Social Media

Sir Keir Starmer’s grip on power is increasingly under pressure as Labour backbenchers grow bolder in their opposition to welfare reforms. If the Prime Minister continues to avoid disciplining his rebellious MPs, the danger is not only policy paralysis—but the potential unravelling of his own authority. Labour MPs angry over the party’s refusal to abolish the two-child benefit cap may want to look inward. The ongoing expansion of the benefits system, driven by surging claims and spiralling costs, has reached an inflection point. Every day, around 1,000 new sickness benefit claims are submitted. Since the Covid lockdowns, an additional 660,000 people have declared themselves too ill to work. From November 2019 to now, the number of working-age adults claiming disability has soared by 50 percent. Meanwhile, Universal Credit claims requiring little or no effort to find employment have ballooned. From 2.6 million in 2019–2020, the number rose to 3.5 million by 2024–2025. This is not just a momentary spike—it’s the sign of a system buckling under strain. In an era when “crisis” is often thrown around casually, the crisis in welfare spending is both real and urgent. The current trajectory is, quite simply, unaffordable. Ordinary families dealing with financial challenges typically look for ways to reduce spending. Labour MPs, by contrast, appear committed to opposing any measure that might limit the state’s payouts—even modest proposals aimed at putting the welfare state on sustainable footing. Last week, their opposition sank a restrained attempt at reform. Now, they are pushing for an outright increase in spending by targeting the two-child benefit cap. The arguments for abolishing the cap are not without merit. Around 1.6 million children are affected by the restriction. But the financial reality cannot be ignored: eliminating the cap would cost at least £3.5 billion a year. That figure dwarfs any savings Labour might have salvaged from the scrapped welfare reform bill. And yet, Labour MPs seem unwilling to entertain the idea that a functioning welfare state must be based on tough trade-offs. The party once celebrated for its reputation for fiscal responsibility under Gordon Brown and Tony Blair now seems unrecognisable. The desire to signal compassion appears to outweigh any concern for affordability. There’s scarcely a taxpayer-funded program Labour MPs won’t defend—particularly if doing so earns them favour in their constituencies. But this short-term political calculus risks enormous long-term damage. A system that pays generous out-of-work benefits indefinitely is not financially viable. The government’s stated priority is economic growth. That ambition must be coupled with a serious effort to reduce the explosion in disability claims. Imagine a Britain where the population is getting healthier each year and contributing more in taxes than it draws in benefits. Sadly, that’s a fantasy in today’s climate. Labour, it seems, is content to watch benefit costs rise. Worse, it is actively encouraging that rise. The pandemic is the favored justification, but the argument wears thin. Covid was disruptive, yes—but it doesn’t explain why so many are still on long-term benefits years later, particularly when most recovered fully and society has long since reopened. Emboldened by their recent success, Labour’s backbenchers may seize the next big moment: the Budget. “Rachel Reeves is hardly seen as the ‘iron chancellor’ of her generation,” the article notes, “and neither is Keir Starmer the kind of Prime Minister who is ‘not for turning’.” If they sense weakness, MPs may force a showdown. No Budget has been defeated in modern parliamentary history—but in this volatile mix of rebellious MPs, economic hardship, and wavering leadership, 2025 could deliver just such a political earthquake. If Starmer continues to placate rather than lead, he may soon find himself the victim of the very same MPs he now refuses to discipline. Adapted by ASEAN Now from Daily Telegraph 2025-07-12

Please continue discussions on any possible ceasefire in the topic dedicated to that: This topic is on discussion of the OP

Two off topic posts on previous alleged incidents going back years and containing false and misleading claims have been removed @Jeff the Chef. This topic is "Latest developments and discussion of events in the Israel-Hamas War." A separate troll post additionally removed

Corbyn Comeback? A Third of Labour Voters Open to New Hard-Left Party A new political movement spearheaded by former Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn could significantly shake up the UK’s Left-wing voter base, according to a recent YouGov poll. The survey suggests that nearly a third of Labour supporters might be willing to abandon Sir Keir Starmer’s party for a fresh alternative rooted in the hard-Left. YouGov asked 2,000 British adults how likely they would be—on a scale of one to ten—to vote for a new party led by Mr Corbyn. Among those who supported Labour in the last general election, 31 per cent gave a score of six or above, indicating they would seriously consider supporting such a party. In comparison, 40 per cent of Labour voters said they could see themselves backing the Green Party, and 12 per cent even expressed openness to voting for Nigel Farage’s Reform UK. This unexpected crossover underscores Sir Keir’s vulnerability on both flanks of the political spectrum. The potential new Left-wing party, which has been confirmed to include both Mr Corbyn and Coventry South MP Zarah Sultana, is preparing to directly challenge Labour in future elections. Both politicians are outspoken critics of the current Labour leadership and have aligned themselves with policies that are significantly more radical on welfare, taxation, and foreign policy—particularly the conflict in the Middle East. Sir Keir’s leadership has come under increasing strain, as Labour’s commanding poll lead following the last election has eroded rapidly. Public dissatisfaction with the government has also deepened, reaching historic lows just one year into Starmer’s term as prime minister. Meanwhile, Farage’s Reform UK has surged ahead in national polls, fueling concerns within Labour that a splintering of the Left vote could clear a path for the Right to regain power. Among all voters surveyed—not just Labour supporters—18 per cent said they would consider voting for a Corbyn-led party. While this figure may not appear large in isolation, it is significant in the context of a fractured political landscape and could influence key marginal seats. Jeremy Corbyn, who currently sits in Parliament as an independent MP for Islington North after being expelled from Labour in 2020, previously led the party between 2015 and 2020. His tenure saw Labour’s vote share surge to 40 per cent in the 2017 general election, resulting in a hung Parliament as Theresa May’s Conservatives faltered. However, just two years later, Corbyn’s Labour suffered a crushing defeat under Boris Johnson, plummeting to its worst performance since 1935. Zarah Sultana, who lost the Labour whip after opposing Sir Keir’s stance on maintaining the two-child benefit cap, has become one of the most prominent voices on the party’s Left. The newly forming alliance aims to directly challenge high-profile Labour figures, including Health Secretary Wes Streeting. Mr Corbyn recently appeared in Ilford North—Mr Streeting’s constituency—shortly after the announcement of the new political venture, signaling an intent to unsettle key figures within the party. The emergence of this hard-Left movement marks a critical moment for Labour as it struggles to maintain internal unity and voter trust. With both flanks under pressure and new rivals rising, Sir Keir Starmer’s leadership faces one of its toughest tests yet. Adapted by ASEAN Now from Daily Telegraph 2025-07-11

Iranian Official Suggests Trump Assassination as US-Iran Tensions Soar A senior Iranian official has stirred international outrage after publicly suggesting the assassination of U.S. President Donald Trump, adding to mounting tensions between Tehran and Washington following recent military strikes and ongoing nuclear disputes. Javad Larijani, a high-ranking adviser to Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, made the provocative remarks on Iranian state television, suggesting that Trump could be targeted at his Florida estate. “Trump has done something so that he can no longer sunbathe in Mar-a-Lago. As he lies there with his stomach to the sun, a small drone might hit him in the navel. It’s very simple,” Larijani said with a laugh, according to Iran International, a London-based media outlet. The chilling comment surfaced as a mysterious Iranian-linked website called “Blood Pact” claimed to have raised over $40 million for acts of "retribution against those who mock and threaten the supreme leader Ali Khamenei.” U.S. national security agencies have responded by intensifying counterterrorism measures in the wake of a recent U.S. strike on Iranian nuclear facilities on June 21. The Department of Homeland Security and the FBI have issued warnings to federal agencies and state leaders, citing a growing risk of retaliatory action. Officials have raised concerns about the possibility of “sleeper cells” — Iranian operatives embedded within the United States — being activated to carry out attacks. According to reports, Trump was previously warned through an intermediary at a G7 summit in Canada that any direct action against Iran’s nuclear program could trigger such cells into action. His confrontational stance toward Tehran is well documented. In 2017, during his presidency, Trump unilaterally withdrew the U.S. from the Obama-era Iran nuclear deal. Then, in 2020, he ordered a drone strike that killed General Qasem Soleimani of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), further straining relations. More recently, an alleged Iranian operative, Farhad Shakeri, was charged with plotting to assassinate Trump before the 2024 U.S. election. Prosecutors said he had been directed by an official within the IRGC. Trump has also survived two separate assassination attempts on the campaign trail—one in Pennsylvania in July 2024 and another at his West Palm Beach golf club in September. Despite the tensions, Trump suggested this week that dialogue might be on the horizon. “They want to talk,” he told reporters, confirming that formal negotiations with Tehran had been “scheduled.” Meanwhile, newly elected Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian appeared to leave the door open for diplomacy. In an interview with broadcaster Tucker Carlson, Pezeshkian said Iran would be willing to resume cooperation with the UN nuclear watchdog. “Unfortunately, as a result of the United States’ unlawful attacks against our nuclear centres and installations, many of the pieces of equipment and the facilities there have been severely damaged,” he added. The policy group United Against Nuclear Iran has called on Washington to act decisively, demanding that the U.S. government impose sanctions on senior Iranian clerics responsible for issuing religious fatwas calling for Trump’s assassination. Chaired by former Florida governor Jeb Bush, the group released a list identifying eleven individuals and two affiliated organizations that it believes should face travel bans, indictments, and financial sanctions. “Threats against the president of the United States and other Americans are a federal crime,” the group said in a statement obtained by Fox News. “Each of these individuals and entities should be sanctioned, indicted and banned from travel, along with their families, to the United States and its allies. The last fatwa against another American citizen, Salman Rushdie, almost cost him his life, with him being stabbed by an Iranian regime sympathiser. It is time to ensure that those who threaten Americans face the full force of the law.” Adapted by ASEAN Now from The Times 2025-07-11

Iran’s Growing Threat to the UK Demands Urgent Action, Intelligence Committee Warns Britain faces a growing and unpredictable threat from Iran that requires far more attention and resources than it currently receives, according to a stark warning from Parliament’s intelligence and security committee. In a newly released report, the committee urged the government to shift from a reactive approach toward a long-term, strategic plan to counter a range of aggressive Iranian activities on British soil and abroad. The wide-ranging inquiry, which concluded in August 2023, scrutinised Iran’s involvement in state-sponsored assassination attempts, espionage, cyber operations, kidnappings, and its expanding nuclear programme. It highlighted an alarming escalation in hostile actions, particularly against regime opponents living in the UK. “Iran poses a wide-ranging, persistent and unpredictable threat to the UK, UK nationals and UK interests,” said Lord Beamish, the committee’s chair. “Iran has a high appetite for risk when conducting offensive activity and its intelligence services are ferociously well-resourced with significant areas of asymmetric strength.” He continued, “Iran is there across the full spectrum of all the kinds of threats we have to be concerned with.” The report makes clear that while Iran’s global activities may seem less coordinated or extensive than those of Russia or China, its impact should not be underestimated due to its unpredictability and willingness to act. The committee was particularly critical of what it described as a short-sighted and reactive posture from the British government, accusing it of prioritising Iran’s nuclear ambitions to the detriment of addressing more immediate threats. “Whilst Iran's activity appears to be less strategic and on a smaller scale than Russia and China, Iran poses a wide-ranging threat to UK national security, which should not be underestimated: it is persistent and – crucially – unpredictable,” the report stated. The government’s approach has so far been labelled as focused on “crisis management” and “fire-fighting,” failing to adequately prepare for or counteract ongoing threats, including plots to assassinate or abduct individuals critical of Tehran. The report, which was published on Thursday, was initially provided to Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer in March and reviewed by intelligence agencies such as MI5, MI6, and GCHQ to allow for redactions based on national security concerns. The government is expected to respond formally within 60 days. The report covers events up to August 2023, when the committee finished taking evidence. This inquiry shines a spotlight on Iran’s escalating hostility and the UK’s vulnerability to its covert activities. The committee’s call for a more comprehensive and proactive stance is a clear signal that Britain must no longer underestimate Tehran’s ambitions or capabilities. Adapted by ASEAN Now from BBC 2025-07-11

X CEO Steps Down Amid Elon Musk’s Political Party Plans and Controversies Linda Yaccarino has stepped down as chief executive of X just days after Elon Musk, the company’s owner, announced the formation of a new U.S. political party. Her departure comes two years into her tenure at the social media platform, formerly known as Twitter, and marks another major shift in Musk’s turbulent stewardship of the company. Yaccarino, who took the role in 2023, announced her resignation publicly via a post on X. Reflecting on her time at the company, she said, “When Elon Musk and I first spoke of his vision for X, I knew it would be the opportunity of a lifetime to carry out the extraordinary mission of this company. I’m immensely grateful to him for entrusting me with the responsibility of protecting free speech, turning the company around and transforming X into the everything app.” Since Musk acquired the company in a $44 billion deal in 2022, X has undergone a dramatic overhaul—rebranding from Twitter, loosening content moderation rules, and attempting to reinvent itself as a platform for a broad range of services beyond social media. Yaccarino characterized her tenure as having overseen a “historic turnaround” and suggested that the company is now moving into a “new chapter,” one increasingly focused on artificial intelligence. Her resignation closely follows Musk’s announcement of a new political movement, which appears to widen the already growing divide between him and president Donald Trump. The timing of Yaccarino’s exit has led to speculation about internal tensions and the direction the platform is heading under Musk’s sole influence. Adding to the turmoil, X recently faced criticism after its AI chatbot, Grok, began generating and sharing anti-Semitic content. The incident drew widespread backlash, prompting the company to act. In a statement issued just one day before Yaccarino’s resignation, X said it would remove “inappropriate” posts generated by the chatbot. While Yaccarino gave no explicit reason for her departure, the combination of political developments and controversy surrounding the company’s AI tools has cast a long shadow over her exit. Still, she remained publicly supportive of Musk and the broader mission of the company. Her departure marks another chapter in the evolving—and often volatile—narrative of X, a company that continues to be at the center of technological and political debate under Elon Musk’s leadership. Adapted by ASEAN Now from Daily Telegraph 2025-07-11

No, an Ocean Current Did Not Reverse—Experts Refute Viral Climate Report A viral claim that an ocean current crucial to global climate systems has reversed direction for the first time is being firmly disputed by scientists and the authors of the very study it allegedly cites. The misinformation stems from a report by European news outlet IntelliNews, which published an article on July 5 titled "Southern Ocean current reverses for first time, signaling risk of climate system collapse." The report set off alarm bells by claiming that the Deep Western Boundary Current (DWBC), a critical element of the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation (AMOC), had reversed for the first time ever. It described the alleged event as “catastrophic” and warned it could accelerate global warming and destabilize global weather systems. The article cited a press release by El Institut de Ciències del Mar, a Spanish state-funded marine research institute, referencing a peer-reviewed study published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS) by researchers at the University of Southampton. However, the actual PNAS study does not report a reversal of any major ocean current, including the DWBC or the AMOC. Instead, it focuses on changes in the surface salinity of the Southern Ocean. Between the 1980s and 2015, the surface waters of the Southern Ocean were freshening, but new satellite data show a "marked increase in surface salinity" over the last decade. This rise in salinity coincided with a sharp decline in Antarctic sea ice coverage and a weakening of ocean stratification. “Our study found that surface salinity in the Southern Ocean has been increasing while sea ice has declined,” the study's lead author, Alessandro Silvano, told Newsweek. “This was unexpected, as melting sea ice is generally thought to freshen the ocean surface. The results suggest that our understanding of the Antarctic system—and how it may evolve—is incomplete.” The situation became further muddled due to a flawed press release issued by El Institut de Ciències del Mar. The German news site Table.Briefings reported that the IntelliNews story appears to have been based on this original, erroneous release. One of the study’s co-authors, Antonio Turiel, told Newsweek that the confusion stemmed partly from mistranslation and partly from imprecise wording. “Our original press note contained some wrong sentences, partly caused by mistranslation, partly caused by a wrong use of words on my side. That’s the reason of the correction,” Turiel explained. He clarified that while the study did observe changes in ocean structure—specifically that “isopycnals have shoaled,” indicating vertical movement of water layers—this does not mean the DWBC or AMOC has reversed. “It is likely that there is a change in the configuration of the currents,” he said, “but not a reversal.” El Institut de Ciències del Mar has since updated the press release and corrected Turiel’s quote. Despite this, the IntelliNews article remains uncorrected and continues to claim that the DWBC has reversed. Silvano also rejected the claim outright. “We do not talk about DWBC in our recently published work. The AMOC is not collapsing this year,” he told Newsweek. “There have been issues over the social media and press,” he added. The AMOC, described by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) as a key component of ocean circulation, plays a critical role in moving heat, salt, and nutrients across the globe. NOAA warns that warming oceans could slow this system, weakening its ability to absorb carbon dioxide and heat, but no evidence currently supports the notion that a full reversal or collapse is underway. In conclusion, while the PNAS study highlights unexpected and important shifts in the Southern Ocean's salinity and structure, the widely circulated claims of a reversed ocean current are inaccurate. Both the researchers involved and oceanographic authorities emphasize that although change is indeed happening in Earth’s climate systems, no catastrophic current reversal has occurred. Adapted by ASEAN Now from Newsweek 2025-07-11

UK Officials Brace for Potential Donald Trump Visit to Scotland Within Weeks Preparations are reportedly underway for a possible visit by U.S. President Donald Trump to the United Kingdom, with sources suggesting he could arrive in Scotland as early as the end of July or in the first days of August. According to information obtained by Sky News, the anticipated trip would likely center on Trump’s personal business interests, particularly his golf properties in Scotland. While no official date has been confirmed due to Trump’s shifting schedule, Police Scotland has acknowledged the need to prepare for a high-security visit. "Planning is under way for a potential visit to Scotland later this month by the president of the United States," said Assistant Chief Constable Emma Bond. "While official confirmation has not yet been made, it is important that we prepare in advance for what would be a significant policing operation." Internal discussions suggest the trip could be logistically extensive, involving up to 5,000 officers who may be required to work 12-hour shifts. The scale of the operation indicates the seriousness with which UK authorities are treating the possibility of Trump’s arrival, despite the lack of a finalized itinerary. The president is expected to spend time at Turnberry, the luxury golf resort on Scotland’s west coast owned by the Trump Organization. Senior sources told Sky News that the current working plan is for Trump to visit Turnberry before continuing north to Aberdeenshire, where he also owns another golf course. Trump’s son, Eric, previously indicated that his father would attend the official opening of a new course in Aberdeenshire at some point this summer. This would mark Donald Trump’s first return to Scotland since his victory in the 2024 U.S. presidential election, should the trip materialize. Although officials representing Trump’s Scottish ventures have not issued public statements, preparations on the ground appear to be intensifying. The Trump Organization’s relationship with Scotland has often sparked debate, both politically and locally, especially in light of the president’s controversial legacy. However, with no formal statement from Trump himself or the U.S. government, speculation continues to swirl around whether the visit will happen—and what impact it could have on the region. Government officials in both the UK and Scotland are believed to be in close contact with law enforcement and the U.S. diplomatic team, as they work to finalize logistics for what would be a high-profile and highly sensitive visit. Adapted by ASEAN Now from Sky News 2025-07-11

“She Had to Save Herself”: Girl Who Survived Southport Stabbing Lost Entire Blood Volume, Inquiry Hears A young girl who endured a brutal stabbing attack during a Taylor Swift-themed dance class in Southport lost her entire blood volume and survived only through sheer courage and the support of fellow children, a public inquiry in Liverpool has heard. Known only as C1 for legal reasons, the child was stabbed 33 times during the horrific incident. Her mother delivered a harrowing victim impact statement at the hearing, revealing that her daughter was dragged back into the dance studio and repeatedly attacked while teachers fled to find help. The girl was later airlifted to Alder Hey Children’s Hospital, where she underwent two life-saving surgeries to treat more than thirty serious injuries, having lost over 2.5 litres of blood—effectively her entire blood volume. She had to relearn how to sit, stand, and walk. “She is so much more than that moment on CCTV,” her mother said. “Those moments carried so much courage and determination to survive, that the CCTV footage does not tell us.” The full extent of her daughter’s injuries was devastating: 33 stab wounds impacting her diaphragm, kidneys, lungs, and even the nerves and muscles that allowed her to move her arms. Her waist was only 27 centimeters wide, and the kitchen knife used in the attack was 17 centimeters long. “The damage was catastrophic,” her mother added. During the attack, the girl tried to escape the dance studio to find her father outside but became caught in a crush at the top of the stairs. Her mother recounted her daughter’s heartbreaking memory of attempting to protect others during the chaos. “She talks quietly of how she put her arms around the girls as he began to attack them,” she said. “She tells me with such clarity that a moment came where one of the girls was able to get up—she put the girl's hand on the handrail and told her to go, to get down the stairs—and she did. The attack continued, she was still holding another girl, 'I crouched over the top of her,' she says. 'I told her it would be okay.'” Bleeding from multiple defensive wounds to her arms and shoulders, C1 managed to escape the building. “Somehow, she emerges from the building — and we see her, for a brief moment on CCTV. Escaping. Finding help. Showing so much strength. But her arm is badly injured and it's trailing behind, and he grabs it. In a flash of struggle, she's gone again.” “For eleven seconds she is out of sight. And then there she is again. She has stood up after enduring another attack of more than twenty stab wounds to her back and shoulders. She stumbles outside to the windows reaching for help. She eventually falls and soon after is carried to safety.” Her mother emphasized that her survival was not due to adult intervention in those critical moments. “The most painful of truths for us... and what has been most devastating to come to terms with, is that there were no adults to help... She was only supported by other children. The courage and strength she found leaves me crushed, but in complete awe.” While she expressed gratitude for the teachers’ actions in shielding other children and calling for help, the mother said, “When the adults left in those first moments, our daughter had to save herself.” Sir Adrian, in his opening remarks to the inquiry, described the attacker Rudakubana as someone who “posed a very serious and significant risk of violent harm, with a particular and known predilection for knife crime.” Adapted by ASEAN Now from ITV 2025-07-11

Lord Hermer Accused of Power Grab After ‘Snitch Clause’ Appears in Legal Guidance Lord Hermer, the Attorney General, has come under fire from Conservative figures after newly published legal guidance revealed a series of changes that critics say amount to an “effective veto” over government policy. The revised document, seen by The Telegraph, replaces previous advice issued by Suella Braverman in 2022 and has sparked accusations of centralising legal power at the expense of ministerial authority. According to the analysis, Lord Hermer’s version of the guidance includes 23 new references to international law and significantly expands the role of government lawyers in scrutinising policy decisions. One of the most controversial additions is a so-called “snitch clause,” which instructs civil service lawyers to report ministers to the Attorney General if they attempt to proceed with actions deemed unlawful. “If it is proposed to proceed with a course of action despite advice that it would be unlawful to do so because it is not supported at least by a tenable legal argument, law officer advice must be sought immediately,” the document states. This clause and other changes have alarmed senior Conservatives, with Sir Michael Ellis, a former Attorney General, describing them as “another extraordinary overreach by Lord Hermer, who has effectively given himself a veto over all government business.” Ellis added: “It is quite something if ministers of the crown within the same Government cannot be trusted, and have to be snitched on by their own officials.” Alex Burghart, the shadow chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, went further, calling the guidance a “surrender charter” that enshrines “rule by lawyers” at the heart of government. “Measures like the snitch clause will undermine discussion across government and harm our national interest,” he warned. “Keir Starmer’s Attorney General is putting the partisan views of activist lawyers before the national interest.” The document instructs lawyers to treat international treaties, such as the Chagos Islands agreement, with the same importance as domestic legislation. It also stresses that breaching international law could lead to “significant consequences, be they legal, political, diplomatic and/or reputational.” In contrast to Mrs Braverman’s guidance—which emphasised that legal risk rarely justified blocking a policy—Lord Hermer advises government lawyers to assume every ministerial decision could face legal challenge. Braverman’s version had instructed legal advisers not to act as an obstacle to policy-making, urging them to suggest “mitigations” if they had concerns. Those provisions have now been removed. The guidance also bars the Government from using Parliament to override international agreements, a direct challenge to tactics used by Rishi Sunak’s administration, particularly in its efforts to bypass the European Convention on Human Rights to rescue the Rwanda deportation scheme. Sir Michael Ellis commented: “I often received advice from lawyers whose opinion was that there was a minimal chance of success and then when the matter was later litigated the Government actually won the case. This is an empire-building charter for a stagnating and internally divided Government.” Responding to the backlash, a source close to Lord Hermer dismissed the criticism as “desperate nonsense from a Tory party that has lost credibility on law and order and upholding the rule of law.” The source defended the guidance as a tool to help implement policy more efficiently: “It demands lawyers to be creative solution finders, enabling our ambitious plan for change to succeed – unblocking obstacles so that policies are not held up for years in the court as was always the way under the last administration.” An official spokesperson for the Attorney General echoed that position, saying: “We are getting on with delivering the Plan for Change, from getting NHS waiting lists down, to rolling out free breakfast clubs in primary schools, expanding free school meals, and creating growth, wealth and opportunity for all. Government lawyers advise ministers, but it is always ministers that make decisions on policy as has been the case under successive governments.” Adapted by ASEAN Now from Daily Telegraph 2025-07-11

If you want your post to remain then please discuss the topic and avoid deliberate diversion attempts. Hamas Its 'genocidal strategy' & use of Extreme sexual violence

@bannork your post has been removed, please place it in the topic you already started here:

Rubio Sanctions UN Palestinian Rapporteur Over Alleged Antisemitism and Anti-US Campaign U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has announced sanctions against Francesca Albanese, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on Palestinian rights, citing her alleged campaign against the United States and Israel. The move comes just days after the U.S. demanded Albanese’s dismissal, accusing her of virulent antisemitism and supporting terrorism. Albanese, an Italian legal scholar who has held the UN role since 2022, was accused by Rubio of attempting to push the International Criminal Court (ICC) to prosecute U.S. and Israeli officials, as well as private companies and executives. “Today I am imposing sanctions on UN Human Rights Council Special Rapporteur Francesca Albanese for her illegitimate and shameful efforts to prompt [ICC] action against U.S. and Israeli officials, companies, and executives,” Rubio posted on X. “Albanese’s campaign of political and economic warfare against the United States and Israel will no longer be tolerated. We will always stand by our partners in their right to self-defense.” Tensions escalated last month when the Trump administration urged UN Secretary-General António Guterres to dismiss Albanese over her controversial communications to American corporations. These letters, according to U.S. officials, were filled with what they described as “inflammatory rhetoric and false accusations.” Acting U.S. Ambassador to the UN Dorothy Shea criticized Albanese’s language, writing that “Ms. Albanese makes extreme allegations, such as that the entities may be contributing to purported offenses including ‘gross human rights violations,’ ‘apartheid,’ and ‘genocide,’” according to the Washington Free Beacon. Despite these demands, a spokesperson for Guterres clarified that the Secretary-General does not have the authority to appoint or remove special rapporteurs, a limitation that left Washington’s request unresolved. Albanese has drawn widespread condemnation for her statements regarding the Israel-Gaza conflict. In a report to the UN Human Rights Council, she accused companies such as Google of profiting from what she described as “the genocide carried out by Israel” in Gaza. These accusations sparked criticism not only from U.S. officials but also from European allies. She became the first UN Special Rapporteur to be formally condemned for antisemitism by both Germany and France. Further controversy arose in July 2024 when Albanese reposted a social media image comparing Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to Adolf Hitler, commenting, “This is precisely what I was thinking today.” Her remarks were seen by many as trivializing the Holocaust and were denounced by key U.S. diplomats, including Deborah Lipstadt, the former Special Envoy to Combat Antisemitism, and Linda Thomas-Greenfield, then U.S. Ambassador to the UN. At this point, no one is surprised to see @UN Special Rapporteur Albanese expose her deep bias and blatantly use antisemitic tropes like comparing Israel to Nazi Germany. But this is why @ADL requested that @UN_HRC open proceedings to remove her from office. UN officials should check their biases at the door and maintain professional standards. This is as basic as it gets and yet Albanese falls far short. Albanese’s response to Hamas’ October 7, 2023, attack on Israeli civilians, which resulted in the deaths of more than 1,200 people and the kidnapping of 250 others, also provoked backlash. Rather than condemning the acts outright, she wrote that “today’s violence must be put in context,” and questioned reported atrocities, including beheadings and rape, committed by Hamas militants. In August 2024, Albanese labeled the targeted Israeli assassinations of terrorist leaders, Hamas chief Ismail Haniyeh and Hezbollah commander Fouad Shukr, as “murders” and “acts of aggression.” Both France and Germany have responded to her rhetoric: France responding: “The October 7 massacre is the largest anti-Semitic massacre of the 21st century. To deny it is wrong. To seem to justify it, by bringing in the name of the United Nations, is a shame.” Germany also replied to Albanese’s comments, stating: “To justify the horrific terror attacks of 7/10 & deny their antisemitic nature is appalling. Making such statements in a UN capacity is a disgrace and goes against everything the United Nations stand for.” Rubio reiterated his stance that Albanese’s “campaign of political and economic warfare against the United States and Israel will no longer be tolerated.” The State Department emphasized its unwavering support for Israel and its right to defend itself against terrorism. The New York Post reached out to Albanese for comment, but no response has been reported. Adapted by ASEAN Now from NYP | ADL 2025-07-10

Mayoral Hopeful’s Campus Group Hosted Speaker Who Blamed U.S. for 9/11 and Admired Terror-Linked Leader Zohran Mamdani, the Democratic Socialist who recently surged to victory in New York City’s Democratic primary for mayor, is facing scrutiny for his past involvement with a college group that invited a controversial speaker who later blamed the United States for the September 11 terror attacks. In 2013, while attending Bowdoin College, Mamdani co-founded the campus chapter of Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP), a group that invited Lebanese-American professor As’ad AbuKhalil to speak about Middle Eastern politics. The visit has resurfaced as a point of contention, given AbuKhalil’s inflammatory remarks and ties to individuals widely condemned for promoting terrorism. Speaking in 2021, AbuKhalil asserted that the United States bore responsibility for the 9/11 attacks. “We have to remember that the US basically was hit on 9/11 by forces that were reactionary and fanatic and were raised and armed and sponsored by America and its allies in the Middle East,” he said. He added, “People forget that 9/11 is a repercussion of the Cold War when the US made its bed and clearly with the religious fanatics of the Muslim world.” While acknowledging the tragedy of 9/11, noting “it’s heart-wrenching remembering all these people who came from 80 nationalities, the ones who died on 9/11 here in the United States,” AbuKhalil contended, “but there were many earlier 9/11s that the US inflicted on people around the world.” AbuKhalil, who teaches at California State University Stanislaus, has also praised George Habash, the founder of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), an organization classified as a terrorist group by the United States since 1997. “He was a great Palestinian leader,” AbuKhalil said during a 2012 appearance in Edinburgh. “Of course if you look at newspapers he would be seen as terrorist,” he added, while crediting Habash as having “tremendous influence” on his thinking. Time magazine once described Habash as “the godfather of Middle East terrorism,” and the Anti-Defamation League noted that his PFLP gained notoriety in the 1970s for a wave of airplane hijackings. Mamdani’s SJP chapter has been involved in other controversial activities over the years, and his past affiliations and statements have drawn growing criticism as his political profile rises. He has previously come under fire for appearing to defend al Qaeda figure Anwar al-Awlaki in resurfaced tweets. Al-Awlaki, a known extremist preacher, was killed in a drone strike authorized by President Barack Obama. In another contentious revelation, Mamdani reportedly identified himself as both “African American” and “Asian” on a college application to Columbia University, which ultimately rejected him. Born in Uganda, Mamdani is of South Asian descent. Though Mamdani won the primary in a landslide, besting former Governor Andrew Cuomo and current Mayor Eric Adams among others, his general election battle is far from over. He faces Republican nominee Curtis Sliwa and a trio of other contenders—Adams, Cuomo, and entrepreneur Robyn Walden—who are running on minor party lines. Despite his commanding primary win, establishment Democrats have so far withheld endorsements, reflecting concern among moderates desperate to prevent Mamdani’s far-left platform from taking control at City Hall. Adapted by ASEAN Now from NYP 2025-07-10