On The Road To A Hyperstate: EU Commission Circumvents Financing Rules

The European Union is funded by contributions from its member states. At least, that’s what the founding treaties say. In practice, however, the EU has long been taking other paths.

At the core of Europe’s financial architecture lies a clear separation of responsibility and liability: Article 125 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), the so-called “No-Bailout Clause.” It states, unequivocally, that neither the Union nor individual member states may assume the debts of other states. The purpose of this provision is to prevent free-rider effects (moral hazard) at the expense of other member states: each state is responsible for its own obligations.

Still, the clause does not exclude political support, as long as it does not mean assuming the existing debts of other states. A notable example of this practice were the bailout programs for Greece during the sovereign debt crisis one and a half decades ago.

Article 310 TFEU further regulates the EU budget: revenues and expenditures must be balanced every year, and the budget may only be financed through own resources such as member contributions, tariffs, or approved revenues. Independent loans by the EU Commission exceeding the approved framework are prohibited.

Together, these rules form the legal backbone of EU financial policy: no automatic liability, no autonomous EU debt, and only fully covered spending.

This design was deliberately chosen to prevent the emergence of a supra-state in Brussels and to defend the national scope of action of member states against an expanding Brussels bureaucracy.

Theory vs. Practice

That’s the theory. In practice, the EU has steadily increased its presence as a borrower in the bond market. It began in 1976 with the first European Community bond to support Italy and Ireland during the oil crisis. In the 1980s and 1990s, further issues followed for France, Greece, and Portugal—always aimed at demonstrating collective solidarity and easing fiscal tensions.

The 2008/2010 financial crisis marked a decisive turning point: with the European Financial Stabilisation Mechanism (EFSM) and, in 2012, the European Stability Mechanism (ESM), the EU began deliberately supporting over-indebted member states via bond issuance. In 2010, the European Central Bank announced it would purchase euro sovereign bonds on the open market to prevent the collapse of the monetary union—always in close coordination with EU institutions.

The COVID years saw a new dimension in 2020: for the first time, the EU issued Social Bonds under the “SURE” fund. At the same time, the “Next Generation EU” program started, providing around €800 billion in crisis aid. Since 2025, the Union has increasingly relied on so-called “sustainable bonds” (Green Bonds) and plans to issue short-term treasury bills for improved liquidity management.

The EU and ECB now operate in tandem, integrating ever-new financing instruments into the capital markets. The signal to the market is clear: we are ready to meet growing demand for euro bonds. And as collateral, not only the European taxpayer but also the ECB’s virtually unlimited liquidity is on standby. What could possibly go wrong?

Keep reading

ABC’s Martha Raddatz Cheers Against Trump’s Efforts To Achieve Peace In Ukraine

President Donald Trump met with Russian President Vladimir Putin on Friday in Alaska in a historic attempt to end the more than two-year war between Ukraine and Russia. Since Russia’s 2022 invasion, tens of thousands have died, while millions have been displaced. The Alaska summit marked the first serious step toward direct negotiations between Moscow and Kiev.

But for ABC News’ Martha Raddatz and the rest of the propaganda press, a Trump-negotiated peace itself was a problem. Instead of acknowledging the significance of Trump’s diplomacy, Raddatz spent her Sunday segment disparaging the president for daring to treat Putin like a foreign leader who can choose to keep the war going rather than a pariah.

Raddatz opened her report by sneering at diplomatic courtesy:

Russia’s Vladimir Putin, responsible for invading Ukraine and the deaths of tens of thousands of Ukrainians, given a red carpet arrival, a warm handshake and a ride in the presidential limousine to a closed door three-hour meeting with the whole world watching and waiting.

Notably, Raddatz apparently had no such objections (based on a cursory search of the web) to “warm” welcomes when then-President Joe Biden rolled out the red carpet for Chinese dictator Xi Jinping.

Keep reading

Creative Chaos: Inside The CIA’s Covert War To Topple The Syrian Government

For over a decade, the dominant Western narrative on the Syrian War has been simple: a peaceful uprising turned into a brutal civil war because of Bashar al-Assad’s ruthless crackdown on his own people.

But in Creative Chaos: Inside the CIA’s Covert War to Topple the Syrian Government, the Libertarian Institute’s latest book, William Van Wagenen methodically dismantles this mainstream version of events, exposing it as a convenient fiction crafted to justify one of the most disastrous regime change wars of the modern era.

His central thesis is clear: the war in Syria was not an organic revolution but a deliberate effort by Washington, Israel, and their regional partners to weaken Iran by toppling Assad’s government. 

And when peaceful protests were hijacked by Islamist militants, instead of helping restore stability, the US and its allies deliberately prevented Assad from crushing the insurgency—even as it became dominated by al-Qaeda and ISIS-affiliated groups.

Now, years later, the result is a fractured Syria, ruled by jihadist warlords and occupied by foreign powers, with Israel consolidating its hold over strategic territory.

How and why did this disaster for Syria’s people come to pass? And why were the non-interventionists who called out Washington’s lies always right about the war and its likely outcome?

Regime Change: The Blueprint for Syria’s Destruction

Van Wagenen carefully documents how regime change in Syria had been a goal of US foreign policy long before the Arab Spring. The Bush administration set the groundwork, but the Obama administration accelerated the effort, seeing it as a way to strike a blow against Iran without a direct war.

His research confirms that the US and its allies—including Israel, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and Türkiye—actively supported and armed the so-called “moderate opposition,” despite overwhelming evidence that jihadists controlled the rebellion almost from the start.

Instead of letting the Assad government restore order, Western intelligence agencies funneled billions in arms, logistics, and training to extremist groups, ensuring the war would drag on.

The leaked 2012 email from Jake Sullivan to Hillary Clinton (which Van Wagenen references) makes this reality undeniable: “AQ [Al-Qaeda] is on our side in Syria.”

This stunning admission exposes the real nature of US policy in Syria: at the same time they fought them on the other side of the line in Iraq, Washington was directly supporting al-Qaeda-linked groups because they served its geopolitical interests.

Note: For those who haven’t read the Libertarian Institute Director Scott Horton’s book Enough Already: Time to End the War on Terror, this was a reversion to form rather than a policy innovation: Washington had, as a rule, favored the fundamentalist and radical Sunni sects over secular alternatives in the region going back decades.

Keep reading

Grassley releases data showing Biden admin placed over 10K migrant children with unvetted sponsors

Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley on Monday released new data from the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), which confirmed his concern that the Biden administration placed over 10,000 migrant children with unvetted sponsors.

The Trump administration provided Grassley with the information as part of his oversight investigation and requests, which were largely ignored or stonewalled by the previous administration. 

The data found that HHS’ Office of Refugee Resettlement from January 2021 through January 2025 placed 11,488 unaccompanied migrant children with unvetted sponsors who were not their parents or legal guardians. During that same period, the department also declined to conduct home studies for over 79,000 migrant children under the age of 12, including in homes where a study was recommended.

Keep reading

Was the FBI Behind the Oklahoma Bombing?

It has always been hard to believe that the truck-bombing of the A.P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City on April 19, 1995, which killed 168 people, including 19 children at a daycare center, was planned by just one or two perpetrators acting alone. However, the official story states that the mastermind was Gulf War veteran Timothy McVeigh, and that the two others sentenced with him only helped him in various ways.

Right from the start, warning signs indicated that the investigation was being misled. The FBI developed a story claiming that a group called the Patriots Movement, which included anti-government extremists and white supremacists, was responsible for the attack. However, the agency also appeared to be trying hard to hide something. Consider these facts:

Twenty-four eyewitnesses saw a man with McVeigh just before the bombing. The FBI referred to him as John Doe 2 but later dismissed the idea that such a person existed. None of the witnesses who saw John Doe 2 were called to testify.

At least eight people connected to the investigation — including a brave police officer who was a first responder — died under mysterious circumstances, five of them reportedly by suicide.

Local reporters who looked beyond the storyline mainstream newspapers presented that the FBI had received a warning call about a bomb attack.

The sheriff’s bomb squad had even been patrolling the city before the explosion. An official of the Bureau from Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) said agents had been asked not to come in to work on the day of the attack.

In a new book called Blowback: The Untold Story of the FBI and the Oklahoma City Bombing, Margaret Roberts, former news director of America’s Most Wanted, presents shocking evidence suggesting that FBI agents might have been involved, acting as agent provocateurs in an operation gone wrong. The book suggests that the bombing was the result of a sting or deep-cover operation meant to trap white supremacists likely to carry out attacks such as the one that, tragically, could not be — or was deliberately not — prevented.

Much of the material comes from investigations conducted by Jesse Trentadue, a persistent attorney who believes his brother Kenneth was killed during an interrogation in jail because he was mistaken for Robert Guthrie, a bank robber and a probable John Doe 2. In his efforts to seek justice for his brother, Trentadue occasionally teamed up with experienced investigative reporters like Mary A. Fischer and Roberts. His legal battle resulted in the family being awarded a million dollars for Kenneth’s “wrongful death.” However, so much evidence had been tampered with or was impossible to obtain that the court refused to rule that Kenneth’s death, declared a “suicide” by prison authorities, was actually a murder.

One of the major questions is how McVeigh obtained the funds to buy the ammonium nitrate and fuel oil used in the bomb. The FBI theory suggests that a group of white supremacists calling themselves the Aryan Republican Army (ARA) funded the bombing through bank robberies across the country. Another question is whether the truck bomb alone could have caused the building to collapse. An investigation by a citizens’ group found that it could not; additional explosives might have been skillfully planted in the building to cause the cave-in.

Equally intriguing is how the prosecution handled Michael Fortier, one of the two others sentenced alongside McVeigh. Through a plea deal, Fortier testified against McVeigh. In return, lesser charges were brought against him and none against his wife. After serving 10 years of a 12-year sentence for failing to inform authorities about the bomb plot, he was released for good behavior and given a new identity under the witness protection program. Terry Nichols, the third person sentenced in the case, is serving multiple life sentences, while McVeigh was executed.

Keep reading

JB Pritzker Under Fire Over His Latest Move Helping Illegal Aliens

Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker signed into law a measure that opens state-funded student financial aid to all residents, regardless of immigration status, making illegal immigrants in Illinois eligible for educational financial benefits.

The legislation, framed as creating “equitable eligibility for financial aid and benefits,” establishes that any student residing in the state who is not otherwise eligible for federal financial aid can now qualify for assistance.

The law specifically cites students disqualified from federal aid, such as transgender students who fail to register for selective service or noncitizen students who lack lawful permanent residence.

The bill was met with immediate criticism from conservatives, including Rep. Mary Miller, R-Ill., who described the move as prioritizing illegal immigrants over Illinois families.

“Allowing taxpayer-funded financial aid for illegal aliens is a slap in the face to hardworking Illinois families and students,” Miller told Fox News Digital.

Keep reading

Dept. of Education Plans to Pull Federal Funds from Five Virginia School Districts over Transgender Policies

The Department of Education said it plans to cut federal funds to five Northern Virginia school districts that have refused to rescind their policies allowing students to use bathrooms and locker rooms based on “gender identity” rather than biological reality. 

The five school districts — including Alexandria City Public Schools, Arlington Public Schools, Fairfax County Public Schools, Loudoun County Public Schools, and Prince William County Public Schools — announced last week that they had rejected the Trump administration’s requests to change their transgender policies, Fox News reported. The Education Department announced in July, following an investigation, that the districts are allegedly in violation of Title IX for sex discrimination. Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 bars discrimination on the basis of sex in any education program or activity receiving federal financial assistance.  

Education Department spokesperson Madi Biedermann told the outlet that the department will begin the process of suspending or terminating federal funding to the five districts. 

“The U.S. Department of Education generously granted an extension for five Northern Virginia School Districts to come into compliance with Title IX and follow federal law – unfortunately, the additional time did not result in a fruitful outcome,” Biedermann said. “The Agency will commence administrative proceedings to effect the suspension or termination of federal financial assistance to these divisions. The Virginia districts will have to defend their embrace of radical gender ideology over ensuring the safety of their students.”

Loudoun County was the first of the five districts to announce that it had rejected the Trump administration’s request. The board voted 6-3 in a closed-session meeting on Tuesday to keep Policy 8040, which allows students to used restrooms and locker rooms according to their subjective sense of “gender identity,” according to the report.

A spokesperson for the district said the federal interpretation of Title IX is at odds with state laws.

“After consultation with legal counsel, the Board voted 6-3 not to comply with this request due to the tension between the OCR position and current law. We will continue to monitor developments closely to ensure continued legal compliance and the protection of all students,” the spokesperson told the outlet on Wednesday. 

The other four districts reportedly asked the department to hold off on pilling funds until the courts clarify whether Title IX applies to gender identity. 

Keep reading

Family of Tribal Chief Who Inspired Washington Redskins Logo Thanks Trump, Urges Team to Restore It

The family of the Native American tribal chief who inspired the former Washington Redskins logo is calling on the team to bring back the image, describing it as a matter of respect and historical accuracy, as reported by The Blaze.

Thomas White Calf, the nephew of the late Chief Two Guns White Calf of the Blackfeet tribe, wrote a letter demanding the franchise restore both the name and logo that activists pressured the team to drop in 2020.

The Redskins name and logo were abandoned in July of that year, replaced temporarily by the “Washington Football Team” before the franchise adopted the “Washington Commanders” identity in 2022.

“White Calf defended tribal traditions in our Blackfeet homeland in Montana, where many of us still live today,” Thomas wrote in a letter obtained by the New York Post.

“He went to Washington, D.C., where he forced the U.S. government to honor Indian treaties. He served as a model for the U.S. Mint’s famous 1913 ‘Indian head’ nickel. White Calf’s face is still a collector’s item.”

Keep reading

Anatomy of a lynching

Kamel Musallet was at home in Florida, United States, when he last spoke to his son Sayfollah (Saif), who was visiting their ancestral hometown of al-Mazaraa ash-Sharqiyah (Mazraa) in the occupied West Bank.

Saif, 20, was in high spirits, telling Kamel he might have found the woman he wanted to marry and talking about how to start the arrangements.

Four days later, Kamel woke up the morning of July 11 to a call from his younger son, Muhammad, 18, telling him that settlers had attacked Saif.

At the time, Saif was lying on the ground near an oak tree where he had hidden to get away from rampaging settlers; he was unconscious and having trouble breathing.

By the time Saif had been carried to an ambulance, he was dead.

Saif’s friend, 23-year-old Muhammad “Rizik” al-Shalabi from Mazraa, was found later in the night – shot, beaten, tortured and left to die of his wounds.

Al Jazeera spoke with witnesses, victims, town officials, first aid responders, and search and rescue volunteers.

This is the story of how Saif and Rizik were lynched by a mob of Israeli settlers.

Keep reading

The Israeli flag just became the only national flag illegal to burn in the United States. Yeah. I’m dead serious.

The Flag America Protects

This week in Washington, D.C., a federal judge made a ruling so shocking, so unprecedented, that it flips the First Amendment on its head. Judge Trevor N. McFadden declared that the Israeli flag — with the Star of David at its center — is not a political symbol at all, but a racial one.

He ruled that tearing it, grabbing it, desecrating it, even in the heat of protest, is not free expression but racial discrimination.

Think about that. In the United States, you can burn the American flag — the Supreme Court has said so for decades. But now, according to this ruling, burning or tearing the Israeli flag could make you guilty of racial hatred. The one national flag protected in American law today isn’t our own. It’s Israel’s.

You can burn the flags of all 50 states. You can torch the American flag all you want. You can burn the flags of the UK or France or Brazil or China.

But not Israel.

Keep reading