Bernstein Puts Timeline On When EU Rearmament Supercycle "Goes Boom"

Readers by now know how we've laid out the looming rearmament supercycle in the West colliding with the "own the bottlenecks" theme, as resource nationalism makes industrial metals and rare earths scarce because of Beijing's export restrictions.

Adrien Rabier, Bernstein's equity analyst covering European aerospace and defense, penned a note on Tuesday explaining why the European defense rearmament cycle remains a top investment theme and even outlined a timeline.

In a report titled "European Defense: Beyond the order boom," Rabier said EU defense firms are set to enter a massive demand-driven cycle for new weapons.

Here's the timeline in three phases:

Stage 1: New paradigm (2022-2026).

The first stage, following the invasion of Ukraine, was characterized by rapid order collection. It drove multiple expansion across the sector, in anticipation of faster growth. The stocks re-rated from 9x EV/EBIT (-30% discount vs. SX600) to 15x currently (+17%). Exposure to the best geographies (Germany) and the quickest growth segments (short-cycle) were the most important drivers of performance.

Stage 2: Re-Arming Europe (2026-2030). 

The second stage marked the transition from an order-driven performance to execution-driven, as backlogs became rich across the sector. Exposure to structurally attractive product categories will remain the most important factor, in our view. We expect the narrative against short cycles products, legacy weapons, and Ukraine-related demand to intensify. Our "new warfare" basket is up +14% YTD, vs. the "old warfare" basket down -34%. We expect this gap to keep widening. We see few positive catalysts for the sector, and therefore favor self-help stories. We expect investors to focus increasingly on the exit multiples, as we head toward Stage 3.

Stage 3: Normalization (2030+). 

After the re-arming phase, we believe European military budgets will normalize near 3% of GDP. European Defense should then return to a GDP+ growth and ~12% EBIT margins sector, close to the Index's average.

Rabier's key message is that investors will reward companies capable of converting backlogs into profitable deliveries: 

With all players now virtually benefiting from very large backlogs, the ability to convert backlog into profitable growth and scale capacity efficiently will matter more. We continue to view electronics exposure as the best, because these businesses grow through volume and content share, and are easier to scale (Thales, Leonardo, BAE Systems). Some companies will also benefit from turning around parts of their businesses (TKMS, Leonardo).

Top picks:

One major constraint on both Europe's rearmament cycle and the looming US weapons buildup is access to reliable, conflict-free supplies of critical materials. Larger budgets and expanding order books can translate into weapons deliveries only if manufacturers secure the necessary copper, tungsten, and rare earths that are in scarce supply. 

 That makes "owning the bottlenecks" a complementary investment theme to the broader defense buildup. 

Tyler Durden Wed, 09/30/2026 - 05:45

Bernstein Puts Timeline On When EU Rearmament Supercycle "Goes Boom"

Readers by now know how we've laid out the looming rearmament supercycle in the West colliding with the "own the bottlenecks" theme, as resource nationalism makes industrial metals and rare earths scarce because of Beijing's export restrictions.

Adrien Rabier, Bernstein's equity analyst covering European aerospace and defense, penned a note on Tuesday explaining why the European defense rearmament cycle remains a top investment theme and even outlined a timeline.

In a report titled "European Defense: Beyond the order boom," Rabier said EU defense firms are set to enter a massive demand-driven cycle for new weapons.

Here's the timeline in three phases:

Stage 1: New paradigm (2022-2026).

The first stage, following the invasion of Ukraine, was characterized by rapid order collection. It drove multiple expansion across the sector, in anticipation of faster growth. The stocks re-rated from 9x EV/EBIT (-30% discount vs. SX600) to 15x currently (+17%). Exposure to the best geographies (Germany) and the quickest growth segments (short-cycle) were the most important drivers of performance.

Stage 2: Re-Arming Europe (2026-2030). 

The second stage marked the transition from an order-driven performance to execution-driven, as backlogs became rich across the sector. Exposure to structurally attractive product categories will remain the most important factor, in our view. We expect the narrative against short cycles products, legacy weapons, and Ukraine-related demand to intensify. Our "new warfare" basket is up +14% YTD, vs. the "old warfare" basket down -34%. We expect this gap to keep widening. We see few positive catalysts for the sector, and therefore favor self-help stories. We expect investors to focus increasingly on the exit multiples, as we head toward Stage 3.

Stage 3: Normalization (2030+). 

After the re-arming phase, we believe European military budgets will normalize near 3% of GDP. European Defense should then return to a GDP+ growth and ~12% EBIT margins sector, close to the Index's average.

Rabier's key message is that investors will reward companies capable of converting backlogs into profitable deliveries: 

With all players now virtually benefiting from very large backlogs, the ability to convert backlog into profitable growth and scale capacity efficiently will matter more. We continue to view electronics exposure as the best, because these businesses grow through volume and content share, and are easier to scale (Thales, Leonardo, BAE Systems). Some companies will also benefit from turning around parts of their businesses (TKMS, Leonardo).

Top picks:

One major constraint on both Europe's rearmament cycle and the looming US weapons buildup is access to reliable, conflict-free supplies of critical materials. Larger budgets and expanding order books can translate into weapons deliveries only if manufacturers secure the necessary copper, tungsten, and rare earths that are in scarce supply. 

 That makes "owning the bottlenecks" a complementary investment theme to the broader defense buildup. 

Tyler Durden Wed, 09/30/2026 - 05:45

Europe Races To Contain Energy Crisis With Patchwork Measures

Via Remix News,

European governments are racing to blunt a fuel shock that even some analysts now refuse to forecast, as Brent crude holds near $100 a barrel and diesel prices climb across Europe.

The international oil market has been expensive for months. What has changed is the confidence of the people paid to explain it. JPMorgan told clients on Sept. 17 that, for the first time since fighting began around Iran about seven months earlier, its commodities team no longer has a baseline view of how the disruption ends.

"We simply don't know how to model the endgame," the bank's analysts wrote, after several economic thresholds they once assumed would force a diplomatic off-ramp, including oil above $100 a barrel, had already been crossed.

The bank said a Brent price near $90 would have been consistent with known supply and demand in September. Futures instead traded around $100 and higher as traders priced the risk of further losses that no one can yet measure. By Monday, front-month Brent was still hovering near $99 a barrel.

Inventories are doing little to cushion the blow. The U.S. Energy Information Administration has said prices are likely to stay elevated until Middle East oil trade is restored and stocks can be rebuilt. The International Energy Agency's September report put the scale of the drain in starker terms: observed global inventories fell another 95 million barrels in August, taking the cumulative draw since February to 507 million barrels, or about 2.8 million barrels a day. World oil supply is now projected to average 100.7 million barrels a day in 2026, down 5.7 million from a year earlier.

Diesel shortages are acute

In some countries, such as Hungary, there is a major imbalance in terms of available energy sources. Crude held in strategic storage remains ample, but diesel is quickly running out. Data from the Hungarian Hydrocarbon Stockpiling Association show gas oil stocks at 520.3 kilotons at the end of January and about 390 kilotons at the end of both July and August. That thinner diesel cushion matters in a country where more than 1.3 million passenger cars run on the fuel and the regional market is competing for the same scarce imports.

Pump prices have already moved. Official and commercial trackers put Hungarian diesel around 701 forints a liter in late September on some official series and closer to 730 forints on daily station averages - well above the roughly 593 forints recorded at the end of June. The original worry in Budapest was not whether prices would rise, but how quickly 800 forints would stop looking like a distant ceiling.

That speed is not a mystery to central bankers. Bank of Slovenia research covering euro-area data from 2005 through 2026 found that a 10% rise in Brent lifts pretax diesel and gasoline prices by about 6.5% and 6.2%, respectively, over the longer term. A large share of the increase shows up at stations within the first two weeks - faster than the physical chain of shipping, refining and wholesale delivery would suggest.

The European Central Bank has reached a similar conclusion and added an unwelcome twist: refinery margins can amplify the shock. During the spring spike, Brent briefly reached $138 a barrel while diesel at the refinery gate jumped to $197. ECB staff later estimated that refining margins were contributing about 41 euro cents a liter to euro-area retail diesel in mid-September, and they told reporters those diesel margins may not peak until October.

The way down is slower than the way up. Taxes, refining and transport costs, inventories, margins and local competition all delay relief when crude finally eases. That asymmetry is why governments are acting now, before higher fuel bills work through freight, food and services and lift broader inflation.

Europe-wide crisis

The policy dilemma is the same from Lisbon to Warsaw: protect households and trucking firms without writing a blank check for fossil-fuel consumption. Europe has answered with a patchwork rather than a single rule. Some governments cap retail prices. Others cut excise taxes, sometimes below the European Union minimum. A third group aims help at farmers, haulers and other heavy users. A few still let global prices hit consumers with no cushion at all. The result is that the same barrel of oil can produce pump prices that differ dramatically at the pump across Europe.

Here are just a few examples of what Europe looks like in this regard.

• Austria has been running a mineral-oil tax cut of 1.9 euro cents a liter into the end of September.
• Belgium has implemented an official price ceiling.
• Croatia cut diesel excise duty by another 3 cents, taking it 10 cents below the EU floor; Zagreb says the average diesel price is 1.91 euros a liter instead of 2.26 euros without the intervention.
• Cyprus is offering an 8.33-cent discount through Nov. 30.
• Luxembourg is absorbing 5 cents of the pump price from July through December.
• Malta is using direct state aid to keep prices below the euro-area average.
• Portugal decided on Sept. 17 to recycle extra value-added tax receipts from more expensive fuel into tax relief worth about 1.3 billion euros through year-end.
• Slovenia posted official maxima of 1.748 euros for gasoline and 2.012 euros for diesel in the week of Sept. 22-28.
• Spain has kept an excise cut below the EU minimum through Sept. 30.
• Italy reduced and capped diesel duty into early October.
• Montenegro and Serbia combine retail caps with lower excise taxes.

Targeted aid is running in parallel

• Greece extended a 10-cent-a-liter diesel subsidy into October and is preparing a heating-oil package.
• France steered relief to agriculture, high-mileage workers and construction rather than a blanket cut.
• Ireland is rebating duty for commercial haulers and bus operators.
• Spain added a 402 million-euro program for truckers on top of its general tax reduction.
• Italy is offering carriers a tax credit for earlier extra costs.

Larger packages are still moving through parliaments

Germany will cut energy tax by 14 cents a liter from Oct. 1 through year-end, about 17 cents once lower VAT is counted, in a 2.5 billion-euro package.

Chancellor Friedrich Merz said drivers who depend on a car every day "are reaching their breaking point."

Berlin is also talking with the oil industry about a temporary price cap modeled on Luxembourg or Belgium, aimed at Jan. 1, 2027.

The Czech government will restore a station-margin ceiling from Oct. 1, cut diesel duty to the EU minimum and cap retail margins at 2.50 koruna a liter.

Poland has floated a 60% levy on oil companies' extra profits to finance about 4 billion zlotys of price relief, though the plan faces parliamentary and constitutional hurdles.

The International Energy Agency has described the response as global, not merely European. In a matter of months, the number of countries applying fuel subsidies rose from 16 to 38, and the number cutting energy taxes rose from 40 to 57. Pew Research Center, drawing on IEA tallies from mid-June, counted 113 countries that had taken at least one energy-cost measure after the Iran war, including tax changes in 55 countries and fuel subsidies in 32. The agency's own warning is implicit in those numbers: governments are treating the symptom at the pump because they cannot reopen the Strait of Hormuz from a finance ministry or end the war in Ukraine.

Read more here...

Tyler Durden Wed, 09/30/2026 - 05:00

Europe Races To Contain Energy Crisis With Patchwork Measures

Via Remix News,

European governments are racing to blunt a fuel shock that even some analysts now refuse to forecast, as Brent crude holds near $100 a barrel and diesel prices climb across Europe.

The international oil market has been expensive for months. What has changed is the confidence of the people paid to explain it. JPMorgan told clients on Sept. 17 that, for the first time since fighting began around Iran about seven months earlier, its commodities team no longer has a baseline view of how the disruption ends.

"We simply don't know how to model the endgame," the bank's analysts wrote, after several economic thresholds they once assumed would force a diplomatic off-ramp, including oil above $100 a barrel, had already been crossed.

The bank said a Brent price near $90 would have been consistent with known supply and demand in September. Futures instead traded around $100 and higher as traders priced the risk of further losses that no one can yet measure. By Monday, front-month Brent was still hovering near $99 a barrel.

Inventories are doing little to cushion the blow. The U.S. Energy Information Administration has said prices are likely to stay elevated until Middle East oil trade is restored and stocks can be rebuilt. The International Energy Agency's September report put the scale of the drain in starker terms: observed global inventories fell another 95 million barrels in August, taking the cumulative draw since February to 507 million barrels, or about 2.8 million barrels a day. World oil supply is now projected to average 100.7 million barrels a day in 2026, down 5.7 million from a year earlier.

Diesel shortages are acute

In some countries, such as Hungary, there is a major imbalance in terms of available energy sources. Crude held in strategic storage remains ample, but diesel is quickly running out. Data from the Hungarian Hydrocarbon Stockpiling Association show gas oil stocks at 520.3 kilotons at the end of January and about 390 kilotons at the end of both July and August. That thinner diesel cushion matters in a country where more than 1.3 million passenger cars run on the fuel and the regional market is competing for the same scarce imports.

Pump prices have already moved. Official and commercial trackers put Hungarian diesel around 701 forints a liter in late September on some official series and closer to 730 forints on daily station averages - well above the roughly 593 forints recorded at the end of June. The original worry in Budapest was not whether prices would rise, but how quickly 800 forints would stop looking like a distant ceiling.

That speed is not a mystery to central bankers. Bank of Slovenia research covering euro-area data from 2005 through 2026 found that a 10% rise in Brent lifts pretax diesel and gasoline prices by about 6.5% and 6.2%, respectively, over the longer term. A large share of the increase shows up at stations within the first two weeks - faster than the physical chain of shipping, refining and wholesale delivery would suggest.

The European Central Bank has reached a similar conclusion and added an unwelcome twist: refinery margins can amplify the shock. During the spring spike, Brent briefly reached $138 a barrel while diesel at the refinery gate jumped to $197. ECB staff later estimated that refining margins were contributing about 41 euro cents a liter to euro-area retail diesel in mid-September, and they told reporters those diesel margins may not peak until October.

The way down is slower than the way up. Taxes, refining and transport costs, inventories, margins and local competition all delay relief when crude finally eases. That asymmetry is why governments are acting now, before higher fuel bills work through freight, food and services and lift broader inflation.

Europe-wide crisis

The policy dilemma is the same from Lisbon to Warsaw: protect households and trucking firms without writing a blank check for fossil-fuel consumption. Europe has answered with a patchwork rather than a single rule. Some governments cap retail prices. Others cut excise taxes, sometimes below the European Union minimum. A third group aims help at farmers, haulers and other heavy users. A few still let global prices hit consumers with no cushion at all. The result is that the same barrel of oil can produce pump prices that differ dramatically at the pump across Europe.

Here are just a few examples of what Europe looks like in this regard.

• Austria has been running a mineral-oil tax cut of 1.9 euro cents a liter into the end of September.
• Belgium has implemented an official price ceiling.
• Croatia cut diesel excise duty by another 3 cents, taking it 10 cents below the EU floor; Zagreb says the average diesel price is 1.91 euros a liter instead of 2.26 euros without the intervention.
• Cyprus is offering an 8.33-cent discount through Nov. 30.
• Luxembourg is absorbing 5 cents of the pump price from July through December.
• Malta is using direct state aid to keep prices below the euro-area average.
• Portugal decided on Sept. 17 to recycle extra value-added tax receipts from more expensive fuel into tax relief worth about 1.3 billion euros through year-end.
• Slovenia posted official maxima of 1.748 euros for gasoline and 2.012 euros for diesel in the week of Sept. 22-28.
• Spain has kept an excise cut below the EU minimum through Sept. 30.
• Italy reduced and capped diesel duty into early October.
• Montenegro and Serbia combine retail caps with lower excise taxes.

Targeted aid is running in parallel

• Greece extended a 10-cent-a-liter diesel subsidy into October and is preparing a heating-oil package.
• France steered relief to agriculture, high-mileage workers and construction rather than a blanket cut.
• Ireland is rebating duty for commercial haulers and bus operators.
• Spain added a 402 million-euro program for truckers on top of its general tax reduction.
• Italy is offering carriers a tax credit for earlier extra costs.

Larger packages are still moving through parliaments

Germany will cut energy tax by 14 cents a liter from Oct. 1 through year-end, about 17 cents once lower VAT is counted, in a 2.5 billion-euro package.

Chancellor Friedrich Merz said drivers who depend on a car every day "are reaching their breaking point."

Berlin is also talking with the oil industry about a temporary price cap modeled on Luxembourg or Belgium, aimed at Jan. 1, 2027.

The Czech government will restore a station-margin ceiling from Oct. 1, cut diesel duty to the EU minimum and cap retail margins at 2.50 koruna a liter.

Poland has floated a 60% levy on oil companies' extra profits to finance about 4 billion zlotys of price relief, though the plan faces parliamentary and constitutional hurdles.

The International Energy Agency has described the response as global, not merely European. In a matter of months, the number of countries applying fuel subsidies rose from 16 to 38, and the number cutting energy taxes rose from 40 to 57. Pew Research Center, drawing on IEA tallies from mid-June, counted 113 countries that had taken at least one energy-cost measure after the Iran war, including tax changes in 55 countries and fuel subsidies in 32. The agency's own warning is implicit in those numbers: governments are treating the symptom at the pump because they cannot reopen the Strait of Hormuz from a finance ministry or end the war in Ukraine.

Read more here...

Tyler Durden Wed, 09/30/2026 - 05:00

Google Challenges EU Orders Requiring It Reveal AI, Search-Engine Information To Rivals

Google parent Alphabet on Monday took Brussels to court over two European Union orders that would force the search giant to open its Android devices to rival AI services and hand competing search engines access to its search data.

The Google logo at the VivaTech show in Paris on June 15, 2023. The Canadian Press/AP, Michel Euler

The European Commission issued both orders in July under the Digital Markets Act, the EU's gatekeeper law, which Brussels says exists to ensure fair competition and prevent monopolies in tech.

"We're appealing decisions that will force us to share people's private search history without sufficient anonymization and weaken vital security protections on Android," said Oliver Bethell, Google's senior director of competition.

"People use Search for their most personal questions - from medical worries to close relationships - and mandating we share these personal queries without adequate safeguards would cause irreversible harm to user privacy."

Google argues the data would go to unvetted businesses without users' knowledge or consent, and that once it leaves Google's systems, third parties could re-identify users and expose their personal lives, trade secrets, or sensitive government information. Advances in AI have made that kind of re-identification far faster and cheaper, the company adds.

As the Epoch Times notes further, the EU-enforced changes are set to kick in in January 2027.

Google's challenges, filed in the Luxembourg-based General Court, Europe's second-highest court, on Sept. 28, will not prevent them from taking effect unless the California company seeks interim measures to delay them as proceedings continue.

A European Commission spokesperson told The Epoch Times that the commission "takes note that Alphabet has announced that it will lodge an appeal against the Commission's decisions at the General Court. As always, the Commission will defend its decisions in court."

The Commission added that it should be "stressed that the two specification decisions carefully consider the integrity and security with respect to the features involved, as well as ensuring the protection of the personal data of end users."

At the time, the commission said the first decision aimed to ensure that competitors' AI services "can compete with Google's own AI services, such as Gemini, by having equal access to features on Google's Android devices."

The aim of the second, the EU said, was to "rebalance the playing field by giving third-party search engines access to search data that only Google Search can collect at scale."

Google's move marks the latest escalation in the company's long-running battle with European regulators over the scope of the Digital Markets Act.

The tech giant has already been slapped with multiple fines totaling billions of dollars in recent years after a series of European court rulings found it had breached aspects of the Act.

The targeting of Google and other American tech giants such as Apple, Meta, and Amazon by EU authorities has drawn criticism from Washington, with President Donald Trump saying in July that his administration would open a formal investigation into the EU's trade practices, threatening new tariffs over billions of dollars in fines leveled against U.S. tech companies.

In a Truth Social post on July 24, Trump said the investigation would begin "immediately" under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974, which allows the president to protect U.S. businesses against unfair trade practices with tariffs and sanctions.

He accused the EU of "robbing" U.S. companies and, in turn, American taxpayers.

"The European Union is at it again and, as usual, taking direct aim at GREAT American Companies!" Trump wrote, referring to European enforcement actions over recent years against Google, Apple, Meta, and Amazon.

As yet, there have been no public revelations regarding that investigation.

Tyler Durden Wed, 09/30/2026 - 04:15

Google Challenges EU Orders Requiring It Reveal AI, Search-Engine Information To Rivals

Google parent Alphabet on Monday took Brussels to court over two European Union orders that would force the search giant to open its Android devices to rival AI services and hand competing search engines access to its search data.

The Google logo at the VivaTech show in Paris on June 15, 2023. The Canadian Press/AP, Michel Euler

The European Commission issued both orders in July under the Digital Markets Act, the EU's gatekeeper law, which Brussels says exists to ensure fair competition and prevent monopolies in tech.

"We're appealing decisions that will force us to share people's private search history without sufficient anonymization and weaken vital security protections on Android," said Oliver Bethell, Google's senior director of competition.

"People use Search for their most personal questions - from medical worries to close relationships - and mandating we share these personal queries without adequate safeguards would cause irreversible harm to user privacy."

Google argues the data would go to unvetted businesses without users' knowledge or consent, and that once it leaves Google's systems, third parties could re-identify users and expose their personal lives, trade secrets, or sensitive government information. Advances in AI have made that kind of re-identification far faster and cheaper, the company adds.

As the Epoch Times notes further, the EU-enforced changes are set to kick in in January 2027.

Google's challenges, filed in the Luxembourg-based General Court, Europe's second-highest court, on Sept. 28, will not prevent them from taking effect unless the California company seeks interim measures to delay them as proceedings continue.

A European Commission spokesperson told The Epoch Times that the commission "takes note that Alphabet has announced that it will lodge an appeal against the Commission's decisions at the General Court. As always, the Commission will defend its decisions in court."

The Commission added that it should be "stressed that the two specification decisions carefully consider the integrity and security with respect to the features involved, as well as ensuring the protection of the personal data of end users."

At the time, the commission said the first decision aimed to ensure that competitors' AI services "can compete with Google's own AI services, such as Gemini, by having equal access to features on Google's Android devices."

The aim of the second, the EU said, was to "rebalance the playing field by giving third-party search engines access to search data that only Google Search can collect at scale."

Google's move marks the latest escalation in the company's long-running battle with European regulators over the scope of the Digital Markets Act.

The tech giant has already been slapped with multiple fines totaling billions of dollars in recent years after a series of European court rulings found it had breached aspects of the Act.

The targeting of Google and other American tech giants such as Apple, Meta, and Amazon by EU authorities has drawn criticism from Washington, with President Donald Trump saying in July that his administration would open a formal investigation into the EU's trade practices, threatening new tariffs over billions of dollars in fines leveled against U.S. tech companies.

In a Truth Social post on July 24, Trump said the investigation would begin "immediately" under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974, which allows the president to protect U.S. businesses against unfair trade practices with tariffs and sanctions.

He accused the EU of "robbing" U.S. companies and, in turn, American taxpayers.

"The European Union is at it again and, as usual, taking direct aim at GREAT American Companies!" Trump wrote, referring to European enforcement actions over recent years against Google, Apple, Meta, and Amazon.

As yet, there have been no public revelations regarding that investigation.

Tyler Durden Wed, 09/30/2026 - 04:15

Argentina Threatens UK With Court Action Over Falklands Oil Drilling

Authored by Charles Kennedy via OilPrice.com,

Argentina will sue the UK unless it suspends an oil drilling project off the coast of the Falkland Islands, the BBC has reported, citing an X post by Argentine president Javier Milei.

"I instructed the Foreign Ministry and our legal teams to initiate international arbitration against the United Kingdom for the illegal plundering of our resources through the Sea Lion Project in the North Malvinas Basin," the Argentine president wrote on the social media platform.

"If in 2 weeks the United Kingdom does not halt the illegitimate exploitation, we will go to the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea. THE MALVINAS ARE ARGENTINE, and they are defended with facts, not words," Milei also wrote.

The Sea Lion oil field is operated by Navitas Petroleum Development and Production Ltd (NPDP), a UK-based fully owned subsidiary of Israeli Navitas Petroleum, and its British partner Rockhopper Exploration.

The companies earlier this year reached a final investment decision on the Sea Lion Northern Development. This means that all the necessary approvals and funding for full-scale project execution have been secured. First oil is planned for March 2028, Navitas Petroleum says.

Oil production is expected to last for over 30 years, creating jobs across the Falkland Islands and the UK supply chain over that period. The two companies see no reason to heed the Argentine president's warnings, saying they have valid licenses to drill in the area, issued by the British government.

The UK and Argentina fought a brief war in 1982 over the Falklands, which Argentina calls Las Malvinas, but the tension and the dispute never really faded away. Britain has controlled the islands since 1833, while Argentina has long claimed they are part of its territory. Last week at the UN General Assembly, President Milei stepped up the rhetoric, accusing the organization of becoming "useless" and serving "arrogant parasites dressed up as well-intentioned bureaucrats".

Tyler Durden Wed, 09/30/2026 - 03:30

Argentina Threatens UK With Court Action Over Falklands Oil Drilling

Authored by Charles Kennedy via OilPrice.com,

Argentina will sue the UK unless it suspends an oil drilling project off the coast of the Falkland Islands, the BBC has reported, citing an X post by Argentine president Javier Milei.

"I instructed the Foreign Ministry and our legal teams to initiate international arbitration against the United Kingdom for the illegal plundering of our resources through the Sea Lion Project in the North Malvinas Basin," the Argentine president wrote on the social media platform.

"If in 2 weeks the United Kingdom does not halt the illegitimate exploitation, we will go to the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea. THE MALVINAS ARE ARGENTINE, and they are defended with facts, not words," Milei also wrote.

The Sea Lion oil field is operated by Navitas Petroleum Development and Production Ltd (NPDP), a UK-based fully owned subsidiary of Israeli Navitas Petroleum, and its British partner Rockhopper Exploration.

The companies earlier this year reached a final investment decision on the Sea Lion Northern Development. This means that all the necessary approvals and funding for full-scale project execution have been secured. First oil is planned for March 2028, Navitas Petroleum says.

Oil production is expected to last for over 30 years, creating jobs across the Falkland Islands and the UK supply chain over that period. The two companies see no reason to heed the Argentine president's warnings, saying they have valid licenses to drill in the area, issued by the British government.

The UK and Argentina fought a brief war in 1982 over the Falklands, which Argentina calls Las Malvinas, but the tension and the dispute never really faded away. Britain has controlled the islands since 1833, while Argentina has long claimed they are part of its territory. Last week at the UN General Assembly, President Milei stepped up the rhetoric, accusing the organization of becoming "useless" and serving "arrogant parasites dressed up as well-intentioned bureaucrats".

Tyler Durden Wed, 09/30/2026 - 03:30

NATO Condemns Russian 'Nuclear Rhetoric' Amid Kaliningrad Row

NATO has called out what it dubs 'desperate' rhetoric on the part of the Kremlin which invokes potential use of strategic forces, also at a moment of growing accusations from European officials that Moscow is engaged in sabotage against EU interests and assets.

"Russia’s use of hybrid tactics is a sign of desperation. But we will not be dissuaded from our support to Ukraine," NATO spokesperson Allison Hart said Tuesday, adding that "we [NATO] have what it takes to defend every inch of allied territory and remain strong, ready, and able to counter any threat."

"NATO is a defensive alliance and none of our activities or exercises pose a risk to any part of Russia," she reiterated. "We strongly denounce the threat of force, including any irresponsible nuclear rhetoric." Hart added: "We call on Russia to end its unprovoked war in Ukraine."

USAF file image

Moscow has just submitted a formal letter warning the Western military alliance concerning Kaliningrad, an exclave of Russia between NATO members Lithuania and Poland.

The letter accused NATO of an "unprecedented escalation of the military-political situation around Russia's region of Kaliningrad accompanied by highly provocative public statements by NATO Allies' officials."

"This dangerous and reckless course entails high risk of the outbreak of a direct armed conflict with the possibility of Russian strikes against decision-making centers of the alliance's member states right from the outset of the conflict," the letter said.

NATO is incensed at this key line of Moscow's letter:

"Russia will be ready to use the entire arsenal of forces and capabilities at its disposal, including nuclear weapons, in order to defend its territory, should NATO countries undertake any attempt aimed at isolating the Kaliningrad region from the rest of the country."

Apparently this tense back-and-forth was initially triggered by a television show which recently aired in the UK this month.

Newsweek describes, "The statement follows a miniseries aired by British broadcaster Sky News last week, The Wargame, which traces a hypothetical Russian attack on the U.K. and how the country might respond—including by authorizing operations against the Baltic territory of Kaliningrad."

Preview of the UK series The WarGame which started airing this month:

Michael ‘The Gover’ Gove and ‘Bad Penny’ Mordaunt are loving their scripted roles in WarGames - just like the scripted parts they played for years in our Parliament.
This drama - documentary simulates an attack on the UK by Russia and was filmed 3 years ago.
Why do you think… pic.twitter.com/JYE8u5U8jH

— Andrew Bridgen (@ABridgen) September 22, 2026

Meanwhile in real life serious accusations continue to fly...

Estonia blames Russia for arson at defence company supplying Ukraine https://t.co/6RpelFNgXT

— BBC News (World) (@BBCWorld) September 29, 2026

On the other side of things, various diplomatic tensions and crises have been sparked over past years also when Russian broadcasters aired scenes imagining what a nuclear war and strikes on the West would look like, and charting the reach of strategic forces. In the context of the still raging Ukraine war, each side has taken these theoretical scenarios on TV screens more and more seriously.

Tyler Durden Wed, 09/30/2026 - 02:45

NATO Condemns Russian 'Nuclear Rhetoric' Amid Kaliningrad Row

NATO has called out what it dubs 'desperate' rhetoric on the part of the Kremlin which invokes potential use of strategic forces, also at a moment of growing accusations from European officials that Moscow is engaged in sabotage against EU interests and assets.

"Russia’s use of hybrid tactics is a sign of desperation. But we will not be dissuaded from our support to Ukraine," NATO spokesperson Allison Hart said Tuesday, adding that "we [NATO] have what it takes to defend every inch of allied territory and remain strong, ready, and able to counter any threat."

"NATO is a defensive alliance and none of our activities or exercises pose a risk to any part of Russia," she reiterated. "We strongly denounce the threat of force, including any irresponsible nuclear rhetoric." Hart added: "We call on Russia to end its unprovoked war in Ukraine."

USAF file image

Moscow has just submitted a formal letter warning the Western military alliance concerning Kaliningrad, an exclave of Russia between NATO members Lithuania and Poland.

The letter accused NATO of an "unprecedented escalation of the military-political situation around Russia's region of Kaliningrad accompanied by highly provocative public statements by NATO Allies' officials."

"This dangerous and reckless course entails high risk of the outbreak of a direct armed conflict with the possibility of Russian strikes against decision-making centers of the alliance's member states right from the outset of the conflict," the letter said.

NATO is incensed at this key line of Moscow's letter:

"Russia will be ready to use the entire arsenal of forces and capabilities at its disposal, including nuclear weapons, in order to defend its territory, should NATO countries undertake any attempt aimed at isolating the Kaliningrad region from the rest of the country."

Apparently this tense back-and-forth was initially triggered by a television show which recently aired in the UK this month.

Newsweek describes, "The statement follows a miniseries aired by British broadcaster Sky News last week, The Wargame, which traces a hypothetical Russian attack on the U.K. and how the country might respond—including by authorizing operations against the Baltic territory of Kaliningrad."

Preview of the UK series The WarGame which started airing this month:

Michael ‘The Gover’ Gove and ‘Bad Penny’ Mordaunt are loving their scripted roles in WarGames - just like the scripted parts they played for years in our Parliament.
This drama - documentary simulates an attack on the UK by Russia and was filmed 3 years ago.
Why do you think… pic.twitter.com/JYE8u5U8jH

— Andrew Bridgen (@ABridgen) September 22, 2026

Meanwhile in real life serious accusations continue to fly...

Estonia blames Russia for arson at defence company supplying Ukraine https://t.co/6RpelFNgXT

— BBC News (World) (@BBCWorld) September 29, 2026

On the other side of things, various diplomatic tensions and crises have been sparked over past years also when Russian broadcasters aired scenes imagining what a nuclear war and strikes on the West would look like, and charting the reach of strategic forces. In the context of the still raging Ukraine war, each side has taken these theoretical scenarios on TV screens more and more seriously.

Tyler Durden Wed, 09/30/2026 - 02:45

French President Macron's Approval Rate Hits Record Low As Fuel Crisis Worsens

Via Remix News,

The popularity of French President Emmanuel Macron and his prime minister, Sébastien Lecornu, has plummeted due to the ongoing fuel crisis, BFMTV reports, citing a poll conducted by Odoxa-Mascaret for the online broadcaster Public Sénat and regional media.

The poll was conducted last week, ahead of Emmanuel Macron's speech on rising fuel prices.

The French president's approval rating has fallen to a historic low of just 18 percent. That is a decrease of as much as 7 percentage points from the end of June.

At the same time, support for the French prime minister fell by 8 percentage points. Currently, 24 percent of the French consider him a good head of government.

The poll shows that 75 percent of respondents in France believe the government's announced expansion of assistance for frequent long-distance drivers is insufficient. Sixty-two percent argue that the government should allocate more resources to solve the problem, despite France's budget deficit.

A poll conducted for radio station RTL shows that if Marine Le Pen faced Jean-Luc Mélenchon, the candidate of the far-left La France Insoumise party, in the second round of the French presidential election, she would receive 69 percent of the vote and Mélenchon 31 percent.

The poll shows that Le Pen is well poised to crush the far-left contender.

If Marine Le Pen faced Édouard Philippe, the candidate of the centre-right Horizons party, in the second round, she would receive 57 percent of the vote and Philippe 43 percent.

In both scenarios, Marine Le Pen's lead is larger than in previous similar polls.

For a candidate that has been convicted and attacked for years by the French establishment media, Le Pen's turnaround is incredible.

The study also shows that in the first round, under various candidate scenarios, Marine Le Pen would come first if the election were held now, with 35 to 36 percent of the vote.

The first round of the French presidential election will take place on April 18, 2027 and the second round on May 2. The election will end 12 days before the end of Emmanuel Macron's second and final presidential term, which ends on May 14.

The RTL poll was conducted between September 22 and 24 among a sample of nearly 2,000 people.

Read more here...

Tyler Durden Wed, 09/30/2026 - 02:00

French President Macron's Approval Rate Hits Record Low As Fuel Crisis Worsens

Via Remix News,

The popularity of French President Emmanuel Macron and his prime minister, Sébastien Lecornu, has plummeted due to the ongoing fuel crisis, BFMTV reports, citing a poll conducted by Odoxa-Mascaret for the online broadcaster Public Sénat and regional media.

The poll was conducted last week, ahead of Emmanuel Macron's speech on rising fuel prices.

The French president's approval rating has fallen to a historic low of just 18 percent. That is a decrease of as much as 7 percentage points from the end of June.

At the same time, support for the French prime minister fell by 8 percentage points. Currently, 24 percent of the French consider him a good head of government.

The poll shows that 75 percent of respondents in France believe the government's announced expansion of assistance for frequent long-distance drivers is insufficient. Sixty-two percent argue that the government should allocate more resources to solve the problem, despite France's budget deficit.

A poll conducted for radio station RTL shows that if Marine Le Pen faced Jean-Luc Mélenchon, the candidate of the far-left La France Insoumise party, in the second round of the French presidential election, she would receive 69 percent of the vote and Mélenchon 31 percent.

The poll shows that Le Pen is well poised to crush the far-left contender.

If Marine Le Pen faced Édouard Philippe, the candidate of the centre-right Horizons party, in the second round, she would receive 57 percent of the vote and Philippe 43 percent.

In both scenarios, Marine Le Pen's lead is larger than in previous similar polls.

For a candidate that has been convicted and attacked for years by the French establishment media, Le Pen's turnaround is incredible.

The study also shows that in the first round, under various candidate scenarios, Marine Le Pen would come first if the election were held now, with 35 to 36 percent of the vote.

The first round of the French presidential election will take place on April 18, 2027 and the second round on May 2. The election will end 12 days before the end of Emmanuel Macron's second and final presidential term, which ends on May 14.

The RTL poll was conducted between September 22 and 24 among a sample of nearly 2,000 people.

Read more here...

Tyler Durden Wed, 09/30/2026 - 02:00

Moscow Closes The Door: How Putin & Lavrov Hardened Russia's Line On Ukraine In Ten Days

Authored by Larry C. Johnson via SonarIntelligence (Sonar21),

In mid-September, the Kremlin was signaling that negotiations could resume. Putin had said the trilateral talks with the United States and Ukraine would be unlikely before the State Duma elections, but that Russia would be ready to resume contacts after them. The elections ended on September 20. Within a week, both Putin and Lavrov had shifted from conditional openness to a set of positions that make a negotiated end to the war harder to reach than at any point this year.

The trigger: September 20

The turning point was Ukraine's drone campaign on election day. Putin said more than 1,600 drones entered the Moscow area that night, with strikes on polling stations, including one in a school he said was virtually destroyed. The chair of a territorial election commission was killed when her home was hit. Moscow Mayor Sergei Sobyanin called the raid unprecedented. According to RT, two civilians were killed in the suburbs and an oil refinery was damaged. Whatever one makes of Russian accounts of the damage, the political effect in Moscow was plain.

Putin: from "ready after the elections" to "we will think twice"

At his press conference in St. Petersburg on September 25, Putin recast the whole negotiating track. He listed a series of Ukrainian escalations: the strike on St. Petersburg's port during the June economic forum, a campaign against Russian refineries, an attempted blockade of Russia's Black Sea coast that he said damaged more than 100 vessels, and strikes on commercial warehouses. He said Russia had answered each one, so effectively that Kyiv is now seeking partial ceasefires in the energy sector and the air.

Putin didn't treat those requests as an opening. He treated them as proof that Russian pressure is working. His message to Kyiv was that no provocation or escalation will get it what it wants, and that it is only making its own situation worse. Then came the key passage. The proposals, he said, remain on the table, but after everything Ukraine has done, Russia "will think twice" about how to respond. Any decision, including whether to resume the negotiations, will be based on Russia's interests.

That is a marked change from ten days earlier. Putin didn't close the door to talks, but he removed the implied commitment to resume them after the elections, and made any resumption depend on Russia's own assessment of what it has to gain.

Lavrov at the Security Council: no pause "in any format"

Lavrov made the position explicit in New York on September 23. Speaking to a Security Council meeting on Ukraine, he said: "Having learned from bitter experience, we will not pause the special military operation for the period of negotiations in any format." He said European countries wanted a pause to buy time to replenish Ukraine's depleted arsenals. He dismissed a pre-agreement ceasefire as not serious and insisted that the goal is a long-term settlement.

The timing made it a direct rebuff. That same day, Ukraine and 51 supporters released a statement demanding that Russia accept an immediate and unconditional ceasefire so talks could begin. Its signatories included the EU and its member states, the UK, Canada and Australia. Ukraine's foreign minister, Andrii Sybiha, noted that 14 of the 15 Security Council members had backed ceasefire proposals in one form or another, leaving Russia alone.

Lavrov went further than ceasefire mechanics. He said Ukraine would have kept its 1991 borders if the Europeans had not "engaged in their shenanigans." That frames the loss of Ukrainian territory as permanent and places the blame on Europe. It is not the language of a government preparing to negotiate over the lines of control.

Lavrov at the General Assembly: Europe as the enemy

In his General Assembly speech on September 26, Lavrov made Europe the central threat. He said the EU is militarizing for war with Russia, and that a buildup on that scale could eventually lead to a conflict. He suggested Germany's pursuit of military primacy could be seen as an attempt to create a "Fourth Reich." At his press conference afterward, he argued that a European buildup must eventually be used, "because we are not planning to" attack. He called European war preparations a possible "self-fulfilling prophecy."

The effect is to rule Europe out as a negotiating party. Lavrov has told the Europeans that they are the ones preparing a war, that their calls for a ceasefire are a device to rearm Ukraine, and that they destroyed the chance of a settlement on Ukraine's 1991 borders. Moscow now treats only the United States as a legitimate interlocutor.

Even the U.S. channel produced nothing

After meeting Lavrov in New York, Secretary of State Marco Rubio said both Russia and Ukraine had shown interest in a limited ceasefire covering energy infrastructure and grain shipping, but admitted an agreement would not be easy. The Russian Foreign Ministry did not confirm any agreement, and Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said there were currently no conditions for moving toward a peace track, although Russia remained open to talks.

Putin's own assessment of the U.S. relationship was cool. He welcomed the Trump-Xi talks in Washington, but said Russia's relations with the United States had been reduced almost to zero, contrasting that with $240 billion in annual trade with China.

Pressure at sea, in the air and on the ground

The diplomatic hardening is matched by rising military pressure on three fronts at once. Moscow is not waiting for talks. It is using the interval to raise the cost to Ukraine of refusing Russia's terms.

At sea, Russia has reimposed a de facto blockade of Ukraine's Black Sea ports. It has not brought its warships back to Ukraine's coast as it did in 2022; it has used missiles and drones against ports and merchant ships instead. After strikes in mid-July, including the sinking of the bulk carrier Golden Leo, shipowners and insurers pulled back, and traffic through Odesa, Chornomorsk and Pivdennyi collapsed. On September 12, Russia hit the Odesa region with cruise missiles, ballistic missiles and 129 drones, and said it struck two cargo ships at Chornomorsk that it claimed were delivering weapons. Ukraine's acting foreign minister has accused Moscow of trying to turn the Black Sea into a "second Strait of Hormuz." In St. Petersburg, Putin listed the lifting of the blockade among the concessions Kyiv is seeking, and made clear he is in no hurry to grant it.

In the air, Russia has intensified strikes on Kyiv and other major cities, aimed at transport, production, power, water and communications. On September 23, the day Lavrov spoke at the Security Council, hours of drone attacks on Kyiv hit railway infrastructure, warehouses and fuel stations, killing at least two people and injuring more than 30. Zelensky said Russia used large numbers of drones, including faster jet-powered models. Strikes have also hit power, water and internet networks, partially suspending water service on Kyiv's left bank. Earlier in September, Russia struck Kyiv and southern and eastern Ukraine six nights in a row. With winter approaching, the grid is becoming a front of its own. Zelensky raised an energy-infrastructure truce with Trump at the UN; Moscow has not accepted it.

On the ground, Russian forces are attacking along the entire line of contact, and Russia is advancing while Ukraine gives ground. Ukraine's own General Staff reported 277 combat engagements on September 24, from the Sloviansk and Kramatorsk sectors in northern Donetsk to Huliaipole in the south, with the heaviest assaults around Kostiantynivka and Pokrovsk. Russian forces took Shirokoe and Shevchenkovo in the Kharkiv region and Novoandreevka in the Zaporizhzhia region on September 14, and Olkhovatka in the Kharkiv region, within an encirclement, the next day. Every day of stalled diplomacy is another day of this pressure.

What this adds up to

Taken together, the statements of the past ten days set out a harder Russian position:

• Talks resume only on Moscow's timetable and on its judgment of its own interests, not as the promised follow-up to the elections.
• No ceasefire of any kind during negotiations, including the unconditional ceasefire backed by more than 50 countries.
• Ukraine's requests for partial truces are treated as evidence that Russian pressure is working, not as openings.
• Europe is cast as the aggressor, excluded as a partner, and blamed for the loss of Ukraine's territory.
• Military pressure rising on every axis: a de facto blockade of Ukraine's ports, intensified strikes on Kyiv's infrastructure, and assaults along the entire front.

The direction is clear. In mid-September, Moscow was talking about when negotiations would resume. By September 26, it was talking about whether it wanted them at all, and on what terms

I discussed prospects for a Russia - NATO war with Lena Petrova:

Nima and I discuss Iran's latest strikes on ships in the Strait of Hormuz:

Sulaiman and I discuss, among other things, confirmation that the reports of additional US Navy and Marine casualties were the result of Iranian strikes on US vessels:

Tyler Durden Tue, 09/29/2026 - 23:25

Sarah Huckabee's Tone Deaf Political Ad And The "Young White Man Problem"

America has a young white man problem, or at the very least, most popular media, corporate advertising and even political advertising seems to say so.  Either they are completely absent from the majority of media imagery, or when they are present, they are depicted as incompetent buffoons and ineffectual effeminate weaklings. 

This has been an inescapable reality of western pop culture for the past decade.  One would think that a conservative candidate would be aware of the problem rather than adding to it, but then again, some of these politicians are painfully oblivious.  

Keep in mind, it's not any single instance of the "clownification" of young white men, it's the endless insults that pile up over time until something snaps.  Republican candidate for Governor of Arkansas, Sarah Huckabee Sanders, just added the straw that broke the camel's back.   

In a political campaign ad promoting her welfare-to-work requirements, she depicts a young chubby white man named “Brad” sitting in a dark room, playing video games and eating snacks as the prime example of an able-bodied person collecting welfare instead of getting a job.

Sanders narrates that taxpayers fund “guys like Brad.”  

You pay taxes to cover welfare for people who just choose not to work. That’s why I launched a welfare-to-work requirement.

If you’re young, healthy, and get government assistance, you should work, go to school, or volunteer. pic.twitter.com/M83nxNMdry

— Sarah Huckabee Sanders (@SarahHuckabee) September 28, 2026

Needless to say, the commercial was not received well by most conservatives.  Critics chimed in on Huckabee's X post in an attempt to slap some sense into her.  Others went scorched earth. 

Any white person or man who votes for this worthless fat retarded hag has zero self respect.

White people and especially men need to start playing identity politics or lose.

You might not care about identity politics, but identity politics cares about you

— Zack (@Asmongold) September 28, 2026

The reason this ad is a problem is not because white guys are particularly sensitive to ridicule (they've been putting up with it for many years now).  Rather, it's the fact that the ad is rooted in a clear statistical fallacy and also political cowardice.   Ah, but defenders of Huckabee say that white people are the largest group of welfare recipients in the country, and this makes the ad "accurate". 

Here's why this is incorrect, and yes, it's another example of dumb people not understanding per capita.

White Americans are 60% of the total population and only 35% of all welfare recipients.  Black Americans are 13% of the population and around 26% of all welfare recipients (this means black people as a group are far more likely to take welfare).  Hispanics are around 20% of the population and around 30% of welfare recipients.   

But what about young white men's share of the welfare pie?  That's what's so insulting.  White men ages 18-25 account for only 2% to 4% of all welfare recipients in the US on average.  In fact, young white men are the least likely to qualify for taxpayer subsidies.  If they get hit with a life crisis, many have little to no help. 

So, why did Huckabee decide to use a Gen Z white gamer guy as her political punching bag? Because for the past 10+ years this has been the politically safe move. 

Depicting a fat black single mother with ten kids and eight baby-daddies going to the club on a Tuesday night with a $900 weave and $300 nails would be a more accurate example of welfare abuse, but it would immediately draw the wrath of the race hustlers.  Bashing a white male with no kids grinding levels on his Playstation is the safer bet. 

Why?  Because as commenters have noted, white people don't do identity politics.  But if political ads like this are any indication, maybe it's time to start?   

If there is anything that progressive society fears more than anything else, it's the idea of young white men going tribal.  This concept has been conditioned out of western populations for decades as a horrendous thought crime.  Every other group on the planet is encouraged to go tribal; young white men are admonished.  It's simply not allowed.  

This doesn't mean that white men should take on the cry-bully tactics of race hustlers and complain about every little insult or accusation.  What it does mean is that, as a group, there is a greater demand for respect when respect is due. And, a healthy fear among other people who might seek to demonize and slander for their own gain. 

As far as Sarah Huckabee Sanders is concerned, it's likely that she didn't have much input on the advertisement in question, but she probably saw it and approved it before it was aired.  She also has a history of producing such ads "in house" with close associates instead of outsourcing to third party firms.  If this is the case, then she is largely responsible. 

Next time, maybe Huckabee will have the guts to depict the welfare situation in America as it really is instead of playing it safe.      

Tyler Durden Tue, 09/29/2026 - 23:00

Justice And Justices' Investments Should Be Blind: The Alito Controversy Raises Persistent Problem On The Court

Authored by Jonathan Turley via JonathanTurley.org,

Yesterday, Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito recused himself from one of the term's most important cases: Suncor Energy Inc. v. County Commissioners of Boulder County.

As I have previously discussed, the case involving the liability of energy companies for nuisance actions tied to climate change could have sweeping implications for the country. Justice Alito should be commended for avoiding even the appearance of a personal interest or a conflict in the case. However, the controversy should prompt the Court to explore a longstanding problem for justices in holding financial interests that can conflict with their duties. The solution is simple: justices need to use blind trusts.

Supreme Court Clerk Scott Harris released a letter revealing that Alito decided he "will not continue to participate" in Suncor Energy Inc. v. County Commissioners of Boulder County.

Suncor Energy, Boulder sued energy companies under "theories of public and private nuisance, trespass, unjust enrichment, and civil conspiracy, claiming that they knowingly contributed to climate change while misleading the public about its impacts." The Colorado Supreme Court ruled for the city and the county in finding that such lawsuits are not barred by federal preemption. If such lawsuits are allowed to go forward, it would expose companies to potentially thousands of climate change lawsuits. Oral agument is set for Oct. 5,

The recusal is a blow for challengers who believe that the opinion could be close and Alito was believed to be on the side of barring such actions. It is now down to 8, so a single loss of another conservative could result in a 4-4 tie - leaving the lower court decision unchanged.

While the letter did not give a reason, critics had called for Alito's recusal due to his financial interest in energy companies which could benefit from the decision.

That included 30 organizations which jointly asked the Senate Judiciary Committee to investigate his involvement in the case. Notably, the court responded to media inquiries by declaring that Alito had no financial interest in any party to the case and that legal counsel had told him that there is no need to recuse himself.

Yet, the standard is whether a reasonable person could question his impartiality and, while he had no interest in the parties, he appears to have investments in other energy companies. Justice Alito previously withdrew shortly before arguments in a separate oil industry case earlier this year.

The Ethics in Government Act of 1978 (EIGA) established financial disclosure reporting requirements for many high-level government officials and employees, including the Justices of the Supreme Court. Supreme Court Justices file publicly available financial disclosure statements that report certain financial transactions. However, they are not required to put their investments into a blind trust.

Justices should be able to have investment portfolios, but they can hold such investments in blind trust or qualified blind trust.

In a blind trust the justice will "have no control over, will receive no communications about, and will (eventually as existing assets are sold and new ones obtained by the trustee) have no knowledge of the identity of the specific assets held in the trust. As such, once a blind trust is established and new assets obtained, an official will not need to (and will not be able to) identify the particular assets 13 5 C.F.R. § 2635.403(b)."

Other federal officials must use such trusts and there is no reason why justices should be exempt, in my view.

This has been a continual and embarrassing problem. Years ago, the Court affirmed an appellate ruling in a major case involving a $400 billion lawsuit in American Isuzu Motors v. Ntsebeza (2008) without a hearing after four justices had to recuse themselves (Chief Justice John Roberts Jr. and Justices Anthony Kennedy, Stephen Breyer, and Samuel Alito Jr).

The business interests of justices should not interfere with the business of the Court. You should either be an active investor in the markets or a justice, not both. The public has a reasonable expectation that, in seeking this high office, justices are willing to set aside certain privileges or interests. This is one of them.

This is not to cast aspersions on the justices. These recusals show that members, including Justice Alito, are cognizant and committed to avoiding even the appearance of a conflict of interest. Moreover, some judges and justices resolve this question by using diversified mutual funds or ETFs where the justice does not control the micro-allocations within the fund. However, there is still knowledge of financial interests in given areas.

This is not a costless obligation for justices. Blind trusts add costs (which Congress may want to consider defraying) and can be complex. However, the business of the Court is too important to be routinely compromised or complicated by these financial interests.

While legislation has been introduced along these lines, it would be simpler for justices to voluntarily adopt this practice.

Consider it is the price of being one of nine. If you want to sit on this Court, you have to do justice which is only fully possible if your investments, like justice itself, are blind.

Jonathan Turley is a law professor who teaches a class on the Constitution and the Supreme Court and is the best-selling author of "Rage and the Republic: The Unfinished Story of the American Revolution."

Tyler Durden Tue, 09/29/2026 - 22:35

Justice And Justices' Investments Should Be Blind: The Alito Controversy Raises Persistent Problem On The Court

Authored by Jonathan Turley via JonathanTurley.org,

Yesterday, Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito recused himself from one of the term's most important cases: Suncor Energy Inc. v. County Commissioners of Boulder County.

As I have previously discussed, the case involving the liability of energy companies for nuisance actions tied to climate change could have sweeping implications for the country. Justice Alito should be commended for avoiding even the appearance of a personal interest or a conflict in the case. However, the controversy should prompt the Court to explore a longstanding problem for justices in holding financial interests that can conflict with their duties. The solution is simple: justices need to use blind trusts.

Supreme Court Clerk Scott Harris released a letter revealing that Alito decided he "will not continue to participate" in Suncor Energy Inc. v. County Commissioners of Boulder County.

Suncor Energy, Boulder sued energy companies under "theories of public and private nuisance, trespass, unjust enrichment, and civil conspiracy, claiming that they knowingly contributed to climate change while misleading the public about its impacts." The Colorado Supreme Court ruled for the city and the county in finding that such lawsuits are not barred by federal preemption. If such lawsuits are allowed to go forward, it would expose companies to potentially thousands of climate change lawsuits. Oral agument is set for Oct. 5,

The recusal is a blow for challengers who believe that the opinion could be close and Alito was believed to be on the side of barring such actions. It is now down to 8, so a single loss of another conservative could result in a 4-4 tie - leaving the lower court decision unchanged.

While the letter did not give a reason, critics had called for Alito's recusal due to his financial interest in energy companies which could benefit from the decision.

That included 30 organizations which jointly asked the Senate Judiciary Committee to investigate his involvement in the case. Notably, the court responded to media inquiries by declaring that Alito had no financial interest in any party to the case and that legal counsel had told him that there is no need to recuse himself.

Yet, the standard is whether a reasonable person could question his impartiality and, while he had no interest in the parties, he appears to have investments in other energy companies. Justice Alito previously withdrew shortly before arguments in a separate oil industry case earlier this year.

The Ethics in Government Act of 1978 (EIGA) established financial disclosure reporting requirements for many high-level government officials and employees, including the Justices of the Supreme Court. Supreme Court Justices file publicly available financial disclosure statements that report certain financial transactions. However, they are not required to put their investments into a blind trust.

Justices should be able to have investment portfolios, but they can hold such investments in blind trust or qualified blind trust.

In a blind trust the justice will "have no control over, will receive no communications about, and will (eventually as existing assets are sold and new ones obtained by the trustee) have no knowledge of the identity of the specific assets held in the trust. As such, once a blind trust is established and new assets obtained, an official will not need to (and will not be able to) identify the particular assets 13 5 C.F.R. § 2635.403(b)."

Other federal officials must use such trusts and there is no reason why justices should be exempt, in my view.

This has been a continual and embarrassing problem. Years ago, the Court affirmed an appellate ruling in a major case involving a $400 billion lawsuit in American Isuzu Motors v. Ntsebeza (2008) without a hearing after four justices had to recuse themselves (Chief Justice John Roberts Jr. and Justices Anthony Kennedy, Stephen Breyer, and Samuel Alito Jr).

The business interests of justices should not interfere with the business of the Court. You should either be an active investor in the markets or a justice, not both. The public has a reasonable expectation that, in seeking this high office, justices are willing to set aside certain privileges or interests. This is one of them.

This is not to cast aspersions on the justices. These recusals show that members, including Justice Alito, are cognizant and committed to avoiding even the appearance of a conflict of interest. Moreover, some judges and justices resolve this question by using diversified mutual funds or ETFs where the justice does not control the micro-allocations within the fund. However, there is still knowledge of financial interests in given areas.

This is not a costless obligation for justices. Blind trusts add costs (which Congress may want to consider defraying) and can be complex. However, the business of the Court is too important to be routinely compromised or complicated by these financial interests.

While legislation has been introduced along these lines, it would be simpler for justices to voluntarily adopt this practice.

Consider it is the price of being one of nine. If you want to sit on this Court, you have to do justice which is only fully possible if your investments, like justice itself, are blind.

Jonathan Turley is a law professor who teaches a class on the Constitution and the Supreme Court and is the best-selling author of "Rage and the Republic: The Unfinished Story of the American Revolution."

Tyler Durden Tue, 09/29/2026 - 22:35

US Working To Close Visa Loophole For Chinese Visitors: Homan

Authored by Frank Fang and Jan Jekielek via The Epoch Times,

The Trump administration is taking steps to prevent Chinese nationals from exploiting a visa-free travel program to the Northern Mariana Islands, according to White House border czar Tom Homan.

Chinese citizens wait to submit their visa applications at the U.S. Embassy in Beijing on May 2, 2012. Mark Ralston/AFP/GettyImages

Speaking to Epoch Times senior editor Jan Jekielek in an "American Thought Leaders" interview aired on Sept. 26, Homan called birth tourism a "driver of illegal immigration."

When asked specifically about Chinese travelers utilizing the U.S. territory's visa-free entry to give birth on U.S. soil, Homan confirmed that federal authorities are moving to close the channel.

"We're on it," Homan said. "It's being addressed."

The push to close the U.S. territory's visa loophole comes amid an ongoing legal battle over U.S. citizenship.

After the Supreme Court struck down President Donald Trump's 2025 executive order restricting birthright citizenship for children of illegal aliens and temporary visitors as violating the 14th Amendment, the president issued two narrower orders, including one banning birth tourism.

On Sept. 2, a federal judge in Maryland blocked enforcement of the new order restricting who qualifies for citizenship at birth.

Birth tourism refers to foreign nationals' traveling to the United States, often on a temporary visa, to give birth so their child can automatically obtain U.S. citizenship.

Currently, Chinese citizens can visit the U.S. territories of Guam and the Northern Mariana Islands visa-free for up to 14 days under the program.

Homan called China and Russia the "two biggest abusers" of birth tourism in the United States. He warned that children of the two nations will eventually have the legal right to vote and run for public office.

"I just think it's a national security vulnerability, and we need to address it," Homan said.

Homan expressed disappointment at the Supreme Court's ruling, but he also said, "It's Congress's job."

A group of Republican lawmakers from both chambers of Congress introduced the One Nation, One Visa Policy (H.R.7780 and S.3857) earlier this year. The legislation would bar Chinese nationals from entering the United States and its territories without a valid visa, a measure intended to curb birth tourism by Chinese nationals.

"It's time to end this abuse by Communist China. America's laws must not be gamed, our generosity must not be exploited, and our national security must not be compromised," Rep. Tom Tiffany (R-Wis.), who introduced the House bill, said in a statement at the time.

In April, four Republican senators sent a letter to Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin and Interior Secretary Doug Burgum, urging them to end the 14-day visa-free program for Chinese nationals. They said the program "threatens America's national security and encourages illegal drug trafficking and birth tourism."

In May 2025, Fang Ye, a Chinese national, was sentenced to 25 years in prison in Saipan for conspiring to possess more than 500 grams of methamphetamine with the intent to distribute.

According to prosecutors, Fang arrived in the Northern Mariana Islands from China in 2016 and overstayed his visa-free admission. He subsequently operated a birth tourism business in Saipan for three years, hosting more than 200 pregnant women and their families from China who traveled to the island to give birth. He later became involved in trafficking methamphetamine.

Fang's co-conspirator, Yang Liang, was sentenced to 55 months in prison in Saipan for trafficking methamphetamine in August 2025.

Beyond birth tourism, Homan said federal law enforcement and intelligence agencies have been working to track military-aged Chinese males entering the country, noting that the mass influx of these individuals does not occur "without the coordination of the Chinese government."

Homan also said that he expects Immigration and Customs Enforcement arrests and deportations to reach record figures next year.

"You can't have strong national security if you don't have border security," Homan said. "We need to know who's coming in, what's coming in, where it's coming in, [and] why it's coming."

Tyler Durden Tue, 09/29/2026 - 21:45

Boston Mayor Michelle Wu Paying Illegals $575 To Become 'Organizers'... And US-Born Residents Are Excluded

Boston taxpayers are funding a program that teaches immigrants how to organize, lobby city officials and advocate for political change, then hands participants $575 for completing it. Illegal immigrants are eligible, while U.S.-born Boston residents are not.

Boston Mayor Michelle Wu

The Immigrants Lead Boston program, operated by Mayor Michelle Wu's Office for Immigrant Advancement, is a 10-week course for what the city calls emerging immigrant leaders.

Candidates must be Boston residents, at least 18 years old and immigrants. Separately, the city states that interested applicants are encouraged to apply "regardless of their immigration status."

So an illegal immigrant living in Boston can apply for the taxpayer-funded program and its $575 scholarship, while a U.S.-born resident cannot qualify under the city's stated requirement that candidates be immigrants.

According to Boston's own description, participants learn:

• Civic engagement and community organizing
• Public narrative and storytelling
• How to build leadership teams to produce community change
• How to navigate city government and engage city officials
• Immigration issues, racism and equity

Participants also conduct civic activities outside class and are expected to use the skills and relationships developed through the program to advocate for their communities. 

"The scholarship rewards participants for their time and commitment to learn, lead, and advocate for their communities," the city says.

Way More Than $575 Each

The $575 is just what Wu is paying the aspiring organizers - while Boston's FY2026 budget documents allocate $100,000 to Immigrants Lead Boston, with the city saying the money will fund training for up to 40 emerging leaders in immigrant communities.

If all 40 positions were filled and every participant received $575, the scholarships themselves would total $23,000. The budget presentation does not itemize where the remaining $77,000 goes. 

The program predates Wu. It began under former Mayor Marty Walsh in the fall of 2020, with an inaugural class of 18 participants. Wu's administration has continued and expanded it. The city's own alumni pages provide a fairly good picture of what some graduates have done with the training.

Members of the 2021-22 class advocated for driver's licenses for illegal immigrants. Participant Griselda Polanco told the city: "I want to see an opportunity to give driver's licenses to undocumented immigrants."

Another participant, Marie Jacques Toussaint, said she wanted "access to a Driver's License for everyone, including the immigrant community."

Participants also drafted testimony on public-policy issues including housing, mental-health services and immigration. Massachusetts ultimately enacted the Work and Family Mobility Act, allowing residents who cannot provide proof of lawful presence to obtain standard driver's licenses if they meet the other requirements.

Wu's administration later created an advanced alumni program called Immigrants Lead Boston Lab: From Ideas to Action.

That curriculum was developed with 're:power,' which Boston itself describes as a national training organization of organizers, strategists and technologists dedicated to building social-justice movements. For nine weeks, graduates received additional instruction in public speaking, meeting facilitation, conflict management and community organizing.

Their goals are clear. From Immigrants Lead Boston Lab's own website: 

"I want to participate more with City Life and the organizations that are fighting for rent control," said Adelaida Carbajal Rosales. 

Viera Andrea Ilse said she was embarking on a mission to help immigrants obtain driver's licenses "regardless of immigration status."

Cindy Marchando said the program had taught her about "the inner workings of social justice movements" and coalition building, which she intended to apply to her advocacy work.

Another participant described the skills involved as "campaign and community organizing."

The current program is being run in partnership with the Massachusetts Immigrant and Refugee Advocacy Coalition, or MIRA, which Boston describes as New England's largest coalition promoting immigrant and refugee rights and integration.

Tyler Durden Tue, 09/29/2026 - 21:20

Congress Ordered An Annual Accounting Of Terrorism; The Counting Has Stopped...

Authored by David E. Firester via RealClearDefense,

On May 1, 2026, the State Department released the 2024 edition of the Country Reports on Terrorism - a full year past the deadline in effect when the report came due, and months past even the more forgiving date Congress has since written into law.

No Annex of Statistical Information, the report's statistical backbone in years past, has been published with it.

And the report's own pages cite terrorism-incident rankings from the Global Terrorism Trends and Analysis Center, or GTTAC - the same data program whose funding the department allowed to lapse in March.

The report is not optional. Federal law - 22 U.S.C. § 2656f, on the books since 1987 - directs the secretary of state to transmit to Congress each year "a full and complete report" on terrorism worldwide, including, "to the extent practicable, complete statistical information" on those killed, injured, or kidnapped "by each terrorist group during the preceding calendar year."

For two decades, professionals met that statistical requirement: the National Counterterrorism Center from 2004 to 2011, the University of Maryland's Global Terrorism Database from 2012 to 2017, and GTTAC's Record of Incident Database - GRID - from 2018 on. GRID was purpose-built for the statutory task. It applied the government's own definition of terrorism, named its sources, published its codebook, and put its methodology through peer review this year in the journal Democracy and Security.

In March, the funding stopped. The team behind GRID kept collecting for a time on its own; the public record now ends in mid-May. Ambassador Adam Blackwell, a GTTAC principal, told me that appeals to senior officials at the State Department, in Congress, and at the White House all failed, and that he finds the timing difficult to credit: the United States is engaged in active campaigns against Hamas, Ansar Allah, Hezbollah, and the IRGC, and has newly designated cartels and gangs from across the hemisphere - Venezuelan, Salvadoran, Mexican, and Haitian - as foreign terrorist organizations. This is the moment Washington chose to stop counting.

Note the statutory asymmetry. The report is mandated unconditionally; only the statistics carry the qualifier "to the extent practicable." Defund the sole mechanism that made the statistics practicable, and the qualifier becomes an exit. The 2024 report's own compliance chapter makes the gap explicit: it states that the statistical requirement "is satisfied through the inclusion of a statistical annex to the report" - an annex that has not been published. The 2025 edition will be worse still, because the incidents of 2025 are not being systematically collected by anyone charged with the task.

The reflex answer - use the alternative datasets - does not survive contact with the data. I spent my doctorate inside those datasets, and their custodians have been admirably candid about the limits. By its own founding director's account, the Global Terrorism Database's source-validity rule excluded 28 percent of otherwise-eligible cases worldwide in an early-2014 sample - and 76 percent in Syria, precisely where the fighting was.

The Armed Conflict Location & Event Data project, the other presumed substitute, measures political violence broadly and does some things well; it was never designed to be the statutory instrument. My dissertation documented what that costs. ACLED codes a suicide bombing only as a stand-alone event, never as part of a battle. Re-coding its Iraq narratives for 2016-2018 by hand, I found 860 suicide bombings where ACLED had coded 344 - and my recount landed within 1 percent of the Global Terrorism Database's independent tally, so the missing events were real. The same re-coding captured 48 percent more incidents than ACLED had coded in Afghanistan, and 111 percent more in Nigeria. ACLED's data are not without merit, as I wrote then. But extracting reliable answers from them requires heavy engineering that most consumers - congressional staff included - will never perform.

Methodology is not a technicality. Across 2018-2020, the years both instruments covered, GRID recorded 30 percent more incidents than the Global Terrorism Database and nearly twice the fatalities - and the two disagreed about whether global terrorism was rising or falling. The choice of instrument decides the trend line the government sees. Choose none, and there is no trend line at all.

There is precedent for the way back. When the Global Terrorism Database lost its State Department funding in 2018, allied governments - first Germany's foreign office, then Britain's - stepped in to keep collection alive, because the capability was too valuable to lose. GRID's case is stronger: the mandate is still on the books; the archive - public once again, and current through mid-May - and the trained pipeline still exist; and the gap to close is measured in weeks, not years. The cost of restarting collection is a rounding error against what the government spends to fight the groups it is no longer counting. The combatant commands consume this data. So do the insurers and reinsurers who price political-violence risk. So do the scholars and students who will train the next generation of analysts.

The 2024 report proves the mandate outlived the capability. The question Congress should be asking - and that any serious funder, public or private, should be answering - is who restores it. The threats were never in doubt. What remains in doubt is whether we intend to see them.

Tyler Durden Tue, 09/29/2026 - 20:55

87 Foreign Cruise Ship Employees Removed For Possession Of Child Abuse Material

Federal authorities have now pulled 87 foreign crew members off cruise ships under Operation Tidal Wave, a Customs and Border Protection initiative aimed at child sexual abuse material aboard the vessels.

Customs and Border Protection Air and Marine Operations members prepare for a patrol in San Diego, on Sept. 23, 2026. John Fredricks /The Epoch Times

Six Philippine nationals on a cruise ship at the Port of Boston admitted to possessing child sexual abuse material, according to a Sept. 25 CBP statement. Julio Caravia, CBP's acting director of field operations, said authorities won't tolerate the exploitation of children and that the agency will keep identifying and arresting those involved.

The multiagency operation, led by CBP, targets crew members tied to the possession, production, procurement, distribution, or use of child sexual abuse and exploitation material.

As the Epoch Times notes further, the current phase of the operation has been in effect since mid-August, with 41 crew members removed in two previous phases.

In phase 1 of Operation Tidal Wave, which took place in San Diego in April, administrative enforcement actions were taken against 27 crew members from six vessels. These people were processed for removal and sent back to their home nations.

In phase 2, which took place in San Juan during June-July, enforcement actions were taken against 14 crew members from three vessels.

In the case of the Philippine nationals, they were processed for removal under the Immigration and Nationality Act. This provision makes foreign nationals who admit to committing acts involving moral turpitude inadmissible into the United States.

CBP clarified that under federal law, people involved with child sexual exploitation material can face severe penalties, including removal from the country, 10-year inadmissibility into the United States, and criminal prosecution.

In addition to CBP, Homeland Security Investigations and the Internet Crimes Against Children Task Force were also part of the operation.

According to the National Center for Missing & Exploited Children (NCMEC), its CyberTipline received more than 21 million reports last year related to child exploitation. CyberTipline receives reports of suspected child sexual exploitation from the public and electronic service providers.

More than 19 million reports were related to the manufacture, possession, and distribution of child pornography. Other reports included child sex trafficking, child sexual molestation, online enticement of children for sexual acts, and unsolicited obscene material sent to children.

In Operation Relentless Justice, conducted last year to tackle child exploitation in the country, 205 child victims were located, and 293 alleged offenders were arrested. And in April, the month-long Operation Iron Pursuit resulted in more than 200 child victims being rescued and more than 350 alleged offenders being arrested nationwide.

Tyler Durden Tue, 09/29/2026 - 20:30