!
Then we have the Strategic Risk. The drawdown has hollowed out U.S. defense capacity against China. Given that we are already struggling to deal with threats from Iran, how do we think we’re going to do against China?” The U.S. Sixth Fleet’s local inventory of SM-3 interceptors was nearly depleted after helping defend Israel from the October 1 Iranian missile strike.
We have strategically incurred the unsustainable cost of trying to fight a war. The economic burden is immense, to put this mildly, despite the pro-war contingent and the analysts preaching that Iran has lost. THAAD interceptors cost roughly $12.7 million each, while SM-3s range from $9 million to $12 million. By mid-April 2024, the Navy had already spent close to $1 billion on munitions defending against Houthi attacks
In short, the U.S. missile inventory may not yet be exhausted, but the recent pace of operations has revealed a dangerous gap between peacetime production rates and wartime demands.
The higher the Tech, the greater the cost, and the fewer bullets you have to fire. Knowing this is not the Achilles Heel of modern warfare. The Iranian attacks in 2025 involved tactics specifically designed to force Israel to expend its expensive air defense arsenal, leveraging an economic war of attrition. However, the 2025 war was a “two-way bleed“—while Israel was forced to fire costly interceptors, Iran’s own missile and launch infrastructure was also devastated. Iran’s approach relied on overwhelming Israel’s defenses through saturation and exploiting a massive cost asymmetry.
Iran cleverly adopted a saturation and the Economic War of Attrition. Iran’s strategy was a direct response to the layered Israeli air defense network, which includes the Iron Dome (rockets), David’s Sling (short-to-medium range missiles and drones), and the Arrow system (long-range ballistic missiles). Iran employed two specific tactics. First, by launching mass waves of threats from multiple directions (Iran, Iraq, Lebanon, Syria, and Yemen), Iran aimed to overwhelm Israel’s multi-layered defenses with more targets than they could handle at once. The core of this tactic was economic warfare. Each interception by a sophisticated Israeli system costs tens or hundreds of times more than the cheap drone it destroyed.
The Iranian Shahed Drone cost was $20,000 – $50,000 A very low-tech, one-way attack drone.
The Israeli David’s Sling cost $1,000,000 per launch Interceptor for short-to-medium range threats.
Israeli Arrow 3 System $3,500,000 – $4,000,000 per interception. Exo-atmospheric interceptor for long-range ballistic missiles.
Was the Strategy Successful? The tactic was partially successful. It placed immense strategic pressure on Israel but did not achieve total victory in 2025. The financial burden on Israel was staggering. For example, during the June 2025 “12-Day War,” the combined cost of U.S. and Israeli defensive operations was between $1.48 billion and $1.58 billion. A senior Israeli official estimated a single night’s defense could cost $1-1.3 billion. Israeli intelligence warned that if attacks continued at their peak rate, Israel’s defense reserves might only last 10 to 12 days.
Iran’s cost is cheaper, but the sheer volume of attacks still costs Iran significantly, with estimates of its missile and drone expenditures ranging from $1.1 billion to $6.6 billion during the 12-day war. The U.S. and Israeli DEPLETION during the conflict also put a major dent in the U.S. inventory, which was already stressed from supporting Ukraine. The U.S. used up an estimated 14% of its global stockpile of THAAD missile interceptors in just 12 days, and at current production rates, it would take three to eight years to replenish them!
In essence, the 2025 conflict showed that while Iran’s economic-attrition strategy was a potent NEW form of warfare, it was not a silver bullet. It forced Israel to expend critical resources at an alarming rate, but the war’s kinetic phase ended with Iran’s launch infrastructure in ruins, highlighting the extreme risks of such a direct confrontation for both sides.
Iran has made a decisive and public shift towards a strategy of economic warfare and attrition. The 2025 war is now seen as a blueprint that forced a hard pivot in their approach, moving away from seeking a decisive military victory to a long-term strategy designed to bankrupt their enemies. The most tangible evidence of this shift is the staggering 10-fold increase in production of attack drones in just the seven months after the war. This industrial surge is the engine of their economic warfare, designed to overwhelm air defenses through sheer, cheap numbers.
Iran possessed an estimated 80,000 to 100,000 Shahed drones at the start of this 2026 war, with a monthly production capacity of up to 500 for sustained pressure, or over 12,000 during wartime peaks. This strategy exploits the massive cost gap, where a $35,000 drone can force the use of a $4 million Patriot missile, creating an economic calculus that is “100 times” in Iran’s favor. By forcing two interceptors per target, they accelerate the depletion of American and Israeli stockpiles.
President Trump pauses to answer the screeching press pool as he departs the White House. Against the backdrop of a tenuous agreement with Iran that may lead to another round of negotiations, and against the background of a successful naval blockade, President Trump outlines the current status with the conflict.
President Trump also spoke about his discussions with Lebanon and Israel earlier today and there is a likely White House meeting between Prime Minister Netanyahu and President Joseph Aoun being scheduled [See Truth Social]. WATCH:
.
[SOURCE]
Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, appears for an interview with Katie Pavlich to outline the importance of bringing all of the information about the Intelligence Community targeting of President Trump to the public.
Sunlight is the best disinfectant, and We the People want to see accountability for the Machiavellian conduct. The intelligence community targeted President Trump and people within the CIA ran an operation to remove him. These people have names and titles that have remained hidden, DNI Tulsi Gabbard is putting those names, specific names into the public psyche so we can have a full understanding of what took place.
Now, for many here this may seem like information we have all known about; however, Gabbard is providing the receipts, the actual evidence, of how these IC operations took place. WATCH:
.
DNI Gabbard is showing how specific people within government weaponized their positions to conduct some of the most insidious schemes in modern U.S. history. The criminality of those schemes is for others in Main Justice to determine, but the evidence of those schemes is clear.
I am thankful that people are now starting to use the new information to review past timelines. [SEE HERE] What they will discover is that Michael Atkinson’s work with Mary McCord and the Lawfare network are not isolated events. This is a continuum of targeting against Donald Trump using all of the intelligence levers at their disposal.
Michael Atkinson and Eric Ciaramella are the current names, but beside them sits Mary McCord, Norm Eisen, Andrew Weissmann, Barry Berke, Dan Goldman, Benjamin Wittes and many others from the Lawfare community. They intersect with various high level government officials in Main Justice, the FBI, the CIA, NSA and various intelligence agencies.
This is the nest of Deep State and Tulsi Gabbard is exposing it.
Secretary Pete Hegseth and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Dan Caine hold a news conference in the Pentagon Press Briefing Room during a renewed push for a second round of negotiations between the United States and Iran.
The briefing is scheduled for 8:00am ET with livestream links below:
.
.
I have created this site to help people have fun in the kitchen. I write about enjoying life both in and out of my kitchen. Life is short! Make the most of it and enjoy!
De Oppresso Liber
A group of Americans united by our commitment to Freedom, Constitutional Governance, and Civic Duty.
Share the truth at whatever cost.
De Oppresso Liber
Uncensored updates on world events, economics, the environment and medicine
De Oppresso Liber
This is a library of News Events not reported by the Main Stream Media documenting & connecting the dots on How the Obama Marxist Liberal agenda is destroying America
Australia's Front Line | Since 2011
See what War is like and how it affects our Warriors
Nwo News, End Time, Deep State, World News, No Fake News
De Oppresso Liber
Politics | Talk | Opinion - Contact Info: stellasplace@wowway.com
Exposition and Encouragement
The Physician Wellness Movement and Illegitimate Authority: The Need for Revolt and Reconstruction
Real Estate Lending
Centinel2012 