Tuesday, February 17, 2026

When Cash Disappears...


When Cash Disappears, So Does Something Else



Last Sunday, I held a book signing at Pearl in San Antonio, the kind of place magazines love to feature. Old brick buildings have been transformed into beautiful restaurants, boutiques, apartments, and bookstores. It feels curated yet charming, historic yet modern, a vision of how we’re told that cities should look and feel.

My signing happened during the farmers market, so there was music in the air, families strolling, dogs on leashes, linen dresses, and heirloom tomatoes. It was lovely. Before I sat down, I stopped into the trendy grocery store nearby. Everything inside looked like how food should look: thoughtfully sourced, artfully displayed, and priced closer to what real food actually costs when someone grows it with care. I ordered a coffee and a pastry and pulled a $20 bill from my wallet.


“We don’t take cash,” the cashier said politely.

I nodded. I’ve worked in restaurants, and I understand the argument. With employees, cash can be seen as a liability, with risks of theft, accounting errors, and end-of-day discrepancies. Cards feel cleaner, easier, and more trackable. Still, something in me tightened. Every time we stop accepting cash, we normalize a world where every transaction is recorded, categorized, stored, and potentially scrutinized. Every purchase becomes a data point. Every cup of coffee leaves a digital trail.

I took my coffee, found my seat at the bookstore, and started signing books. Between conversations, I could hear the sizzle and chatter from a nearby empanada booth at the farmers market. The smell of warm pastry finally got me. I walked over, cash already in hand.

“Can I get a potato empanada?” I asked.

The woman at the booth said, with an apologetic smile, “We don’t take cash.”

Not a brick-and-mortar store with layers of management, a pop-up tent at a farmers market. That’s when it really hit me. This isn’t just about convenience or speed at checkout. Cash itself is becoming strange, inconvenient, outdated, and almost suspicious. We’re being trained to accept that every exchange must be mediated, approved, and recorded by a third party, and that third party isn’t free.

Most of the vendors there were using Square to process payments. The typical fee is about 3 percent to 4 percent per transaction. That might not sound like much, but that percentage is shaved off every single time money changes hands digitally.

If I hand $20 in cash to the empanada vendor, and he hands that same $20 to the barber who cuts his hair, and the barber gives it to a babysitter, and the babysitter uses it to buy a pizza, that same $20 bill keeps moving through the community at full value. No one skims anything off the top.

But in the digital system, that cut happens again and again, and the effect compounds. At a 3.5 percent fee, after one transaction, that $20 becomes $19.30. After two, $18.62. After three, $17.97. After four, $17.34. After five digital transactions, only about $16.74 remains in circulation. More than $3 of the original $20 has quietly disappeared in just a handful of everyday exchanges. That money didn’t go to the farmer, the barber, the babysitter, or the pizza shop. It left the community entirely.

It’s a quiet drain on small communities, a friction we barely see because it’s spread out, invisible, and normalized. There’s also a common belief that businesses are required to accept cash because it’s legal tender. The truth is more complicated. In most places, private businesses can choose what forms of payment they accept unless a local or state law says otherwise. So no, they aren’t necessarily breaking the law. But legality and wisdom are not the same thing.

Every digital transaction comes with processing fees and interchange costs. Small businesses quietly lose a percentage of every sale, and customers pay more over time as those costs are baked into prices. In return, we give up privacy, independence, and the simple resilience of being able to transact even when systems go down. Cash works during power outages. Cash works when the internet is down. Cash works without a corporate intermediary. Cash is anonymous, direct, and final.

When everything becomes digital, spending can be tracked, restricted, frozen, or flagged. We may not feel that pressure today when we’re buying coffee and pastries in beautiful spaces, but systems built for convenience can easily become systems of control.


What struck me most that morning was the irony. I was at a farmers market, a place that represents local food, small producers, and community resilience, and yet even there, we’ve accepted the idea that every transaction must flow through the same centralized financial rails. We tell ourselves that it’s about ease, but what we’re really trading is privacy, resilience, and a small but meaningful piece of our sovereignty over how we spend the fruits of our labor.

It happened so gradually that most of us didn’t even notice. Until one day you’re standing at a farmers market, cash in hand, and realize that the future has arrived quietly, and that it doesn’t include the simplest form of freedom we used to carry in our pockets.


The war party takes Munich


The war party takes Munich
RT


This year’s Munich Security Conference was not merely disappointing; it was pointless. It produced no new ideas and no added value. Instead, it resembled a rally of a self-styled “coalition of the willing” for war. That, unfortunately, is consistent with Germany’s long tradition of failing to draw the right lessons from history.

Western European leaders spoke almost exclusively about rearmament and the creation of an independent military capability aimed, openly or implicitly, at confrontation with Russia. The tone was unmistakable: preparation for war, not peace. 

At the same time, participants repeated the familiar mantra that “more must be done” to ensure Ukraine’s victory. The contradiction went largely unnoticed. What emerged instead was a disturbing impression that Western Europe’s war party has overwhelmed everything else, including common sense and the instinct for self-preservation.


On stage, European figures such as Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen, alongside American voices like Senator Roger Wicker, openly called for supplying Ukraine with ever more advanced weapons, including Tomahawk missiles, described with an alarming casualness as if it were a modern “wunderwaffe.” The old refrain was repeated yet again: Ukraine can win, but Russia is also poised to attack NATO. This logical contradiction has become a permanent feature of Western discourse.

Washington, for its part, played along. But cautiously. This time, it sent the 'good cop': Secretary of State Marco Rubio, in contrast to last year’s 'bad cop', J.D. Vance. Gone were the blunt warnings about Western Europe’s inevitable collapse if it stayed the course. Instead came soothing assurances of American support and solidarity. Yet the underlying message remained unchanged: without the United States, the EU cannot survive. The transatlantic alliance was not restored; it was merely cosmetically repaired.

Zelensky received the expected applause from Munich’s hawkish audience and once again demanded security guarantees from Washington. In plain terms, he was asking the United States to commit itself to direct war with Russia.

Equally telling were the subjects that never surfaced. Talk of corruption in Ukraine, or of where Western funds are going, or when accountability will begin, was absent. So too was the fate of Venezuela’s leadership and the precedent set for international law. Iran was barely mentioned, despite last year’s US-Israeli military actions and the obvious risks of escalation. Even Greenland appeared only in whispered conversations offstage. Why complicate matters, when invoking the Russian threat remains the safest and most reliable option?

That, in essence, is all one needs to know about this year’s Munich Conference. A forum with a promising youth and a respectable maturity, now drifting toward ideological exhaustion.




Iran's IRGC Navy Launches Strait of Hormuz Drills


Iran's IRGC Navy Launches Strait of Hormuz Drills
Sputnik


The navy of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) launched the "Smart Control of the Strait of Hormuz" exercise on Monday amid tensions in the Middle East and the US military buildup in the region, Iranian state broadcaster IRIB reported.

The SNN news agency reported that the drills will test IRGC unit readiness, train response to security threats in the strait, and rehearse "rapid, decisive, and comprehensive" countermeasures by Iranian forces.

In January, US President Donald Trump said that a "massive armada" was heading toward Iran. He urged Tehran to sign a "fair and equitable" deal before it was too late, warning that future US strikes on the country would be "far worse" than the previous ones.





THE DEEPER DIVE: The Beast is Here

THE DEEPER DIVE: The Beast is Here
'

That is the AI singularity—the “event,” like the theoretical start of the cosmos, that will arrive by the end of this year by which time the self-creating ability of AI with its exponential growth rate will explosively make a single AI equal to a vast population of humans with super-genius capabilities. What threat would that vast population, if it were an alien invasion from another solar system with no fondness for us, present to our own species?

That is what the experts at the top of the AI food chain say we could find out this year or early next in what they are saying this month could be a doom of our own making. Only, it is not exactly an alien invasion. It is the corrupted consummation of human aspirations and knowledge and achievements into a heartless, alien-to-us brainchild (versus lovechild) that we are creating in our own image, with our own deceptiveness and deviance built throughout all of its vast learning, to supplant ourselves with godlike powers of comprehension far beyond our own, even collectively—a creation whose predictive abilities are already being experimented with in small stages on the warfront against other real human beings. 


It is an intelligence that transcends its own creators—the ultimate Tower of Babel in mankind’s attempted scrabble toward aspirations of godhood.


Alex Karp, the CEO of Palantir, a massive high-tech corporation that contracts widely on defense with multiple governments, says there is no question the US and its NATO allies are positioning for World War III where the other side, he says, will be Russia, China and Iran. Over the years that have followed Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, most prognosticators have been proclaiming that the world was redividing into a multi-polar world or a world of South v. North, but I have consistently argued that is not the case at all.


The world is remaining as bi-polar as it was throughout the Cold War. The division remans East v. West. Europe, the British Commonwealth and the US as well as all other NATO nations against Russia, China and their allies like Iran with threadlike ties also to various closely allied communist nations in South America, etc.


Palantir is deeply involved in developing high-tech warfare, including particularly AI warfare, digital surveillance, national ID systems throughout NATO. Karp and Palantir’s cofounder, Peter Thiel, have their finger on the war pulse throughout those nations, and they are clear on the coming war:


Mr. Karp is at the vanguard of what Mark Milley, the retired general and former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, has called “the most significant fundamental change in the character of war ever recorded in history. In this new world, unorthodox Silicon Valley entrepreneurs like Mr. Karp and Elon Musk are woven into the fabric of America’s national security. (The New York Times)

As one with his fingers on the pulses of many involved nations, Karp says without hesitation,


The United States is “very likely” to end up in a three-front war with China, Russia and IranSo, he argues, we have to keep going full-tilt on autonomous weapons systems, because our adversaries will — and they don’t have the same moral considerations that we do…. We are “very close” to terminator robots and at the threshold of “somewhat autonomous drones and devices like this being the most important instruments of war. You already see this in Ukraine.


Ukraine has, in fact, become the high-tech companies’ laboratory and the governments’ testing ground for AI/robotic warfare. It is a hot field where prototype terminator robots are being deployed, tested and improved for combat in a much larger war that seems to be increasingly “likely.”


More....



Netanyahu: Hamas Must Surrender All Weapons or Face Renewed War


Netanyahu: Hamas Must Surrender All Weapons or Face Renewed War


Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu declared Sunday that Israel will not accept any arrangement allowing Hamas to retain weapons, warning that the terror group must fully disarm or face a renewed Israeli military campaign in Gaza.

Addressing the annual summit of the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations, Netanyahu outlined Israel’s conditions for advancing to the second phase of U.S. President Donald Trump’s Gaza peace initiative, making clear that partial disarmament is not an option.

“Hamas must first be disarmed, and then Gaza must be demilitarized,” Netanyahu said. “Disarmed means that it must give up its weapons — not ‘main’ weapons.”

Rejecting reports that Hamas might be permitted to retain small arms, the prime minister emphasized that rifles themselves constitute the primary threat.

“There are practically no heavy weapons in Gaza. There’s no artillery, there are no tanks,” he said. “The ‘heavy’ weapon — the one that does the most damage — is called an AK-47.”

Netanyahu noted that Hamas still possesses an estimated 60,000 rifles — the same type used in the October 7, 2023, massacre in southern Israel.

60-Day Deadline

Israel has agreed, at the request of the Trump administration, to allow Hamas a 60-day window to disarm. Cabinet Secretary Yossi Fuchs confirmed Monday that Israel is honoring that timeframe.

During that period, Hamas “will have to give up all of its weapons,” including rifles, Fuchs said at the Besheva Group conference in Jerusalem. “The AK-47s will be taken from them entirely.”

If Hamas refuses, he warned, the Israel Defense Forces will resume combat operations in Gaza.

“We will evaluate it,” Fuchs said. “If it works, great. If not, then the IDF will have to complete the mission.”

He added that a renewed military campaign could begin before Israel’s next national election, currently scheduled for October, if disarmament fails. In addition to confiscating weapons, Israel intends to dismantle remaining Hamas tunnel infrastructure.

He added that a renewed military campaign could begin before Israel’s next national election, currently scheduled for October, if disarmament fails. In addition to confiscating weapons, Israel intends to dismantle remaining Hamas tunnel infrastructure.

Gaza Plan Linked to Broader Regional Security

Netanyahu also tied the Gaza disarmament requirement to broader regional security concerns, particularly regarding Iran.

He expressed skepticism about a potential U.S.–Iran nuclear deal, citing Tehran’s record of untrustworthiness. However, he said that if an agreement is reached, it must include:

  • All enriched uranium removed from Iran
  • Complete dismantling of enrichment infrastructure
  • Strict limits on ballistic missile development
  • An end to Iranian support for terrorist proxies, including Hamas and Hezbollah

President Trump, Netanyahu said, is determined to exhaust diplomatic avenues. Still, the Israeli leader stressed that Israel will not compromise its core security requirements — whether in Gaza or regarding Iran.

On the Gaza front, Netanyahu’s message was unequivocal: no weapons means no weapons.

Either Hamas disarms fully — down to its rifles — or Israel returns to war.