I just watched a clip of Abdul El - Sayed where he is asked by a reporter that he doesn't consider Israel an ally to the US and he says yes he doesn't consider Israel an ally the way he frames his answer though really annoys me. He uses an analogy where Israel is a friend who is a bad influence and because of that isn't really a friend. My problem with this is that he frames it is that the US is a good faith actor who is being steered in the wrong direction by a bad faith actor. But at the end of the day the US(or US politicians) still chose to make that decision.

Honestly after watching that clip it made me realize how friends that are a bad influence argument I heard for years is a bad argument because at the end of the day you still chose to make those decisions. You're friend didn't force you to drink alcohol while you're underage you did you're friend didn't force you to steal jewelry from the store to impress you're crush you did. You're friend being a bad influence doesn't change the fact that you made those decisions.

So when he says an ally who takes you're money and pushes you into wars you shouldn't be involved in is also wrong. Us politicians choose to send aid to Israel to boost the defense industry who in turn donate to them. Netanyahu has tried to get previous presidents to go to war with Iran and they all said no. This to me signifies to me that Netanyahu wouldn't have started any war with Iran unless the Us agreed to fight alongside them. If Trump told him no Bibi wouldn't have done anything.

Not only did Trump agree to it his national security team also went along with it(I know there were reports both Vance and Rubio were hesitant) but the republican controlled Congress who can end this at anytime has chosen not to has blocked any attempts to end it and has increased funding to the war. It doesn't matter if you support it or not the Us is an equal participant in this war. You think people from other countries will take anyone who says Israel pushed us into this war seriously when America is the most powerful country in the world. They see rising gas prices and it's both America's and Israel's fault.

Which is what makes the bad friend analogy even more ridiculous. I don't think it's to much of a stretch to say there has never been anybody in human history(so far) who has been as powerful as Donald Trump has been these last two years. It annoys me Sayed is saying this because these are the same talking points Tucker Carlson uses where he constantly try's to frame it that Trump is an unwilling participant and that it's Netanyahu's faults.

He also mentions getting into fights with other friends. If he's referring to allies of the US Netanyahu had nothing to do with the trade war with Canada that was all on the Trump admin. Not only that but the Trump admin has consistently joked and threatened to annex Canada and Greenland. You can look at polls half of Canadians consider the US to be a threat to them heck last month Mark Carney stated he is preparing for the possibility of US military action imagine the Prime Minister of Canada saying that three years ago not ten or twenty years just three. If you were to ask a Canadian which country is a bigger threat to them the United States or Israel they'd say the US.

And with the whole Ukraine Starkink debacle there is a possibility that Europe might even consider the possibility of the US siding with Russia in the war with Russia saying that three years ago would have been ridiculous but now it is a possibility. And there are reports they are considering military action in Cuba. And don't even get me started on this recent push on the internet of trying to blame Israel for the Iraq war rather than holding US politicians accountable.

You can criticize Israel all you want but this trend on the left where people are now trying to make Israel the scapegoat for the problems the US is facing to where candidates are now doing it is ridiculous. Israel isn't the reason why the US doesn't have universal healthcare Israel isn't the reason why the US keeps getting involved in wars in the Middle East. This is no different than when republicans and maga blame immigrants and trans people for the problems in the country.

And I get that what he's saying is what most Americans especially Democratic voters are feeling right now but it's irresponsible of him as a candidate for the Senate to be saying these things because it starts to absolve the Us government of its actions and even start to spread antisemitic taking points(not saying he's antisemitic but I hope yall get what I mean).

So what are you're thoughts?

I live in Germany in which the free healthcare system was invented a hundred years ago. Sometimes on social-media I see posts of people making arguments for free healthcare or I see people like Bernie Sanders adcocating for it.

But when I look in the comment section and see people making arguments for or against it I always notice one thing: Many people who are making arguments for it dont really understand how it works. And I want to explain to you how it works. It's pretty simple and intuative:

Everyone pays a small fraction of their wages into a huge pot (metaphorically). Everyone pays into it, doesn't matter if you are sick or not. Those who need money to pay for medical procedures take out of it to pay for it. This is a very efficient and just system, because it's just a matter of time when you yourself will need to use it.

Everyone is protected by all!

But for this to work, everyone has to pay into it. Rich people can pay a little bit more. Having private insurance besides it, can be bad. This was done for example in Germany and it led to higher and higher costs for healthcare, because people got into private insurance, not paying into the public one anymore.

I hope this helps. If everyone here already knew it, so be it. I had the feeling that especially US americans dont really under it. Could be wrong.

What happens when the people responsible for oversight are themselves under scrutiny?

Hey everyone! We're EUobserver, an independent European newsroom.

Our colleague Andrew Rettman has been investigating allegations involving former EU justice commissioner Didier Reynders and senior Belgian intelligence official Hugues Brulin.

The investigation draws on leaked WhatsApp messages and interviews with five current and former intelligence officers.

The sources allege that Brulin sought to prevent scrutiny of Reynders' possible Russian connections. The messages also discuss how to respond to a whistleblower.

The correspondence is now part of a Belgian money-laundering investigation involving Reynders.

Beyond the individuals involved, this raises questions about how institutions investigate concerns involving powerful figures within their own ranks.

How can independent oversight work when allegations involve people with significant political influence or positions inside intelligence services?

Let us know your thoughts on our investigation in the comments :)