10-20-25 DailyBriefs.info LennyAndMariaPodcasts.com 

I. First Major Risks of a Cashless Society By Milan Adams Preppgroup

1. The move toward a cashless society is a globally coordinated effort.

The push for a cashless society represents more than just technological evolution—it’s a coordinated effort occurring at multiple levels of government, financial institutions, and corporations worldwide.

This transition is reshaping how we interact with money and raising significant questions about financial freedom and privacy.

2. Digital money increases the risk of confiscation by authorities or collapse.

The convenience of digital money that allows you to spend your money more easily, also makes it easier for banks, governments and thieves to take it.

Your money will be seized as part of any approved plan, perhaps even before the broke bank files for bankruptcy.

3. Government authorities, such as the IRS, can seize bank accounts without notice.

Your bank account can be raided by government authorities, like the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) without notice or reason given.

If the IRS believes your bank account deposit and/or withdrawals activity is suspicious and/or may involve a pattern designed to avoid reporting requirements, they may seize your account.

4. Cashless societies shift crime online, leading to larger heists with less risk for thieves.

In a cashless society, theft will occur on line and in far larger amounts than cash heists.

The online heist involves no risk of death or threat to the thief’s personal safety and can be done from anywhere in the world.

5. Digital currency relies entirely on a functioning banking system, which is susceptible to various failures.

Without cash, the value of currency would have no independent value outside a functioning banking system to which you have access.

If the banking system is down due to a power outage, solar flare, financial crisis, Internet failure, hack or network crash, your money is unavailable and potentially lost.

6. Individuals risk being exiled or shut out of the system entirely.

Even if the digital banking system was 100% fool proof, you may end up being shut out of the system for wrong doing (actual or alleged), bad credit or failure to pay banking fees.

Without access to the banking system, how will you pay your bills and buy items you need?

7. The convenience of automatic payments can easily turn into tyranny and loss of freedom.

If money is easy to spend, it is also easy to take.

This type of forced convenience results in a removal of freedom of choice of how you may wish to spend your money.

8. Cashless transactions result in a significant loss of privacy.

In a cashless society there is the loss of privacy.

Such a system, however, also leaves a permanent digital foot print of where you spent your money, accesible to just about anyone who has access to your account (crimminal hackers and government agencies).

9. Digital money abstracts value, turning consumers into "mindless spenders."

Without cash, consumers are no longer market participants that evaluate tangible value based on how much cash they have in their wallets, but mindless spenders without a sense of the value of the items they are purchasing or a sense of understanding of their actual cost after incurring bank and credit card interest fees.

A cashless society turns money and value into digital abstractions as defined and controlled by the banks and central planners.

II. Individualism and Self-Determination in the American Tradition By Wanjiru Njoya

1. Individual liberty is the core principle of the libertarian tradition.

Individual liberty lies at the heart of the libertarian tradition.

In this tradition, self-determination is understood as an emanation of individual liberty, rather than as a right vested in the “nation” or the “state” as a collective unit.

2. Self-determination is a right belonging to the inhabitants of a territory, not the nation.

To call this right of self-determination the “right of self-determination of nations” is to misunderstand it.

It is the right of the inhabitants of every territory to decide on the state to which they belong.

3. The "rugged individualism" of American frontiersmen drove their fight for self-determination.

It is in this context that the “rugged individualism” of the American frontiersmen, as they fought for independence in both the Revolutionary War and Lincoln’s War, should be understood—as a struggle by each individual for his own liberty and right to self-determination.

A vigorous breed, hardy, assertive, individualistic, thrifty, trained in the democracy of the Scottish kirk, they were the material out of which later Jacksonian democracy was to be fashioned, the creators of that western type which in politics and industry became ultimately the American type.

4. The Scots-Irish pioneers were "radical individualists" who rejected group-identity politics.

Webb describes the Scots-Irish as “radical individualists” who never exhibited the collective group-identity that dominates today’s socialistic identity politics, where people claim to have rights based on their race or sex.

In their insistent individualism they are not likely to put an ethnic label on themselves when they debate social issues.

5. Confederate soldiers were motivated by independence and defiance of outside authority.

In their eyes, an outside force was not only telling them how to live their lives, but also threatening to force solutions on them if they disagreed.

The tendency to resist outside aggression was bred deeply into every heart – and still is today.

6. American individualism emphasizes independence from collective control rather than self-regarding character traits.

The ideal of individual liberty has less to do with atomistic or self-regarding character traits, and more to do with independence from collective control.

Individualism in the American tradition represents the conviction that each individual is the author of his own life and is not subject to the will or control of the government.

7. Individual liberty is defined as living without interference from the coercive state apparatus.

The distinctive principle of Western social philosophy is individualism.

It aims at the creation of a sphere in which the individual is free to think, to choose, and to act without being restrained by the interference of the social apparatus of coercion and oppression, the State.

8. Individualism does not mean denying society, as man is inherently a social animal.

To insist, as I do, that the individual is the criterion by which institutions and political theories should be judged is not to deny the immediate and obvious meaning of the phrase, “man is a social animal,” that is, that each man has a multifarious set of relationships with other men.

The concept of freedom always refers to social relations between men.

III. Joe Rogan Criticizes The Harsh Tactics Of ICE: Here’s Why He’s Wrong By Brandon Smith

1. The “big political tent” is weakened by members who are unwilling to take necessary action.

There is one ever-pervasive and dangerous downside to the idea of the “big political tent” – The idea that all groups in the tent are equally entitled to dictate the terms within the tent.

The problem is, some members of the big tent are more dedicated to the cause than others, and some simply don’t have the stomach to do what is necessary.

2. The current political conflict is viewed as a war, not a negotiable disagreement.

Any group that opposes the woke mob will fail in the end if they can’t set aside the delusion that this situation is merely a disagreement between countrymen.

This is a war between utterly disparate enemies with completely different moral positions.

3. Centrists hinder conservative movements by prioritizing political optics and diplomacy.

Conservative movements often fail to root out radical leftists because they feel the need to appeal to pie-in-the-sky centrist notions of diplomacy and fairness.

Centrists fear being accused of authoritarianism more than anything and the political left knows it.

4. Illegal immigrants who have been in the U.S. for decades should be prioritized for deportation.

An illegal that has been living in the US for 20 years should be at the TOP of the list for deportation.

The biggest insult, though, is that the people Rogan is talking about have had 20 years or more to become a naturalized citizen and they chose not to.

5. Illegal immigrants negatively impact the U.S. economy and political landscape.

Around 60% of them tap into welfare subsidies and healthcare programs that cost US taxpayers billions.

They drive down wages for legal citizens by working for 30% less.

6. The author asserts that all illegal immigrants are criminals and should be deported equally.

In terms of the optics of the arrests, illegals are criminals.

No, all illegals need to go.

7. Aggressive deportation tactics are proposed to encourage self-deportation and reduce future violence.

Around 1.6 million have already done this; they are the smart ones.

In other words, we get ugly right now so that we don’t have to get ugly tomorrow.

8. Illegal migrants are not entitled to the same due process rights as native citizens under federal law.

Illegal migrants do NOT have the same due process rights under federal law as native citizens.

Due process for an illegal only requires that ICE verify that the person is a foreigner and that they do not have a proper visa or greencard.

IV. Statins: They Lie To You And Want You Weak, Docile And Dependent On Their Profitable Drugs By Joachim Bartoll

1. Claims regarding statins reducing dementia risk contradict established biological and biochemical principles.

The pharmaceutical shills at Medical News Today recently posted an article about some fabricated and paid research involving the extremely dangerous and maiming drug called statins.

The claim in the Medical News Today article — that statins, by lowering cholesterol, could slash dementia risk by up to 80% — fundamentally and severely misaligns with established principles in biology, human physiology and biochemistry.

2. Cholesterol is a life-sustaining molecule essential for cellular and neural structures.

Cholesterol serves as an indispensable building block for cellular integrity, hormonal synthesis, tissue and neural repair.

Cholesterol comprises about 25% of the brain’s dry weight as a structural lipid in myelin sheaths and neuronal membranes.

3. Statins disrupt the body's natural repair mechanisms by inhibiting cholesterol synthesis.

Suppression of the mevalonate pathway with statins doesn’t “heal” the body; it does the opposite, it starves the body’s innate repair mechanisms, aligning more with iatrogenic harm than physiological restoration.

LDL particles deliver it precisely to sites of cellular damage for repair.

4. High cholesterol is seen as a compensatory symptom of internal damage, not the primary pathology.

You can never blame the body for what it naturally manufactures and uses to sustain life, you can only blame yourself for destroying that terrain by consuming inappropriate and toxic foods.

“High cholesterol” readings are merely a symptom of the body ramping up production to compensate the damage you are doing to yourself.

5. Dietary inputs, specifically carbohydrates and PUFAs, are blamed for rendering cholesterol dysfunctional.

Chronic carbohydrate overload or polyunsaturated fatty acid (PUFA) excess from seed oils, which glycate and peroxidize cholesterol particles, especially LDL, rendering them dysfunctional and prone to arterial adhesion.

Glycation (glucose from carbohydrates binding to proteins/lipids and destroying them) and lipid peroxidation (oxygen radicals attacking unsaturated fats, as in all plant-based toxic fatty acids) causes extreme damage.

6. Anthropological evidence suggests humans thrive on hyper-carnivorous, cholesterol-rich diets.

Anthropological evidence from isotopic analyses of Paleolithic remains and studies of modern hunter-gatherers (e.g., Hadza) reveals diets dominated by ruminant meats and organs.

Humans survive by opting for omnivory in extreme famine scenarios, scavenging plants for glucose and something to fill their bellies, but we thrive as hyper-carnivores.

7. Statins accelerate neurodegeneration by depleting Coenzyme Q10 and contributing to amyloid accumulation.

Aggressive lowering depletes coenzyme Q10 (CoQ10,) a mitochondrial antioxidant vital for neuronal energy, leading to myopathy, fatigue, and cognitive fog — precursors to the very decline statins purport to avert.

Statin users exhibit accelerated amyloid-beta accumulation (hallmark of Alzheimer’s) due to impaired cholesterol efflux from neurons, and meta-analyses link them to a 20-30% higher all-cause mortality in the elderly.

8. True prevention of cognitive decline lies in adopting a carnivorous diet.

True prevention lies in reclaiming our carnivorous heritage: prioritize ruminant fats and organs to fortify the terrain, letting cholesterol do its sacred work unhindered.

Animal foods provide native, heme-bound cholesterol (e.g., yolks, liver) with cofactors like B12 for optimal bioavailability, unlike synthetic or plant forms.

V. Washington Is Reaching Its Deadly Endgame in Venezuela By Robert Bridge

1. The ultimate goal of U.S. intervention in Venezuela is regime change and the appropriation of petroleum resources.

Trump’s plans are criminally transparent: they are quite simply a brazen effort to legitimize regime change with the ultimate goal of appropriating Venezuela’s petroleum resources.

The U.S. military has been building up its naval presence Caribbean Sea with the stated goal of targeting drug smugglers.

2. The significant military buildup in the Caribbean is excessive for mere counter-narcotics operations.

The United States deployed 4,500 sailors and multiple naval vessels, including missile destroyers, a cruiser, an amphibious assault ship, and a nuclear-powered submarine, off the coast of Venezuela.

In other words, far more firepower than is needed to crush a drug cartel.

3. The military buildup is viewed as "gunboat diplomacy" aimed at driving President Maduro from power.

The buildup should not be viewed as anything less than bloodthirsty “gunboat diplomacy”, part and parcel of a regime change operation to drive President Nicolás Maduro from power.

US President Donald Trump acknowledged this week that he had authorized the clandestine action and said the United States was considering strikes on Venezuelan territory.

4. Washington uses the designation of drug cartels and terrorism to legitimize taking out Maduro.

The U.S. Department of the Treasury designated the Cartel de los Soles – a Venezuelan crime and terrorist organization said to be headed by high-ranking members of the Armed Forces of Venezuela who are involved in international drug trade – as a Specially Designated Global Terrorist organization.

This, Washington arrogantly believes, will give it the authority to take out Maduro, who was democratically elected president by the people of Venezuela in 2013.

5. Russia accuses the U.S. of plotting a coup using classic color revolution and hybrid war tools.

Russian Ambassador to the UN Vassily Nebenzia accused the US of plotting a coup in Venezuela under the guise of an anti-drug campaign.

The coup plot is being carried out “using the classic tools of color revolutions and hybrid wars” by “artificially fueling an atmosphere of confrontation”.

6. The Nobel Peace Prize is criticized as a tool used to legitimize individuals favored by imperialism.

Venezuelan opposition leader Maria Corina Machado won the Nobel Peace Prize.

The Norwegian prize serves not as a reward to peacemakers, but as a brutal tool for anointing those favored by imperialism and to legitimize war.

7. A U.S. invasion of Venezuela would require a large number of troops and face significant challenges post-invasion.

The Center for Strategic and International Studies estimates an invasion of Venezuela would require nearly 50,000 troops.

Occupying and rebuilding the country is another consideration, as the U.S. learned to its disappointment in the Middle East and North Africa, in still-struggling places like Iraq and Libya.

VI. Why Western Sanctions Have Failed and Become Self-Defeating By Ian Proud

1. Western sanctions have failed to achieve their stated objective of stopping Russia's actions in Ukraine.

Sanctions will not stop the war.

The UK and its allies have manifestly failed to deliver upon that goal.

2. The belief that sanctions undermine support for President Putin in Russia is misguided.

Firstly, because even if people in the west consider them to be justified, the Russian State considers them to be unjust.

The idea that sanctions undermine support in Russia for President Putin is deeply misguided.

3. Sanctioning wealthy Russians based outside of Russia is an empty gesture because they lack real power in Russia.

Sanctioning British-based Russian billionaires who took their assets out of Russia might play well in the Financial Times but is a meaningless gesture.

These figures have no real power in Russia.

4. Western policy coordination among NATO states is too slow and fragmented for decisive action.

While the combined economies of NATO are 27 times bigger than Russia, 32 states cannot coordinate policy quickly enough to take decisive action.

President Putin is not hemmed in by the need to consult, and western indecision gives him time to adapt.

5. Russia's economy has adapted to sanctions by reorienting away from dependence on the West.

Since 2014, Russia’s economy has reoriented away from its dependence on the west, precisely to limit the impact of sanctions.

When war broke out in 2022, Russia had been adapting to sanctions for 8 years already.

6. Despite sanctions, Russia achieved a massive current account surplus in 2022.

In 2022, with everyone crowing about the crashing rouble, Russia pulled in its biggest ever current account surplus of over $230 billion which, by the way, is bigger than Ukraine’s whole economy.

Despite cutting off gas supplies and bearing down on shadow tankers, Russia to this day continues to pull in hefty trade surpluses each year.

7. Sanctions have ceased being a strategy and have become a political tool in themselves.

The ugly truth is that sanctions have become an end in themselves.

They are not a strategy, but a fig leaf covering the embarrassing fact that the west does not have a strategy.

8. Sanctions prolong the war by serving as a weak alternative to genuine war or peace efforts.

They are a weak alternative to war or peace that serve no purpose other than to prolong the war in Ukraine.

The longer they go on, more Ukrainians will die.

9. The West refuses diplomacy because talking to Putin is dismissed as granting him legitimacy.

Western nations have shown themselves unwilling to contemplate diplomacy.

Diplomacy is about talking to the people with whom you most disagree.

10. Sanctions have inadvertently served as a "Godsend" by forcing Russia to become self-sufficient and independent.

Western sanctions have forced Russia to do the right thing and it seems that only people outside of Russia are unaware of this.

These sanctions have become the biggest single boost to the country in Russian history: a real Godsend.