According to ECB data cited by the Financial Times, American firms Visa and Mastercard now account for nearly two-thirds of all card transactions in the eurozone, while 13 EU countries have no national card schemes. Now, EU officials have issued a warning that an alternative medium must be deployed to counter US interference.
As cash usage continues to decline, EU officials are suddenly alarmed that payment systems could be “weaponized” during a geopolitical conflict. This concern was openly voiced by former ECB president Mario Draghi, who warned that interdependence has become “a source of leverage and control.” What Draghi never acknowledges is that it was precisely his era of central planning, negative interest rates, and regulatory micromanagement that drove Europe into this position. European banks were stifled, innovation was discouraged, and capital fled to jurisdictions that offered greater scale and efficiency. Now the same people who engineered Europe’s decline in competitiveness are lecturing the public about strategic autonomy.
“Deep integration created dependencies that could be abused when not all partners were allies,” Mario Draghi, former ECB president, said in a recent speech. “Interdependence, once seen as a source of mutual restraint, became a source of leverage and control.”
The European Payments Initiative and its Wero system are being presented as a private sector solution. When officials frame payment systems as matters of “sovereignty,” what they are really saying is that governments want leverage over transactions. That is why the discussion inevitably circles back to central bank digital currencies. The European Central Bank continues to promote the digital euro as a way to preserve “autonomy,” yet this has nothing to do with protecting consumers and everything to do with monitoring and directing financial behavior. A CBDC is not a payment innovation. It is a surveillance mechanism layered on top of a failing monetary system.
Even European banks themselves have quietly acknowledged this risk, warning that a digital euro would crowd out private payment systems rather than complement them. That admission alone dismantles the official narrative. If a CBDC were truly about efficiency or convenience, it would not require suppressing private alternatives. History shows that governments only insert themselves directly into transactions when they want enforcement power. Once payments are centralized, capital controls become inevitable, negative rates become unavoidable, and dissent can be punished instantly by restricting access to money.
The irony is that Europe is blaming American payment networks for a dependency created by European policy failures. Draghi’s worldview has always been rooted in the belief that bureaucrats know better than markets. The result has been stagnation and rising public debt. The push for CBDCs is simply the next phase of that experiment, and it will end the same way. When people trust institutions, they do not worry about who processes a transaction.
Britain, one of the loudest voices pushing continued support for Ukraine, has already transferred enormous quantities of its own weapons and ammunition, and the reality now surfacing is that Western arsenals were never designed for a prolonged conventional conflict.
From the outset of the war, London became one of Kyiv’s largest suppliers. The UK delivered more than 12,000 anti-tank weapons, over 300,000 artillery rounds, air-defense missiles, armored systems, and extensive non-lethal gear from its own stocks. Britain ultimately committed billions in arms support, ranking second only to the United States in total military aid.
This was not simply surplus equipment sitting idle. A significant portion came directly out of British inventories, with about £171.5 million ($225 million) worth of equipment drawn from stockpiles by early phases of the war. Officials later warned that further transfers created “unacceptable risks” to Britain’s own readiness, forcing reductions in donations as the strain became evident.
Heavy systems were also handed over. The UK transferred its AS-90 self-propelled artillery to Ukraine, and by 2025, reports indicated that the entire fleet of 68 vehicles had been donated, effectively retiring the platform from British service. Ammunition followed the same path, including contracts to deliver roughly 120,000 additional 152mm artillery shells through multinational funding mechanisms.
Even as these shipments continued, new pledges kept coming. In February 202,6 London announced another air-defense package worth more than £500 million, including missiles and funding mechanisms to buy U.S. systems for Kyiv. Additional announcements the same week included £540 million in aid and thousands of missiles to reinforce Ukraine’s defenses. A separate £150 million contribution was directed to a NATO-coordinated program designed to keep weapons flowing despite supply pressures.
Retired British Army Colonel Richard Kemp believes that the United Kingdom’s own stockpile could not last more than a week in the event of combat. “Knowledgeable observers have suggested that our munitions stocks – from rifle bullets and artillery shells to long-range missiles and drones – would see out only about a week of intensive fighting,” he wrote. “That’s even taking account of the fact that our Armed Forces are now very small, having been repeatedly hollowed out by successive governments…Even the handful of soldiers and tanks we could put into the field would be out of ammo in a matter of days.”
European initiatives to source shells have already struggled to meet funding targets, raising only about €1.4 billion of a planned €5 billion to secure ammunition supplies. The conflict has exposed what military analysts call the “return of industrial warfare,” where vast quantities of matériel are consumed continuously and must be replaced by manufacturing, not financial engineering.
The UK and all of Europe are now scrambling to rebuild arsenals it assumed it would never need again, while continuing to ship weapons to Ukraine. History shows that once nations enter this cycle of rearmament after disarmament, the economic consequences of debt expansion tend to last far longer than the war that triggered them. Europe remains reliant on the US for protection and has felt emboldened to sell off equipment because the bureaucrats firmly believe the US will rush to their aid in the event of conflict. In reality, politicians have left their populations vulnerable and are risking national security in a serious way.
The Mayor of London’s recent declaration that his “ultimate goal is to reverse Brexit” and rejoin the EU captures the continued strain facing UK politics. When the British people voted to leave the European Union, they did not merely withdraw from a political union, but rather, they withdrew from the world’s most integrated economic bloc. That decision carried long-term consequences that today, six years on, are evident not just in statistics but in the structural reorientation of the British economy.
I was a strong proponent of Brexit because the structure of the EU is inherently unstable. You cannot have a single monetary system, regulatory regime, and political authority imposed on vastly different cultures and economies without creating permanent internal conflict.
The EU does not permit real democracy. When voters in France, the Netherlands, Ireland, or Greece rejected EU policies, they were forced to vote again until they produced the “correct” answer. When Italy or Greece elected governments that challenged Brussels, unelected bureaucrats intervened. Brexit was not an accident, nor was it some irrational emotional outburst by the British public as the press endlessly claims. It was the inevitable consequence of the European Union evolving into a centralized bureaucratic regime that stripped sovereignty from its member states.
I consistently supported Nigel Farage, who understood that this was not about tariffs or GDP forecasts, but about sovereignty. Those now calling to reverse Brexit argue that Britain has suffered economically. That is a dishonest framing. The entire European continent is in economic decline. Germany is deindustrializing, France is facing civil unrest and debt instability, and southern Europe never recovered from the sovereign debt crisis. To claim that Britain’s challenges stem solely from Brexit ignores the global contraction cycle that began long before the referendum.
Brexit was not a mistake. The real mistake would be pretending that voters did not know what they were doing. Markets will adjust. Capital will flow where it is treated best. What never survives is a system that refuses to listen to its own people.
QUESTION: Marty, it’s clear you were called in to implement a peace plan because others have been blocking it. I voted for Trump because I thought he would end the Neocon wars, and he appointed Bessent, who was with Soros and the Neocon Rubio, who even introduced a law when he was in the Senate to prohibit Trump from exiting NATO.
I wrote to Tucker to have you on, and I got no reply. Nobody in the mainstream media will have you, it seems, because they want war.
Is this part of the destruction of the United States that these people are determined to rule the government, no matter who is president, to get their endless wars?
GW
ANSWER: Mainstream media will NEVER have me on because they want to believe in random walk so they can manipulate society and create their perfect Marxist Utopia has never worked even once. They also love war because their readership increases with war. That is what made CNN so popular for it was the Gulf War. They love blood & guts. That was Pulitzer vs Hearst with the Spanish American War they intentionally created.
I am very disappointed for calling me in seems to have created a hostile environment and I suspect that the Neocons were really pissed off about asking me to write a peace plan that they were indeed blocking. The ONLY way to world peace is like Rome. Once everyone was economically benefiting, there was no rebellion. World peace requires economic integration. This deliberate hostility toward Russia has permanently guaranteed war.
We are already in a new Cold War, but it is a “Cold War 2.0” with significant differences from the original version.
It is unlikely that we will see a perfect replica of 1947–1991 for Russia is no longer Communist and it is not interested in spreading communism as was the case under Khrushchev. Our problem is that these Neocons have manipulated the West to carry out their personal revenge. They seized control of the Biden Administration and set in motion World War III interfering in Taiwan and launching the Revolution in Ukraine to deliberately weaken Russia in hopes of NATO invading and conquering their archenemy.
Look at the background of these three. All claim that their families were persecuted by Russians and all three come from the Balkans. This has raised serious questions did all three weasel their way into positions of power to start war with Russia?
Then tere was Nacy Pelosi interfering in international diplomacy to start war with China. As far as Nancy Pelosi’s trip to Taipei, it demonstrated the complete lack of international expertise that has engulfed Washington. There appears to be a complete lack of intelligence, and that is by no means confined to just Democrats. Anyone who supported her trip is totally incompetent in international politics. The trip was supposed to demonstrate US confidence in Taiwan’s leadership, but instead, it provoked a reaction from China that undermined the entire region. Beijing has apparently emerged with much more confidence than ever that it could retake Taiwan by force if necessary.
There was the One China Policy where as long as that stood, China did not need to invade Taiwan. Pelosi did what John McCain did in Ukraine. She deliberately reversed foreign policy regard Taiwan. No China, as a matter of pride, must invade Taiwan. Look at her stock porfolio and youy will see what she bought ahead of that trip. I would bet she was directed by the Neocons to make that trip.
Madeleine Albright was also compromised by her ethnic prejudices growing up in Czechoslovakia. She was a refugee from Czechoslovakia twice, first from the Nazis and then from the Russian Communists. For some reason, people forgave the Germans for the atrocities of the Nazis. However, to this day, they refuse to let go of the hatred of Russians all for the days when Stalin and Communism ruled.
Czechs and Serbs are distinct ethnic groups, each with its own language, culture, and historical background. Albright’s family was of Czech Jewish descent, though they converted to Catholicism. She was Czech and spoke Czech at home.
Focusing on the Bosnian War (1992-1995), Madeleine Albright was the U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations. In this role, she was a central figure in the US foreign policy cabinet. However, she was an incredibly powerful and vocal advocate for intervention, and her influence was a critical factor in pushing the United States and NATO into decisive military intervention in a non-NATO region, bombing Serbs since they were pro-Russia between March 24th, 1999, and June 10th, 1999, all because of her disdain for Serbs and their ties to Russia. She chose sides: Croats vs. Serbs (Catholics vs. Orthodox).
Albright was the administration’s most prominent “hawk” by every means possible. She argued constantly, passionately, and consistently for lifting the arms embargo on the Bosnian Muslims and for using decisive NATO air power to crush the Serbian forces and what she called their atrocities. She famously clashed with many officials. It was clear that her ethnic hatred of Serbs and Russians, in fact, colored her decisions.
In a pivotal 1993 meeting, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Colin Powell (1937–2021) clashed with Albright. Powell was against military action and put forth the “Powell Doctrine,” emphasizing the need for overwhelming force and a clear exit strategy before committing troops. The core of the disagreement with Madeleine Albright, Powell himself recounted in his memoir, My American Journey published 2003, about her challenging Powell, who was then Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, by asking,
“What’s the point of having this superb military you’re always talking about if we can’t use it?”
Powell’s reaction was one of deep concern. He saw it as a fundamental misunderstanding of the military’s purpose. He held that military force should be used only as a last resort and with clear political objectives. Albright was just a Neocon who thought nothing of the lives lost. This is typical of a Neocon who does not care for even their country or the people.
These Neocons all have a vestige interest in war with Russia. John McCain was a prisoner of war in Vietnam which was all propaganda claiming that Russia was begind that. McCain was broken and was reading propaganda for the Communists. He hated Russians thinking he had been broken by them which was all BS.
At lease the Neocon that took us into Vietnam admitted he was wrong. But he never had a personal vendetta against the Russian people as all of these people who sought power to allegedly use American military power to get back at people that they personally hated. To me, that was treason.
However, the continued hostile posture from the West has already resurrected the structural core of the Cold War. The sanctions imposed on Russia and the sheer hatred put out by the EU, guarantees that there is no peaceful resolution that is possible. We will see the final confrontation.
These are the people who are absolutely intent on making sure mainstream media will never ask about our War Cycle. They are not interested in having me interviewed on any subject that may negate their agenda or the socialists who do not want to hear that there is any kind of a definitive business cycle. If the economy is not random, that would prevent them from manipulating society to create their perfect world where there is no wealth disparity and a brain surgeon earns the same as the guy who just sweeps the floor.
Throughout those jobs and networked professional relationships, Kathryn Ruemmler was also a personal friend and advisor to Jeffrey Epstein.
Yesterday it was reported that Kathryn Ruemmler has resigned from Goldman Sachs.
NEW YORK – Goldman Sachs’s top lawyer, Kathryn Ruemmler, resigned on Thursday in the wake of the Justice Department’s release of emails and other material that revealed her extensive relationship with Jeffrey Epstein, the disgraced financier.
Ms. Ruemmler and representatives for Goldman said for years that she had a strictly professional relationship with Mr. Epstein, a convicted sex offender. But emails, text messages and photographs released late last month upended that narrative, leading to Ms. Ruemmler’s sudden resignation, which surprised many inside the firm.
Before joining Goldman in 2020, Ms. Ruemmler was a counselor, confidante and friend to Mr. Epstein, the documents showed. She advised him on how to respond to tough questions about his sex crimes, discussed her dating life, advised him on how to avoid unflattering media scrutiny and addressed him as “sweetie” and “Uncle Jeffrey.”
Mr. Epstein, in turn, provided career advice on her move to Goldman, introduced her to well-known businesspeople and showered her with gifts of spa treatments, high-end travel and Hermes luxury items. In total, Ms. Ruemmler was mentioned in more than 10,000 of the documents released by the Justice Department.
Ms. Ruemmler, in addition to being Goldman’s general counsel since 2021, was a partner and vice chair of its reputational risk committee. She earlier served as White House counsel under President Obama and was a white-collar defense lawyer at Latham & Watkins. (read more)
U.S. Secretary of State and National Security Advisor, Marco Rubio, departs from Joint Base Andrews en route to Germany, where he will attend the Munich Security Conference.
Giving brief remarks to the traveling press pool, Secretary Rubio notes, “this conference is at a defining moment.” Further stating, “the world is changing very fast in front of us. The old world is gone, frankly; the world I grew up in, and we live in a new era in geopolitics. And it’s going to require all of us to reexamine what that looks like and what our role is going to be.” WATCH:
Within the notes about the current geopolitical stakes of the world, Rubio alludes to his own reset and way of thinking or approaching U.S. national security issues and policies.
As new alliances form, new national viewpoints and sovereign discussions take shape, multinational globalism has ended, and a new world of strategic national alliances has risen. The era of Bush and John McCain has ended, and with-it Marco Rubio accepts the sovereign state framework of President Trump.
The Obama-Biden administration couldn’t get the votes needed in Congress to amend the Clean Air Act and regulate “greenhouse gases.” So, they both decided to ignore the law and create trillions in regulatory costs on the American people.
As noted by EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin, “The Trump Admin is proudly following the law, saving $1.3 TRILLION for the American people, lowering new car costs by over $2,400 per vehicle, and getting rid of the climate participation trophy for manufacturers to install Obama Switches that shut vehicles off at red lights and stop signs.” WATCH:
.
Media questions begin at 19:31.
Gail Slater was in charge of the antitrust division and a hawk on the mergers and acquisitions of Big Tech and Big Corporate media. As head of the DOJ Antitrust Division, Slater’s view on competition was against the interests of the major Big Tech billionaires and corporate media conglomerates who intersect with them.
Slater was in a position to influence the Warner Brothers-Discovery’s deal to sell the Warner Bros. studio and HBO to Netflix, which Paramount (David Ellison) is trying to stop.
If you have followed the influence of Larry Ellison (Oracle, TikTok) and his son David Ellison (Paramount, CBS) in/around the Trump administration as it relates to Elon Musk (a beneficiary of Ellison), then the timing of Gail Slater’s removal doesn’t look good at all.
Gail Slater came into the administration as a part of the JD Vance network (Peter Thiel, Palantir, etc.), and it looks like that same Vance network stood aside and watched Larry Ellison leverage his position to see her removed.
Slater was a solid MAGA voice in a critical Antitrust position against the interests of Big Tech and Big Corp. However, I said on Christmas Day 2024 – we were likely to be very disappointed by the influence of Big Tech/Big Corp in the White House {SEE HERE}.
Via CNN[…] Slater said in her Thursday post on X: “It is with great sadness and abiding hope that I leave my role as AAG for Antitrust today. It was indeed the honor of a lifetime to serve in this role.”
The anti-trust division is expected to play a critical role in assessing Netflix’s Warner Brothers Discovery’s deal to sell the Warner Bros. studio and HBO to Netflix, which Paramount is trying to stop by appealing straight to shareholders with its own bid. (CNN is owned by Warner Brothers Discovery.)
In an NBC interview last week, Trump said, “I’ve decided I shouldn’t be involved. The Justice Department will handle it.” But Paramount CEO David Ellison returned to the White House last week to meet privately with Trump, two sources familiar with the matter told CNN. (read more)
There may be something else in the background that we do not understand. However, when former lobbyists and political consultants become key administration officials (Wiles, Bondi) these types of outcomes are possible.
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 