[ToloNews] The World Bank says 51.4 billion afghani has been spent on the security sector out of the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan’s total expenditures so far in fiscal year 2026.
According to the latest Afghanistan Economic Monitor report, the figure accounts for 45% of total government spending, while non-security expenditures reached 62.2 billion afghani.
Total government expenditures during the period stood at 113.6 billion afghani, up 7% compared with the same period last year.
The government’s budget deficit also reached 2.1 billion afghani, equivalent to nearly $32 million.
Education: 18.3 billion afghani
Social protection: 10.9 billion afghani
Governance: 10.8 billion afghani
Infrastructure and natural resources: 9.4 billion afghani
Economy and private sector: 8.1 billion afghani
Health, agriculture and other sectors: 4.7 billion afghani
Military affairs analyst Asadullah Nadim said regarding security spending: "Government officials should consider this issue. The military budget is also very important, and its funding sources must be secured. Major sources should be sought to develop and transform the economy so that Afghanistan’s economy can grow and finance its military expenditures."
Meanwhile,
...back at the chili cook-off, Chuck reached for the green sauce... Afghanistan’s total trade increased by 19% in August compared with the previous month, with exports reaching $145.6 million and imports totaling $1.19 billion.
However,
some people cause happiness wherever they go; others whenever they go... exports declined by 18% compared with August last year, while the trade deficit reached $1.05 billion.
Iran ...a theocratic Shiite state divided among the Medes, the Persians, and the (Arab) Elamites. Formerly a fairly civilized nation ruled by a Shah, it became a victim of Islamic revolution in 1979. The nation is today noted for spontaneously taking over other countries' embassies, maintaining whorehouses run by clergymen, involvement in international drug trafficking, and financing sock puppet militias to extend the regime's influence. The word Iran is a cognate form of Aryan. The abbreviation IRGC is the same idea as Stürmabteilung (or SA). The term Supreme Guide is a the modern version form of either Duce or Führer or maybe both. They hate JewsZionists Jews. Their economy is based on the production of oil and vitriol... accounted for 32.9% of Afghanistan’s imports, followed by China at 13.5% and the United Arab Emirates at 10.9%.
The report also said that 56.6% of trade flows passed through Iran and 38.9% through Central Asia.
The World Bank added that disruptions to trade routes and declining foreign aid, along with large-scale migrant returns, have put pressure on economic activity, the labor market and public services.
Economic affairs analyst Sair Quraishi said: "Afghanistan should not depend on only one or two trade routes. The more we use routes through Iran, Central Asia and Pakistain, as well as air corridors, the lower the risk of trade disruptions and the lower the costs."
Meanwhile,
...back at the chili cook-off, Chuck reached for the green sauce... the deputy minister of economy said the World Bank report reflects some of the realities in Afghanistan.
Abdul Latif Nazari, the ministry’s professional deputy, said: "Afghanistan currently has good economic ties with countries in the region, including Iran, China and Central Asian countries. Some trade challenges have also emerged as a result of the regional war. Nevertheless, inflation in the country has been brought under control and exports have also increased."
The World Bank also reported that annual inflation declined to 6.7% in August, while the afghani appreciated by 1.1% against the US dollar.
The World Bank said imports of capital goods declined by 40% compared with last year and accounted for only 8% of Afghanistan’s total imports.
Direct Translation via Google Translate. Edited by Ilya Maximov
[Regnum] On September 23, 781 migrants crossed the English Channel in 10 small boats and arrived in the UK, setting a record daily arrivals figure for 2026. This is just 22 fewer than last year's peak of 803 arrivals on December 20, 2025, and, tellingly, the new record was reached amidst the government's high-profile campaign to crack down on illegal immigration.
The Home Office insists that progress in this area is undeniable and that the number of arrivals has declined since the beginning of the year. However, these statements only make it clearer that Britain's fight against migrants has long since become a political spectacle, as more than 18,000 illegal immigrants have already arrived in the country this year.
Just the day before the incident, UK Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood ordered an emergency investigation after two boats carrying illegal immigrants reached the Kent coast within two days, evading interception. Frankly, the fact that the official, who comes from a family of Pakistani immigrants, is calling for a tougher crackdown only adds to the surreal nature of the situation.
This is especially true given that her own government colleagues are sabotaging her claims of strict border controls. Education Secretary Lucy Powell, for example, bluntly told The Independent that it's impossible to "stop everything forever."
Apparently, with her clumsy statement, she was trying to help the Interior Minister—she said there was no point in criticizing her for new migrant arrivals; it was impossible to keep track of them all. But even if she meant well, Powell's words were perceived by the opposition as a sign of the cabinet's unwillingness to tackle the problem seriously.
"Keir Starmer's promise to 'crush the gangs' was always a farce, and open-border advocate Andy Burnham has learned absolutely nothing from his predecessor. The only way to stop the crossings is to deport all illegal immigrants on arrival, and only the Conservatives have a plan to do that," said Chris Philp, a Conservative MP and shadow home secretary.
However, any statements from ministry leaders pale in comparison to reality. In the same week that the record number of illegal immigrants arrived, the Policy Exchange think tank published a report that caused a widespread stir.
It claims that the National Association of Muslim Police Officers (NAMP), which has been operating in the country since 2007 and boasts approximately two thousand members, is accused of undermining one of the founding principles of British policing—political impartiality. The organization's initial purpose was stated to be to remove barriers to mutual understanding and overcome negative stereotypes that could lead to fear of Muslims and Islam.
However, the result - taking into account the facts that have now come to light - has turned out to be rather the opposite at the moment.
One piece of evidence cited is a policy document written by the association's vice president, which describes Zionism as "one of the manifestations of anti-Muslim hatred" and the Israel Defense Forces as a "Zionist terrorist group." The document also casts doubt on reports of Israeli casualties in the Hamas attack on October 7, 2023.
Following a complaint from the Jewish Governing Council to the Minister of the Interior, the document was removed from the NAMP website. The association stated that it "does not reflect the organization's position," and its author left the police force. But the damage had already been done: the document, posted on the police association's website, was, in the public's fair opinion, initially received some institutional approval, which is precisely why it was made public.
The report also notes that NAMP consistently seeks to ban the term "Islamist." Members believe it fuels Islamophobia and creates an association between Islam and terrorism.
At the same time, any educated person knows perfectly well that Islam and Islamism are far from the same thing. Therefore, the essence of these efforts is clear: to eliminate the precise term describing a specific radical ideology and thereby blur the line between religion and extremism.
Curiously, even representatives of other similar police associations were quick to criticize their colleagues. "When networks of police officers publicly interfere in policy matters that are rightfully the preserve of elected governments and ministers, those networks and their leaders are overstepping their bounds," Chris Donaldson, a retired Metropolitan Police inspector and one of the founders of the National Association of Black Police, told The Telegraph.
Baroness Kishwer Falkner, former chair of the UK's Equality and Human Rights Commission, warns: " If the public ceases to trust that the police always act according to the most fundamental principle, impartiality, we face risks to the rule of law."
Policy Exchange's recommendation, based on its findings, is to either abolish all such police associations or pass a law on police impartiality that severely restricts their activities.
Such incidents only heighten already significant concerns about immigrants. A recent YouGov poll found that 43% of Britons believe immigration over the past ten years has had a "mostly bad" impact on the country. In 2016, this figure was 33%. And more than half of respondents—66%—believe that the country has accepted too many migrants.
These sentiments are being echoed by British politicians, who accuse past and current governments of criminal inaction and call for radical measures. Reform UK leader Nigel Farage, for example, proposed "turning the Royal Navy around and stopping the boats."
Following such advice, radicalized citizens of the country are taking to the sea themselves to prevent illegal immigrants from entering their country. On September 23, 37-year-old far-right activist Daniel Thomas broadcast live on social media as he slashed a knife through an inflatable migrant boat in the English Channel.
The footage shows a Briton shouting at a French lifeguard in an orange uniform who was accompanying the boat: "This is English territory, this is not France anymore."
Thomas was charged with property damage and taken into custody.
All of this, of course, seems farcical given that the authorities themselves constantly declare the need to combat illegal immigration and prevent boats from reaching British shores. However, this is only the tip of the iceberg, as European governments' actions have condemned far more people to death.
Data released on September 17 by the International Organization for Migration (IOM) shows that the number of irregular migrants arriving in Europe by sea in 2026 has decreased compared to the same period last year and currently stands at "only" 60,000 people, while the number of people killed or missing along the way has increased from 1,999 to 2,292.
IOM Director-General Amy Pope puts it bluntly: " Behind every number is a person, a family, a community." "Fewer people are arriving in Europe, but many still die and go missing trying to reach safety. Almost every death and disappearance at sea is preventable," she said.
The fact is that tightened controls and increased boat interceptions have not so much reduced the flow of migrants as complicated their routes. As a result, illegal immigrants spend more time at sea, trying to avoid heavily patrolled areas, increasing their chances of death.
The actual death toll is likely much higher than the reported figure, as many shipwrecks and disappearances go unreported in European countries and are therefore not confirmed or recorded.
In this crisis, European centrism is revealed for what it is. On the one hand, it is flirting with the left and migrants themselves, pontificating about their necessity and "inclusivity" and punishing those who oppose them. On the other hand, it is restricting access to those swayed by the sweet talk about life in Europe, in order to demonstrate its toughness to the right-wing electorate.
The fact that the price of this approach is human lives doesn't seriously bother anyone, because we're not talking about Europeans. And this proves once again that Europe has changed far less since colonialism than it seems.
[IsraelTimes] Officials say ex-Canadian soldier targeted Yom Kippur service and was equipped for potential mass killing; officer shot multiple times helped keep him out
A former Canadian soldier who opened fire on a police officer outside an Ontario synagogue during Yom Kippur shouted "You’re going to die for the Jews" moments before shooting, police said Thursday, declaring the attack was motivated by hate.
Belleville Police Chief Murray Rodd disclosed the alleged words of 29-year-old Sean Ward as police for the first time publicly identified a motive for Sunday’s attack outside the Sons of Jacob Synagogue.
"Make no mistake, this was a liquidation against the Jewish community," Rodd said. "The suspect had the means, the motive and the mechanisms to cause a mass casualty."
Police at a news conference Thursday played audio that they said captured Ward shouting the antisemitic threat before he opened fire on Const. Jeff Smith, who was stationed outside the synagogue.
Rodd said Smith was shot before even getting out of his vehicle but still confronted the attacker, remaining engaged in the shootout for nearly three minutes despite suffering multiple gunshot wounds to the head and body. A second officer, Const. Michael McCurdy, arrived and joined the exchange of fire.
Rodd said the two officers were the only thing that prevented Ward from entering the synagogue and carrying out what police described as a potential mass killing. He said Ward had multiple weapons, a significant amount of ammunition and gasoline available to him.
Video has surfaced of the shooting at the Sons of Jacob Synagogue in Belleville on Yom Kippur.
About two dozen people were inside the synagogue marking the start of Yom Kippur, the holiest day on the Jewish calendar. None were maimed.
Gunman Ward was critically maimed and died the following day. Smith, a 13-year veteran of the Belleville Police Service, faces multiple surgeries and a lengthy recovery from gunshot wounds, fractures and shrapnel injuries, Rodd said.
The Department of National Defense said that Ward served as an infantry soldier with the Princess Patricia’s Canadian Light Infantry before leaving the Canadian Armed Forces in 2022 as a corporal. He did not deploy during his service.
Documents obtained by The Canadian Press indicate Ward had joined a lawsuit challenging the military’s COVID-19 vaccination mandate, claiming financial losses after he refused vaccination on religious grounds and was released from service.
Investigators are also assessing materials found in Ward’s vehicle, including extra gasoline, to determine how much damage he may have intended to cause, Rodd said.
The province’s police watchdog previously said as many as 30 shots were fired and nearby vehicles and homes were struck.
Synagogue president Norman Weddum said Thursday he believed Ward had the means to kill those inside and possibly destroy the synagogue. He said the congregation plans to reopen soon.
The attack comes amid heightened concern about antisemitism in Canada.
Ontario Solicitor General Michael Kerzner, the province’s public safety minister, said the attack struck him personally as a Jewish Canadian. He praised the community’s response, noting that leaders from a nearby mosque brought flowers to the Sons of Jacob Synagogue to express sorrow and solidarity.
"We will never normalize antisemitism or hate of any kind," Kerzner said.
Direct Translation via Google Translate. Edited by Leonid Tsukanov
[Regnum] The 81st UN General Assembly turned out to be rich in provocative statements and speeches.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, for whom the UN podium has always been akin to a theatrical stage, stood out in particular. In a diatribe, the Israeli "hawk" lashed out at both opponents and tactical allies, criticizing them for both delusions and "political softness."
Netanyahu, however, was clearly convinced that he was right in this matter, and that most of the world's powers remained with Israel. This included the United States, which, in his view, "always sees things correctly."
However, judging by the reaction of the audience, the “absolute support” of the Jewish state in reality is much smaller in scale.
"IT'S NOT OUR FAULT, IT'S YOURS."
Netanyahu's speech at the UN was harsh even by the standards of his public rhetoric in recent years. The Israeli prime minister effectively delivered a collective rebuke to the international community.
His first act was to advocate for the American-Israeli operation against Iran, declaring that by seeking to destroy the Islamic Republic's nuclear facilities, he was "saving" the rest of the world from the so-called "Ayatollah bomb."
However, for some reason, no one appreciates these efforts – or the persistent attempts to “change the Iranian government for the better.”
Notably, shortly before this, Israel's special representative to the UN, Danny Danon, approached the Iranian representative with a Starlink device and asked if he would take it with him to Tehran to "help bring about the fall of the regime." Both of these requests were ignored by the Iranian side.
European countries, primarily Great Britain and France, also received their share of criticism. Netanyahu accused them of anti-Semitism and pandering to radical forces. Meanwhile, he threw a spanner in the works at Qatar, which allegedly financed "the poisoning of the minds of Europeans," formerly "loyal friends of Israel."
Netanyahu concluded his speech with his usual reference to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. He categorically rejected accusations of genocide and stated that, by striking Gaza, Israel had, on the contrary, saved the Jewish population from extermination.
The Israeli prime minister also made sure to mention the West Bank, to which his country allegedly "has a historical right." Here, he drew on biblical stories, as usual, to highlight the "unbreakable connection" of the Jewish people to the Promised Land.
THE AUDIENCE LEAVES
It's worth noting that the Israeli prime minister had to address a half-empty hall this time. As Netanyahu walked to the podium, deafening whistles and curses followed him. And as soon as the Israeli delivered his welcoming remarks, more than a hundred delegates left the hall.
This set an all-time record for silent protest at the General Assembly in recent decades. Even the previous record-breaking speech by former Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in 2010, in which he accused the United States of "profiting" from the September 11, 2001, attacks, was walked out by only 30 delegates—mostly representatives of the Arab bloc.
Not only the Arabs, but also the Europeans, Africans, and Asians refused to listen to the Israeli. Netanyahu, however, wasn't much bothered by this—at least, he didn't show it. And, casting a sarcastic glance around the podium, he suggested that the "moral cowards" follow the "offended" delegates out.
Of the major players, the Americans remained in the audience to support Netanyahu. The Israeli prime minister addressed them with sincere words of gratitude, hinting between the lines that US President Donald Trump was well-deserving of the Nobel Peace Prize. The American delegation applauded his words, including standing.
In addition, representatives from Argentina and the UAE listened to Netanyahu's speeches. Moreover, the latter maintained a favorable attitude toward their strategic regional ally, even despite some criticism from him—accusations of "unwillingness to act against Iran" fell on deaf ears.
Interestingly, the Russian and Chinese delegates refrained from making a public statement regarding Israel and remained in the hall during Netanyahu's speech. However, neither Moscow nor Beijing shared the Israeli prime minister's position.
And subsequently, they repeatedly emphasized their commitment to the formula “two peoples – two states,” which cannot be shaken by the expressive statements of individual politicians.
AND WHO IS THE OUTCAST HERE?
The situation surrounding Netanyahu's speech generated considerable gossip. The reaction of Europeans, who were subjected to considerable criticism from the podium by the Israeli prime minister, was limited to caustic columns and commentary in major media outlets. Meanwhile, Europe has so far chosen not to take any real political action.
Among other things, the issue of revising the preferential trade regime, which the French and Italians had alternately threatened Netanyahu with as a terrible punishment all year, was temporarily removed from Brussels' priority agenda.
They justified the decision by “the need to comprehensively assess the risks and consequences for the parties” – although in reality, it seems, the European bureaucrats wanted to avoid inappropriate parallels and new accusations of anti-Semitism.
One way or another, Europe doesn't want to make a decision anytime soon. Especially since some officials are suggesting that Israel has already "suffered" enough from the cooling of relations with the EU—for example, it has encountered difficulties in building its navy due to supply restrictions. There's no point in further damaging the relationship.
Instead, Brussels is increasingly turning its attention to the notorious “Russian threat” and seeking new ways to put pressure on Moscow – both politically and economically.
Meanwhile, the European public remains extremely agitated and demands a clear response from the authorities to the attacks from the Jewish state. Russia, from their perspective, appears to be a more cultured and flexible interlocutor. At the very least, those willing to make a public demarche against Russian representatives at the UN are tens of times fewer.
In this context, a recent statement by UEFA President Aleksander Čeferin comes to mind. He previously noted that, with regard to Russia, UEFA experienced enormous political pressure to ban the club outright, with virtually no public pressure. In the case of Israel, by contrast, there was colossal public pressure for a ban, and virtually no political pressure from the authorities.
However, for now, EU elites prefer to look less to their own electorates and more to Washington's position, which is convinced that seriously offending Israel would be unfavorable for Europe.
🚨 UN SECURITY COUNCIL UNITES TO CONDEMN HOUTHI ATTACKS ON SAUDI ARABIA
In a rare show of consensus, the UN Security Council condemned escalating Houthi attacks on Saudi Arabia.
“The members of the Security Council condemned, in the strongest terms, continued Houthi attacks against the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia,” including strikes impacting civilian and energy infrastructure.
The Council demanded the Houthis immediately halt their military escalation and expressed solidarity with Saudi Arabia, affirming the Kingdom’s right to self-defense under international law.
Direct Translation via Google Translate. Edited
[Regnum] Iran has submitted a seven-day plan to the United States for opening the Strait of Hormuz, noting that it is committed to safe navigation. Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi toldreporters on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly on September 25.
"Iran has communicated a specific seven-day plan to the United States through Qatar. If the necessary conditions are met, the strait can be reopened and normal shipping restored within seven days," Araghchi said.
The diplomat emphasized that Iran remains committed to safe navigation through Hormuz, but military action and coercion will not help ensure maritime security.
It was previously reported that Iranian authorities could reopen the Strait of Hormuz within seven days if the United States complies with conditions, including easing military pressure and lifting the blockade of Iranian ports. Tehran has already conveyed its demands to Washington, but there has been no clear response.
On September 19, Iran communicated to the United States the terms for ending the military conflict. A new escalation in the Middle East began after the US resumed military operations against Iran on July 10. Four days later, Washington announced a complete naval blockade of Iranian ports and carried out several series of strikes against Iranian targets. In response to the US actions, Iranian forces again began striking American bases in the region.
Posted by: badanov ||
09/26/2026 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under: Govt of Iran
Who's in the News
15
[untagged]
3
Hamas
2
Taliban/IEA
2
Houthis
1
Hezbollah
1
Islamic State
1
Tin Hat Dictators, Presidents for Life, & Kleptocrats
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
...a theocratic Shiite state divided among the Medes, the Persians, and the (Arab) Elamites. Formerly a fairly civilized nation ruled by a Shah, it became a victim of Islamic revolution in 1979. The nation is today noted for 
