One Single Move, and They’ll Trigger a Global Panic!

A Man-Made, Completely Avoidable Crisis Is Now In the Works…

In October 2019, the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security in partnership with the World Economic Forum and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation hosted Event 201 – an exercise to discuss the global response to a simulated coronavirus pandemic. Since then, we’ve seen similar events simulating global attacks on the Internet, EU public service announcements encouraging citizens to prepare for nuclear war, and dire warnings regarding the growth of artificial intelligence.

This has prompted many people to speculate about the next global crisis. What will it be? Will it be simple misfortune or will it be planned?

No one can know exactly what the next crisis will be. However, we can see one such crisis coming right now, and it’s an easily avoidable crisis. Nevertheless, the people in charge are moving full speed ahead in their preparations to spark the crisis. Therefore, we must assume it’s part of their plan to set off a global crisis.

You Can Thank the EU Technocrats…

When this crisis arrives, you can thank the technocrats in the European Union, especially those driving policy at the European Central Bank (ECB). Why do I say that?

Because the ECB is doubling-down on its efforts to launch a digital euro. Just this past March, ECB President Christine Lagarde announced her intent to oversee the launch of the digital euro this October.

What does the launch of the digital euro have to do with the coming crisis? Everything. Because the crisis isn’t something that will coincidentally arrive alongside the digital euro, it’s a feature of the digital euro. Widespread use of the digital euro is the very thing which will make the crisis inevitable.

And that means this is a man-made, completely avoidable crisis.

Because the best way to diffuse the crisis – which Christine Lagarde and every other technocrat in Europe can easily see coming – is to end all plans to launch a digital euro. It’s that simple. Yet, unsurprisingly, instead of rethinking the digital euro, they’re moving forward at lightning speed.

Again, knowing this, we can only assume it’s part of their plan to set off a global crisis.

So what is this coming crisis?

Banks on the Brink

The coming crisis involves a systemic failure of the European banking system, and by default, the entire global banking system. The European banking system is already facing a number of headwinds, but widespread use of a digital euro will prove catastrophic. Why? Because it will lead to massive deposit flight out of European banks, leaving them vulnerable to collapse.

ING Financial Sector Strategist Marine Leleux noted this possibility in a February article titled, "The Digital Euro Project is Making Progress, European Banks Should Pay Attention." In her article, she writes:

"While this has not been observed with the three existent CBDCs, a Central Bank digital currency could attract depositors in masses. This is especially true during periods of uncertainty as it represents a nearly risk-free currency through its direct claim to the Central Bank. A large and sudden outflow of deposits from the banking sector to CBDC personal accounts would have a significant negative impact on the banking sector in the EU."

A digital euro will be housed in a digital wallet at the European Central Bank rather than in an account held with a traditional bank. This means most citizens who start using the digital euro will be withdrawing funds from a bank account and transferring them into a digital wallet directly held at the ECB – completely bypassing the traditional banking system.

As Leleux notes, a large and sudden outflow of bank deposits to CBDC wallets will have “a significant negative impact on the banking sector in the EU.” Such a scenario will decrease bank liquidity, profitability, and resilience:

"Firstly, it would imply a drop in credit institutions’ liquidity levels which consequently hardens banks’ task to reach their liquidity requirements. This would also imply a general increase of liquidity risks in the sector. Additionally, the impact of a large-scale deposit outflow could also spill over to the real economy as a result of banks’ limited lending capacity. Overall, a deposit outflow could lower banks' liquidity levels, profitability and ultimately also their resilience. Considering the potentially severe magnitude of these adverse outcomes, the European regulator stressed its willingness to implement adequate safeguards."

This means any banks already nearing the brink of failure will suddenly fail, likely triggering runs on other banks rumored to be in trouble. Once those banks also fail, a system-wide bank run will take place as citizens race to pull their funds out of the bank and put them into a digital wallet at the ECB. Why?

As the monopoly supplier of euros, the European Central Bank is the only bank capable of literally printing the currency. Theoretically, that means the ECB is the only bank incapable of failing. So in a panic situation, most citizens will go with the relative safety of holding digital euros in the ECB vs. holding non-digital euros in a traditional bank.

---

This work is a full-time endeavor for our family. Without the support of readers, viewers, and listeners like you, the work we do here would not be possible. If you like what you see, please consider becoming a paid subscriber.

As a paid subscriber, you’ll get weekly paid-subscriber videos and/or articles, a monthly live Q&A via Zoom, commenting privileges on every post, access to the complete archives, and more. Most of all, you get to support this work which spreads the Good News of Jesus Christ to tens of thousands of people in over 100 countries.

---

By its very nature, such a scenario will trigger “a large and sudden outflow of deposits from the banking sector.” But don’t worry, the ECB has a solution. What’s their solution?

Digital euro holding limits.

That’s right. The main impediment to the immediate roll out of a digital euro right now is not the debate over whether or not to have a digital euro. It’s a debate over what the holding limits should be.

These limits will put a cap on the amount of digital euros one person can hold, and thus, significantly decrease the threat to the European banking system:

"The ECB therefore proposes the implementation of digital euro-holding limits. These constraints would be set to limit individual holdings and prevent European citizens from using the digital euro as a store of value. The European regulator explored several levels of holding limits ranging from €1,000 to €5,000. Through a balance sheet optimisation model, they analysed the effect of a deposit outflow on banks under each of those individual holding limits. The model forecasted how credit institutions would manage the overnight deposit outflow while also minimising funding costs and managing their liquidity risks.

Estimates show that with the loosest limit, at €5,000, the household overnight deposit outflow could reach a maximum of 12%. With a €3,000 holding limit, European banks would see the outflow would not surpass 9%. At the current stage of the project, the regulator is considering enforcing the €3,000 personal holding limit."

"The ECB scenarios consider that when facing high household deposit outflow, banks would first compensate with their excess reserves before turning to other funding options such as interbank and central bank funding. Using data from the second quarter of 2023 and under the different holding limit scenarios, the central bank concludes that the impact on the sector’s liquidity risks and funding structures would be contained. Only an outflow of over 15% would make European banks reliant on central bank funding. In all other cases, banks own funds and the interbank market would suffice to cover the change.

That being said, the sector’s liquidity metrics would be expected to decline once citizens adopt the digital euro. However, results from the ECB model highlight that it would remain well above the regulatory minimum threshold."

So even at a €3,000 holding limit, European banks could lose up to 9% of their deposits. But this should raise a number of red flags, especially when considering the ECB’s track record of broken promises.

After all, what’s the point of having a digital euro if you’re going to limit the amount of digital euros one person can hold – especially at a relatively low limit of just €3,000? Undoubtedly, the ECB eventually envisions all transactions taking place with digital euros. That’s the whole point of the digital euro – surveillance and control.

As Leleux states:

"While these results show reasons to believe individual holding limits can effectively constrain a negative impact of the digital euro on the European banking sector, the final threshold hasn’t been set yet and the establishment of such a ceiling remains a complex task. Indeed, setting a too-strict limit might dissuade citizens from making use of the new digital currency and would also be counterproductive for the ECB.

To limit the impact of the holding limit on the payment functionality, the Commission also proposes the implementation of different mechanisms such as ‘waterfall’ and ‘reverse waterfall’ functions. The waterfall mechanism would imply that when a payee receives a digital euro payment resulting in a total balance above the holding limit, the excess amount would automatically fall to the user’s linked private payment account."

Imagine this… The digital euro is launched with a €3,000 holding limit. European banks lose approximately 9% of their current deposits. Some of those banks fail, leading to runs on additional banks. The public, concerned over the possible loss of their hard earned savings, demands the ECB raise the holding limit so they can park more of their funds in the “risk-free” digital wallet – where the fear of institutional failure is zero.

The ECB willingly complies, eliminating the digital euro holding limit in order to “restore order” and “eliminate the panic.” But far from doing either, eliminating the digital euro holding limit simply leads to more deposit outflows from the European banking system, making the problem markedly worse.

As more banks fail, more deposits flee the banking system for the perceived safety of digital euros held at the ECB. In doing so, the entire European banking system collapses, taking down several “systemically important” banks with significant global ties. Contagion spreads throughout the global banking and financial system, and the world experiences the greatest financial crisis in human history.

It's not far fetched at all.

In fact, Tether CEO Paolo Ardoino says the European financial system is already at great risk – before a digital euro ever rolls out.

As reported in ZeroHedge, Ardoino isn't overly positive about the European banking system:

"Tether CEO Paolo Ardoino has issued a dire warning to about Europe's financial system, predicting that "many" of the continent's banks are at risk of catastrophic collapse.

In an interview with the Less Noise More Signal podcast, Ardoino highlighted how stringent regulations and risky banking practices could precipitate a wave of failures, drawing parallels to the collapse of Silicon Valley Bank in 2023.

Ardoino’s concerns center on the European Union’s regulatory framework for stablecoin issuers, which he argues exacerbates systemic risks rather than mitigating them."

Tether (USDT) is a cryptocurrency stablecoin pegged to the U.S. dollar. Tether is the largest cryptocurrency in terms of trading volume, holding 70% of the global market share among stablecoins and boasting a user based of 350 million worldwide. Being pegged to the dollar, Tether should generally track the value of the dollar in a "stable" manner and not, as do many cryptocurrencies, wildly fluctuate in value. Yet, at least in Europe, Tether may not be as “stable” as many users believe:

“The regulation was pushing us to keep 60% of our reserves in uninsured cash deposits in Europe,” the Tether CEO told host Pascal Hügli, describing a scenario where stablecoin issuers are forced to park billions in vulnerable bank accounts. “Imagine that you have 10 billion euros in market cap of your stablecoin in Europe. Then 60% needs to be kept in uninsured cash deposits in a bank. Uninsured cash deposit means that the bank insurance in Europe is only 100,000 euros. If you have 10 billion, 100,000 euros is like a spitting on a fire.”

The math, as Ardoino laid out, is grim. With 60% of a stablecoin’s reserves—equivalent to 6 billion euros in his example—held in uninsured deposits, banks’ fractional reserve practices amplify the risk. “They can lend out 90% of it to people that want to buy a house, that want to start a business, and all that,” he explained. “So 5.4 billion euros will be lent out by the bank and 600 million euros will be cut.” In the event of a 20% redemption demand, or 2 billion euros, Ardoino warned that banks would fall short of cash. “You go to the bank and you tell the bank, well, I want 2 billion euros. And the bank says, well, I only have 600 million euros.”

Ardoino predicts that the fallout would be catastrophic for stablecoin issuers. “As a stablecoin issuer, you go bankrupt. Not because of you, because of the bank,” the Tether CEO said. “So the bank goes bankrupt and you go—like, so is—I mean, and—and, oh, sure, the government will say, ah, told you so, stable coins are very dangerous.”

In other words, a stablecoin issuer in Europe could theoretically see its stablecoin lose 60% of its value overnight in the event of a widespread banking crisis. This makes such cryptocurrencies anything but “stable.”

According to Ardoino, European banking regulations inevitably force stablecoin issuers like Tether to partner with more risky banks, amplifying the potential for crisis:

Ardoino’s critique extends to the broader European banking ecosystem, which he believes is ill-equipped to handle stablecoin operations. Major institutions like UBS, which he described as “systemic risk banks,” refuse to work with stablecoin issuers, forcing companies like Tether to rely on smaller, less stable financial institutions. “They need to use very small banks,” he said, warning that these institutions are particularly vulnerable. “Mark my words, as happened with Silicon Valley Bank that, by the way, almost killed them in 2023, they will face the same issues.”

“Four banks blew up last—in the last two years in the US,” he added. “Many banks will blow up in Europe in the many years—in the next few years.”

Based on his personal experience, Ardoino thinks “many banks will blow up in Europe.” And he isn’t even factoring in the launch of the digital euro and the prospect of a 9% deposit outflow from the European banking system!

Meanwhile, the situation isn’t much better for the U.S. banking system. As we read in Fortune:

Just over two years after the collapse of Silicon Valley Bank and First Republic, banks are still taking big losses thanks to high interest rates. That’s cause for major concern, several experts told Fortune, especially if President Donald Trump’s tariffs lead to the dreaded combination of “stagflation,” or rising inflation coupled with slowing growth, putting further pressure on lenders.

U.S. banks held $482.4 billion in total unrealized losses on securities investments at the end of 2024, according to Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation data, an increase of $118 billion, or 32.5%, from the previous quarter. That number had risen to $515 billion when SVB fell victim to a bank run in March 2023 and peaked at $684 billion later that year. Data for the first quarter of 2025 is expected later this week, but April’s spike in bond yields means any reprieve in the first three months of the year was likely short-lived.

These unrealized losses don’t show up on a bank’s income statement unless the assets are sold, but they represent a looming threat to liquidity if depositors get spooked, said Rebel Cole, a finance professor at Florida Atlantic University who worked for a decade in the Federal Reserve System.

“All it takes is one bad news story about any of these banks, and we could have another banking crisis like we had in March of [2023],” Cole, who has served as a special adviser to the International Monetary Fund and World Bank, told Fortune. “I’m amazed we haven’t had one since then.”

The U.S. banking system is likely sitting on a record amount of unrealized losses. Those losses don’t really matter – until they do. As with Silicon Valley Bank, once depositors start to demand their cash, the only way to provide it is to sell assets, and if those assets are underwater, the sale of those assets means the unrealized losses become realized losses.

And the U.S. banking is under additional pressures as well:

Cole, meanwhile, said he sees additional pressure coming from a looming crisis in commercial real estate, leaving banks increasingly vulnerable if investment losses put them under pressure. He said he’s especially worried about regional and super-regional banks with $10 billion to $200 billion in assets, many of which are public companies with major exposure to depositors with holdings above the FDIC’s $250,000 limit for insurance.

“They can’t meet one of those runs if they have any unrealized losses on their securities portfolio,” Cole said. “Then they’ll have to mark that to market, and the regulators will close them.”

In short, banks face a “nightmare scenario” and are sitting on a “tinderbox.”

“And it’s just going to take one spark,” Cole said.

According to FAU’s Rebel Cole, all it will take is “one spark” to set off the “tinderbox” that is the U.S. banking system.

And right now, the odds are very high the digital euro will provide that spark. If the digital euro is widely adopted, it will devastate the European banking system. That devastation will then quickly spread to the U.S. banking system and the entire world.

What are the odds of widespread adoption?

Very high. After all, it’s the chief aim of the European Central Bank.

As we read in this statement by Piero Cipollone, Member of the Executive Board of the ECB, at the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs of the European Parliament:

"We must also ensure that Europeans have a secure and reliable digital means of payment that complements cash and extends its key benefits to the digital sphere. The growing preference for digital payments means that the acceptance and the availability of cash are no longer sufficient to cover a growing share of use cases. For example, online shopping accounts for more than one-third of our retail transactions, but cash cannot be used online and it is often not possible to pay using a European payment service, meaning we need to rely on non-European payment systems. This is a structural weakness that we need to address.

Europe cannot afford to rely excessively on foreign payment solutions. Doing so makes us dependent on the kindness of strangers in a context of heightened geopolitical tensions. The urgency of preserving our autonomy in defence and energy is already extremely clear. But ensuring autonomy for essential services like daily payments is just as urgent. Without it, we are vulnerable to geopolitical threats and risk losing our monetary sovereignty. Recent international developments underscore these risks."

According to Cipollone, one-third of all European retail transactions take place online. And those transactions rely on non-European payment systems. He views this as a national security risk and aims to replace those non-European payment systems with the digital euro. Doing so will require widespread adoption of the digital euro.

But it’s not just online transactions he wants to replace. He wants the digital euro to cover “all the payment needs” of European consumers:

"The digital euro would provide European consumers with a simple and safe digital payment option, free for basic use, that covers all their payment needs everywhere in the euro area while ensuring their privacy."

It’s impossible for the digital euro to achieve such widespread adoption and not simultaneously destroy the entire European banking system. Cipollone and everyone else at the European Central Bank know this. All the European Union politicians know this. Otherwise, why are they debating digital euro holding limits at all?

The only conclusion we can draw is this:

1) They know the digital euro will destroy the European banking system, and

2) They want the digital euro to destroy the European banking system.

Otherwise, they would take another approach with the digital euro, one where digital euros are held in bank accounts – a system where the banks act as intermediaries between the public and the European Central Bank.

Why Do They Want a Crisis?

Knowing this raises the obvious question – why do they want a crisis?

The answer is simple. They want a crisis so they can offer the solution.

What’s their solution?

The very invention which kicked off the crisis.

They’ll offer a new, “safer” system – one primarily composed of three elements:

1) Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC)

2) Tokenized Assets

3) Digital IDs

This will create a system similar in both capability and function to a system we read about in the Bible:

"He required everyone — small and great, rich and poor, free and slave — to be given a mark on the right hand or on the forehead. And no one could buy or sell anything without that mark, which was either the name of the beast or the number representing his name." Revelation 13:16-17 (NLT)

This is widely known as "the mark of the beast" system. Now, let me be clear - central bank digital currencies, tokenized assets, and digital IDs are NOT the mark of the beast. However, they create a system functionally indistinguishable from the mark of the beast system, meaning they effectively put the mark of the beast infrastructure in place.

It’s yet another sign of the nearness of the seven-year Tribulation and the Second Coming of Jesus Christ. So look up – your redemption draws near (Luke 21:28)!

If you like this article, click the “Share” button above to share it with your loved ones and spread the Good News of Jesus! Also, please click the ❤️ button or re-stack buttons below so more people can discover this information on Substack 🙏