In one of the most absurd and comical headlines of the year, The Wall Street Journal on Friday says it knows who will be tapped to oversee Gaza once the Israel-Hamas war is over: former British Prime Minister Tony Blair.

That’s according to a controversial White House plan now being proposed to Arab and Israeli leaders. The 72-year old is being presented as a peace-maker, despite his record of being George W. Bush’s biggest allied supporter in the disastrous, blood-soaked invasion of Iraq and overthrow of Saddam Hussein. 

“As Britain’s prime minister, Tony Blair helped negotiate a landmark peace agreement to end three decades of conflict in Northern Ireland,” WSJ writes, apparently without intending irony. “Now, President Trump might want him for an even more difficult job: Helping Gaza get back on its feet once the conflict ends.”

The plan calls for a Gaza International Transition Authority (GITA) – which sounds a bit like the Bush-era’s Coalition Provisional Coalition (CPA) which oversaw nation-building in Iraq. And so it seems Blair will be the Paul Bremer for the Gaza Strip, according to the plan.

The idea is that this would be a UN-overseen initiative. “The United Nations-backed body would control the enclave for at least several years, staffed in part by Palestinian technocrats and supported by an Arab-led international peacekeeping force, until it could hand over full control to the Palestinians, officials say,” WSJ continues.

However, US admin officials have said Blair is but one of several officials under consideration for heading up the GITA mission. The plan would have to gain the cooperation and backing of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, and presumably whatever Palestinian officials remain in the war-ravaged Gaza Strip.

While the whole thing sounds dubious, the WSJ presents an optimistic outlook:

“But the plan’s broad outline has been received well so far by several Arab countries and some Palestinian leaders, and its backing by Trump means it likely has the best chance of success of any plan so far, analysts say,” the publication writes.

Leaked documents show Tony Blair Institute (TBI) staff were involved in a postwar Gaza proposal for a “Trump Riviera” and “Elon Musk Smart Manufacturing Zone.”

An internal TBI paper called the war a “once-in-a-century opportunity” to rebuild Gaza with artificial islands,… pic.twitter.com/qLty0yNH6l

— WikiLeaks (@wikileaks) July 9, 2025

This is yet another example of how Washington and London NeoCons and warmongers keeping ‘failing up’ in the world in terms of responsibility, oversight, and power. 

But the US might think to ask average Palestinian people themselves what they think of Tony Blair and his legacy in the Middle East. It’s likely not good.

Authored by Aldgra Fredly via The Epoch Times,

The U.S. State Department said on Sept. 26 that it would revoke Colombian President Gustavo Petro’s visa after he called on U.S. soldiers to disobey orders during his visit to New York.

“Earlier today, Colombian president @petrogustavo stood on a NYC street and urged U.S. soldiers to disobey orders and incite violence,” the department stated on X.

“We will revoke Petro’s visa due to his reckless and incendiary actions,” it added. The department did not provide further details about the incident.

Petro traveled to New York for the United Nations General Assembly, though it is unclear whether he is still in the city.

His office shared a series of videos on social media showing him addressing a crowd of pro-Palestinian protesters gathering outside UN headquarters in New York on Sept. 26.

“I ask all the soldiers of the U.S. army, do not point your guns at the people,” Petro said through a translator in one of the videos.

Disobey [President Donald] Trump’s orders. Obey the orders of humanity.” 

No soldiers appear to be visible in the videos shared by the Colombian president’s office.

Neither the Colombian government nor Petro has issued a response statement to the U.S. State Department’s decision.

In his Sept. 24 address to the UN General Assembly, Petro called on other nations to form “a powerful army” to help defend Palestine from the Israel-Hamas war, which has been ongoing since Hamas’s Oct. 7, 2023, attack on southern Israel.  

The Colombian president said that diplomacy had failed to resolve the war and that it’s time for the international community to take a different approach.

“We need a powerful army of countries that do not accept genocide. That is why I invite nations of the world and their peoples more than anything, as an integral part of humanity, to bring together weapons and armies to defend Palestine,” Petro said.

Trump, whose administration has been pushing for a cessation of hostilities in Gaza and the release of hostages, said Sept. 26 that “intense negotiations” had been held with the Middle Eastern community about the situation in Gaza.

All countries in the region are involved in the negotiations, Trump said, adding that the Hamas terrorist group is aware of the talks and that Israel has been kept informed at every level, including Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

“There is more Goodwill and Enthusiasm for getting a Deal done, after so many decades, than I have ever seen before. Everyone is excited to put this period of Death and Darkness behind them,” he stated on Truth Social.

Relations between the United States and Colombia have been strained in recent months. Colombia halted weapons purchase from the United States after Trump issued a presidential determination designating Colombia—and several other nations—as having “failed demonstrably” to meet their obligations under international counter-narcotics agreements.

In July, the United States recalled its ambassador over what it called “baseless and reprehensible statements” from the Colombian government’s “highest levels,” prompting Colombia to recall its own ambassador. The diplomatic rift came as the Colombian Attorney General’s Office investigated an alleged plot to oust Petro.

Submitted by Thomas Kolbe

More and more people are turning their backs on the European Union. With them, the states are also losing economic substance. Exit taxes are being used in an attempt to counter this.

The states of the European Union are experiencing a veritable exodus. About 1.4 million EU citizens left their home countries in 2023, among them 265,000 Germans. Among the favored destinations are, alongside Switzerland and the United States, booming regions such as Qatar or Dubai.

Good Reasons

The list of destination countries carries political dynamite, because it says much about the background of this flight movement. A growing number of high performers are trying to escape what is in many places almost predatory levels of taxation. In addition, academics, researchers, freelancers such as the so-called “digital nomads,” and entrepreneurs simply find better economic prospects elsewhere than in economically sedated Europe.

EU citizens are not infrequently being drained by a tax burden of 45 percent. We know this from Germany: it is not even necessary to count among the absolute top earners in order to have to surrender nearly half of one’s income to the tax authorities. Basically, it is a scandal—one about which there is no longer any open discussion.

In Dubai, for example, there is no income tax at all. In the United States, the state burdens its citizens with around 27 percent. Anyone who can calculate, who is well educated and mobile, draws the consequences. Alongside the tax burden, social crises increasingly come into play: uncontrolled migration, the decay of major cities, and the visibly hostile climate of ever-expanding bureaucracies. For many ambitious people, life in the EU’s Europe is simply too expensive, and the essence of bureaucracy too overbearing.

Expensive Emigration

Every emigrant leaves behind an economic gap in his homeland. When a German with a high income leaves the country, the state does not only lose a taxpayer—it loses his capital and know-how. Over the lifetime of an academic, around €1.5 million in taxes and social contributions escape the treasury. In addition, there is the enormous loss of capital. Estimates assume that the median wealth of Germans per person is €106,000. With the emigration of 265,000 Germans and the return of 191,000 persons—where for simplicity we assume the same level of wealth—about €7.8 billion in capital flows abroad.

The economist Bernd Raffelhüschen calculates the annual fiscal loss through emigration by discounting the difference between future tax and social contribution payments and state transfers of an average academic to its present value. He arrives at a loss of about €30,000 for each emigrated academic.

The flight of high performers works like economic erosion in real time. Highly qualified people leave the country. People who, with higher probability, would have moved venture capital and founded companies are tearing open a fiscal gap. About 56 percent of income tax revenue is provided by the top ten percent of taxpayers—the political class would be well advised to roll out the red carpet for these people instead of harnessing them to the cart of their ambitious social projects.

Feudalism as the Answer

The answer of EU Europe to the flight of the economically ambitious and wealthy is neo-feudal in character. Through punitive taxes, the costs of fleeing the tax collector and the increasingly invasive state are to be raised so high that the impulse to emigrate is suffocated. Somewhat exaggeratedly formulated, this policy recalls the old feudal European conditions which once led to the mass migration of Europeans to North America.

Alongside France, Spain, Italy, and the Netherlands, the Federal Republic of Germany has also deployed an exit tax.

Anyone who, as an entrepreneur, holds at least 1 percent of a corporation (this includes stock capital) and turns his back on Germany triggers exit taxation—even if no sales proceeds have been realized. In this case, the state assumes a fictitious sale of the shares and taxes the theoretical capital gain. What is decisive is the difference between the original purchase price and the current market value. Sixty percent of this gain is added to taxable income and taxed at up to 45 percent, depending on the income tax rate. In addition comes the solidarity surcharge and a possible church tax levy.

This regulation applies if the person concerned was subject to unlimited taxation in Germany for at least seven of the past twelve years—and it applies equally in the case of emigration to third countries or relocation within the EU. Since 2022, moves within the EU are no longer automatically privileged for tax purposes: whoever wants to leave must pay—unless he applies for a deferral over seven years and provides collateral. The frequently mentioned €150,000 threshold is not a tax-free allowance, but only a guideline for assessment.

In sum, this amounts to state access to future gains, binding entrepreneurs to their homeland and making departure more difficult through a fiscal hurdle.

Europe Will Rely on Capital Barriers

Up to now, exit taxation refers to corporate holdings and does not cover private individuals who want to emigrate with their capital. However, in view of the fiscal emergency of numerous EU states, we must assume that this will change in the medium term, and that other groups of persons will also be included in the scope of exit taxation.

That the states of the EU will in all probability rely on mobility barriers rather than reforming their expensive state apparatus shows the entire problem. People are literally voting with their feet against bureaucratism and the sprawling hyper-state.

The response is further barriers to capital, such as the planned digital euro. It would amount to an almost insurmountable capital barrier. And it would at the same time send the signal to worldwide capital to give the eurozone a wide berth.

* * * 

About the author: Thomas Kolbe, a German graduate economist, has worked for over 25 years as a journalist and media producer for clients from various industries and business associations. As a publicist, he focuses on economic processes and observes geopolitical events from the perspective of the capital markets. His publications follow a philosophy that focuses on the individual and their right to self-determination.

By Tsvetana Paraskova of OilPrice.com

Exports from the semi-autonomous region of Kurdistan will resume on Saturday, September 27, following agreements reached between Iraq’s federal government, the Kurdistan Regional Government, and a group of international oil companies, Norway-based oil producer DNO ASA said on Friday. 

However, DNO, one of the major foreign producers in Kurdistan, will not ship its crude directly to the Iraq-Turkey pipeline to the Turkish Mediterranean port of Ceyhan. 

Instead, DNO will deliver the Kurdistan Regional Government’s share of sales from the company’s operated Tawke license, currently averaging 38,000 barrels per day (bpd), for export. The balance of the oil, representing the share of sales the foreign contractor group consisting of DNO and Genel Energy International Limited, currently averaging 30,000 bpd, will continue to be sold to local buyers under existing contracts.

DNO ASA and British Genel Energy have refused to sign the deal reached by the federal government, KRG, and the other oil companies until the Kurdistan Regional Government provides guarantees that they will receive the money it owes them. 

“DNO is pleased that exports of oil from the Kurdistan Region have been unlocked and will now flow to international markets,” said DNO executive chairman Bijan Mossavar-Rahmani. 

“We have elected not to engage directly in exports at this time and will continue to sell our oil on a monthly, cash-and-carry, basis to our buyers at a per barrel price in the low USD 30s,” he added.

Oil exports from Kurdistan have been halted for two and a half years, after they were shut in in March 2023 due to a dispute over who should authorize the Kurdish exports.

The resumption of flows on September 27 is expected to add about 230,000 bpd of oil from Kurdistan to the international market. 

Additional supply from Kurdistan is set to hit the oil market at a time when analysts, forecasters, and traders expect oversupply to start building with the end of the peak summer demand season.  

The FBI deployed nearly 300 plainclothes agents to the US Capitol during the Jan. 6, 2021 riot, in an effort that became so chaotic it caused an internal schism within the agency that led many rank-and-file at the bureau that core competencies had been lost to “wokeness,” and that employees had become “pawns in a political war,” according to an after-action report hidden from the public for over four years until it was obtained by Just the News. 

Anonymous complaints were sent to the after-action team by scores of FBI agents and other personnel – many from the bureau’s premier Washington field office (WFO) – detailing how agents were sent into a dangerous situation without proper safety equipment or even the ability to identify themselves as armed officers to other police agencies.

Most common among the complaints was that under former directors Chris Wray and just-indicted James Comey, the bureau had become infected with political bias and liberal ideology that treated the Trump-supporting Jan. 6 protesters much differently from Black Lives Matter rioters from the summer of 2020. 

“The FBI should make clear to its personnel and the public that, despite its obvious political bias, it ultimately still takes its mission and priorities seriously,” wrote one employee. “It should equally and aggressively investigate criminal activity regardless of the offenders’ perceived race, political affiliations, or motivations; and it should equally and aggressively protect all Americans regardless of perceived race, political affiliations, or motivations.”

The agent suggested that leaders “identify viable exit options for FBI personnel who no longer feel it is legally or morally acceptable to support a federal law enforcement and intelligence agency motivated by political bias.”

Another agent suggested that the problem was widespread throughout the FBI.

“Currently, the US Attorneys office is dictating what it is that gets investigated. This is a dangerous precedent because we can barely get them to prosecute investigations that clearly meet thresholds needed for Federal prosecutions,” the agent wrote. “However, their willingness to conduct a search warrant on someone’s life for a misdemeanor seems ridiculous. It is unreasonable for the FBI to conduct investigations involving misdemeanor violations at a federal level… it is not our role.”

‘Hopelessly Broken’

Several employees directly mentioned the Washington Field Office (WFO) and its culture. “WFO is a hopelessly broken office that’s more concerned about wearing masks and recruiting preferred racial/sexual groups than catching actual bad guys,” wrote one worker. 

“I wish you all would pay more attention to our safety than what type of masks we wear. If you are going to deploy us to a riot situation, then give us the proper damn safety equipment–helmet, face shield, protective clothing–and training!” wrote another. 

In total, the after-action feedback spanned 50 pages, which were located by current FBI Director Kash Patel’s office and turned over to the House Judiciary Committed and its subcommittee 

As Just the News notes further; the document has proven a bombshell to lawmakers, revealing for the first time that the FBI had a total of 274 agents deployed to the Capitol in plainclothes and with guns but no clear safety gear of way to be recognized by other law enforcement agencies working in the chaos of the riot.

Wray, Patel’s predecessor, steadfastly refused to tell Congress how many if any agents went to the Capitol that day. And a prior DOJ Inspector General Report did not divulge the number, referring only to a SWAT team the bureau sent into the Capitol and having more than two dozen informants in the crowd.

The existence of mass FBI agents at the Capitol on Jan. 6  could also be a problem in many of the cases that were subsequently brought in court. If agents were witnesses at the Capitol and did not disclose it in the subsequent affidavits during prosecutions it could create grounds for defendants to appeal.

The document also reveals for the first time that there were widespread concerns for years inside the bureau – sentiments that boiled over after the FBI began sending SWAT teams to arrest Jan. 6 participants on misdemeanor charges – that the FBI had become biased in favor of liberals and against conservatives.

Despite the pre-existing report, Wray rejected that notion in testimony before Congress. “The idea that I’m biased against conservatives seems somewhat insane to me, given my own personal background,” Wray told Congress in 2023. 

“I have found almost invariably, the people screaming the loudest about the politicization of the FBI are themselves the most political, and more often than not, making claims of politicization to advance their own views or goals, and they often don’t know the facts or are choosing to ignore them,” Wray added in an episode of the podcast “FBI Retired Case File Review” that aired the same year. 

Read the rest of the report here…

AnarchistNews, the long-running anarcho-communist propaganda site, popular among Antifa militants and radical leftists, issued a movement order this week instructing “all anarchists across the country” to disrupt operations at ICE facilities in every city and to “celebrate life with fire against the death march of american law and order.”

“We invite all anarchists across the country not only to occupy and disrupt operations at ICE facilities in every city, but to celebrate life with fire against the death march of american law and order. With tactical diversity, lets meet in the streets and wage a carnival of war against ICE and all authority!” read a post titled “A Call for Anarchist Action in America,” anonymously submitted on AnarchistNews.

Given that AnarchistNews doesn’t usually create original reporting, it collects and reposts content from anarchist collectives, independent media, and individuals. It’s therefore difficult to determine who penned this action order. Still, its publication on the site suggests that Trump’s domestic terror designation of Antifa has riled up the base of far-left radicals who have already been attacking ICE facilities nationwide. This signals a likely rise in civil terrorism, as seen on Wednesday when a left-wing extremist opened fire at an ICE facility in Texas. 

On Wednesday morning, FBI Director Kash Patel provided new details about yesterday’s radical leftist shooter, who had written down notes during the planning phase of the attack, writing: “Hopefully this will give ICE agents real terror, to think, ‘Is there a sniper with AP rounds on that roof?”

@FBIDallas and FBI HQ have been working 24/7 to seize devices, exploit data, and process writings obtained on location and in the subject’s person/residence/bedroom. This @FBI is committed to providing timely updates, as promised:

– The perp downloaded a document titled “Dallas…

— FBI Director Kash Patel (@FBIDirectorKash) September 25, 2025

Also, on Thursday, President Trump responded to OANN reporter Daniel Baldwin’s question about the attack. The representative said the shooting is part of the …

“Radical left rhetoric. The radical left is causing the problem. They’re out of control. They’re saying things and they’re really dumb people. I mean, I look at Crockett, I look at some of these people. They’re — they’re very low IQ people, actually. But the radical left is causing this problem, not the right, the radical left And it’s going to get worse. And ultimately it’s going to go back on them. I mean, bad things happen when they play these games. And I’ll give you a little clue. The right is a lot tougher than the left. But the right is not doing this. They’re not doing it And they better not get them energized because it won’t be good for the left. And I don’t want to see that happen either. I’m the president of all the people. But the radical left is causing this Radical left Democrats are causing this problem and it’s it gets worse. It gets worse and it’ll be a point where other people won’t take it anymore and that will not be good for the radical left and we don’t want that.”

.@OANN’s @Baldwin_Daniel_: “There was another shooting at an ICE facility in Texas yesterday.”

President Trump: “Yes, terrible.”

Baldwin: “Detainees were killed. The FBI director posted on social media bullets that were engraved with the message ‘anti-ICE.’ He just posted… pic.twitter.com/jmnYle1J5c

— Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) September 25, 2025

Related:

• DoJ To Investigate Soros Foundation

Democratic Socialists Association Rep. Rashida Tlaib, D-Mich. spewed more of that “radical left rhetoric” on Wednesday. 

When are Democratic politicians who incited violence against ICE agents and Trump supporters finally going to be held accountable? DHS reports an 830% surge on ICE officers since Jan. 2025, from their inflammatory rhetoric. Rashida Tlaib “strike ready” Prosecute them now. pic.twitter.com/17XedXXPOq

— Jason (@jason1Patterson) September 25, 2025

Recall in 2019…

It seems the radical left is mobilizing, using violence and force to derail President Trump’s “America First” agenda.

And now, Trump’s crackdown on dark-money, billionaire-funded NGOs could spark a wave of even more violence emanating from the left.

Authored by Naveen Athrappully via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

The Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) has issued an emergency directive asking federal agencies to take immediate action to identify and mitigate system vulnerabilities to protect their devices from a major hacking campaign, the agency said in a Sept. 25 statement.

“This widespread campaign poses a significant risk to victims’ networks by exploiting zero-day vulnerabilities that persist through reboots and system upgrades,” CISA said.

Zero-day vulnerabilities refer to unknown or unaddressed security flaws in computer hardware, firmware, or software. Such vulnerabilities are called “zero-day” since the software or device with such flaws has zero days to fix the issue, thus enabling hackers to immediately exploit them.

According to the directive, Cisco has assessed that the hacking campaign is linked to the threat actor ArcaneDoor.

A May 2024 post by computer and network security company Censys said an investigation of IPs controlled by ArcaneDoor suggested “the potential involvement of an actor based in China, including links to multiple major Chinese networks and the presence of Chinese-developed anti-censorship software.”

Four out of five IP hosts analyzed by Censys were found to be in China, with some linked to Chinese conglomerate Tencent and Chinese telecom company ChinaNet.

“Networks like Tencent and ChinaNet have extensive reach and resources, so they would make sense as an infrastructure choice for a sophisticated global operation like this one,” Censys said in its post.

In a Sept. 25 statement, Cisco said it had been engaged by multiple government agencies in May to provide support to an investigation into attacks targeting the company’s ASA devices.

The company said it has “high confidence” that the hacking activity was related to ArcaneDoor.

“Cisco assesses with high confidence that upgrading to a fixed software release will break the threat actor’s attack chain and strongly recommends that all customers upgrade to fixed software releases,” the company said.

The CISA directive comes as Chris Butera, the agency’s acting deputy executive assistant director for cyber, discussed helping organizations tackle the growing number of vulnerabilities during a Sept. 25 panel discussion held by media company FedScoop.

Butera discussed the Known Exploited Vulnerabilities (KEV) catalog CISA uses to prioritize system vulnerabilities that require patching.

“The number of vulnerabilities that have been published has increased to over 40,000 last year. And so for any organization to try to track and patch against 40,000 different vulnerabilities within their IT ecosystem is a very complex challenge,” he said.

“We have to do a lot more with automation, and I think that’s where maybe AI can come in and help with some of the automation pieces.

“In the federal space, we’ve had great results, with over 99 percent of the KEVs that are internet-facing being patched quickly by our federal agencies.”

Exploiting CISCO Devices

CISA’s emergency directive was issued due to the threat actor targeting Cisco Adaptive Security Appliances (ASA).

Cisco ASA is a family of firewall security devices that offers users “highly secure access to data and network resources,” according to the Cisco website. Vulnerabilities on ASA devices can allow malicious actors to access user data.

In the directive, CISA asked federal agencies to account for all Cisco ASA and Firepower devices, collect forensic data, and analyze any compromises using procedures and tools provided by CISA.

Agencies are required to “disconnect end-of-support devices and upgrade those that will remain in service by 11:59 PM EST on September 26, 2025,” the statement said.

End-of-support devices are those that continue to be used by agencies but no longer receive direct support or security updates from their manufacturers.

“As the lead for federal cybersecurity, CISA is directing federal agencies to take immediate action due to the alarming ease with which a threat actor can exploit these vulnerabilities, maintain persistence on the device, and gain access to a victim’s network,” said CISA Acting Director Madhu Gottumukkala.

“The same risks apply to any organizations using these devices. We strongly urge all entities to adopt the actions outlined in this Emergency Directive.”

According to the directive, agencies are required to report to CISA a full inventory of all affected products, including details regarding the actions taken and the results of such actions. This must be done by Oct. 2.

This is the second emergency directive issued under the Trump administration, CISA said. In August, the agency issued an emergency directive for agencies to update their systems to prevent vulnerabilities in Microsoft Exchange.

The Supreme Court on Friday handed the Trump administration another emergency-docket victory, allowing it to pause spending on $4 billion in foreign aid that Congress had appropriated for the current fiscal year.

In a brief order, the court said the government made a “sufficient showing” that the plaintiffs – aid groups led by the Global Health Council – are likely barred from suing under the 1974 Impoundment Control Act. The majority also noted that “the asserted harms to the Executive’s conduct of foreign affairs appear to outweigh the potential harm” to the organizations, and left in place a Sept. 9 administrative stay Chief Justice John Roberts had issued while the justices considered next steps.

The decision blocks a lower-court ruling by U.S. District Judge Amir Ali, who on Sept. 3 ordered the administration to spend the money unless Congress affirmatively withdrew it. The administration has told lawmakers it intends not to obligate the $4 billion while proceeding with roughly $6.5 billion in other foreign-aid outlays.

The dispute centers on whether the White House can use “rescission” – formally notifying Congress that it does not plan to spend certain funds – to run out the clock as the fiscal year ends Sept. 30. Critics have labeled the end-stage tactic a “pocket rescission,” a maneuver not seen in nearly half a century and, they argue, at odds with Congress’s power of the purse. The administration counters that Judge Ali’s ruling imposes unacceptable constraints on diplomacy by forcing officials into late-stage negotiations with foreign counterparts over funds the Executive has decided to withhold.

Friday’s order arrived without full briefing or oral argument, prompting a dissent from the court’s three liberals. Justice Elena Kagan wrote that the legal questions have not been presented to the court before, placing the case in “uncharted territory,” and said the justices should have allowed the litigation to proceed in the lower courts. “We therefore should have denied this application… and ensured that the weighty question presented here receives the consideration it deserves,” she wrote.

Per NBC News, the ruling marks the 20th time the justices have granted an emergency application from the administration since President Donald Trump’s second term began in January – an unprecedented volume and success rate on the so-called “shadow docket” (without full briefing or oral arguments), according to critics in the legal community, including some lower-court judges.

The stakes extend beyond separation-of-powers doctrine. The administration has moved swiftly to reorient the U.S. Agency for International Development, which traditionally disburses billions for global health, water access and disease prevention. With Republicans controlling both chambers and engaged in broader fiscal talks to avert a shutdown before Oct. 1, Congress is unlikely to muster a response to the rescission notice in the few remaining days.

What to Watch Next

• Merits posture: The case now returns to the lower courts to litigate whether the Impoundment Control Act permits the administration’s approach – and who, if anyone, has standing to challenge it.

• Clock pressure: If funds expire on Sept. 30 without obligation, subsequent court rulings may be overtaken by events, effectively vindicating the “pocket rescission” strategy.

• Hill dynamics: Any congressional pushback would require swift agreement in a Capitol consumed by year-end funding negotiations.

• Foreign-policy fallout: Aid groups warn of program interruptions abroad; the administration frames the pause as necessary to align spending with its diplomatic priorities.

The Global Health Council and allied organizations argue that the administration’s theory would flip the Impoundment Control Act “on its head,” transforming a statute designed to curb presidential impoundments into a vehicle for expanding them while insulating such decisions from judicial review. The Supreme Court’s order leaves that debate for another day—but, for now, allows the withholding to continue.

In short, reeeeeee!

*  *  *

By Charles Kennedy of OilPrice.com

Several terminal operators in China’s Shandong province plan to ban entry to old vessels and such with fake or suspicious certificates in a move that appeared to be aimed at the shadow fleet, Reuters reported on Friday, quoting a notice from the operators it has reviewed.

The terminal operators Qingdao Haiye Oil Terminal Co, Qingdao Shihua Crude Oil Terminal Co, Qingdao Gangxin Oil Products Co, and Qingdao Lixing Logistics Co, last week issued an official notice for the Huangdao Port.

The communication, seen by Reuters, will ban – effective November 1 – tankers operating for 31 years or more and vessels using fake International Maritime Organization (IMO) identification numbers from docking at the terminals of the Huangdao Port, which is part of the greater Qingdao port area.

Qingdao is the key entry point of Iranian oil into China, which continues to be the main customer of Iran, purchasing more than 90% of its oil exports.

The terminal operators at Huangdao Port will also ban tankers with invalid or expired certificates from international certification and regulatory bodies. Vessels with a record of accidents or pollution for the prior three years will also be denied entry, per the notice reviewed by Reuters.

The notice comes a month after the U.S. sanctioned two Chinese crude oil terminals and storage operators as the Treasury took additional actions to disrupt Iranian oil exports and the shadow fleet enabling them.

The U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) designated a China-based crude oil terminal and storage operator in the Dongjiakou Port Area in Shandong.

Dongjiakou and Huangdao are both part of the greater Qingdao port area.

But the measures of the Huangdao port operators may not have much effect on flows, as Huangdao has a minor role in handling shadow fleet compared to other ports in the Qingdao area, Emma Li, China analyst at tanker tracker Vortexa Analytics, told Reuters.

“The new tanker risk-rating rules appear to be a precautionary step driven by environmental concerns and rising U.S. sanctions pressure, even though the latter is not explicitly mentioned in the notice,” Li told Reuters.

Iran, meanwhile, appears unfazed by the prospect of UN snapback sanctions coming into effect this weekend, saying that it will continue to sell its oil to its biggest and nearly only buyer, China.