Social Media

The BBC is currently investigating unrecorded payments made to Clive Myrie for outside work after claims surfaced that several moonlighting fees were not properly logged in the broadcaster’s earnings register. According to reports, some payments for external events, which Myrie hosted in addition to his duties as a presenter, have not been included in the corporation’s official records. The BBC maintains a regular log of external payments made to its staff, which is intended to ensure transparency about additional earnings outside their BBC salaries. However, recent reports suggest that some of Myrie’s payments, including those for a number of corporate events, were missing from the register. This issue was brought to light by *The Sunday Times*, which noted that a payment of £5,000 to £10,000 for Myrie’s role as host at an Intermediary Mortgage Lenders Association lunch in March had not been recorded. In response to these claims, the BBC has committed to reviewing the situation and updating the register if needed. “There appears to have been some administrative errors in relation to entries on the register. These will be reviewed and, where necessary, the register will be updated,” a BBC spokesman said. Clive Myrie, one of the BBC's most prominent presenters, is among the corporation's highest-paid staff members, earning between £310,000 and £314,999. On top of this, he has become known for participating in external speaking events, which is a common practice among top BBC presenters. These events often pay substantial fees, contributing to the presenter’s overall income. According to a study by the *Press Gazette*, Myrie is at the top of the list when it comes to additional earnings from outside work, bringing in around £66,000 over the 12 months leading up to June 2024. This puts him ahead of other prominent BBC presenters such as Amol Rajan and Nick Robinson. The issue of moonlighting among BBC presenters has long been a topic of discussion, with some critics questioning whether presenters' outside engagements conflict with their roles within the BBC. However, there has been no suggestion of any wrongdoing on Myrie’s part in relation to the unrecorded payments, and the issue appears to be primarily an administrative oversight. Myrie has gained increasing prominence within the BBC, especially after the departure of Huw Edwards from the News at Ten. Alongside Reeta Chakrabarti and Sophie Raworth, Myrie has been filling in as one of the rotating presenters for the BBC’s flagship evening news bulletin. There has been widespread speculation about who will eventually take over Edwards’ role permanently, with bookmakers frequently placing Myrie as the favorite for the position. Despite the current investigation into the missing payments, Myrie has expressed satisfaction with his position and salary at the BBC, stating previously that he is "incredibly pleased with what I've got." Based on a report from: Daily Telegraph 2024-09-24

Heather Iqbal, a Labour candidate in Dewsbury and Batley, revealed that she faced intense scrutiny and harassment during her election campaign, including being told she was “not a proper Muslim” due to her Western first name. Iqbal Mohamed, the independent MP who defeated her, did not intervene when his supporters targeted her with these attacks, according to Ms. Iqbal. In an interview with *The Telegraph*, Ms. Iqbal described the hostile environment surrounding the campaign, which included being chased down the street and accused of being a “child murderer” and a “genocide agent.” Supporters of Mr. Mohamed reportedly used a loudspeaker van that broadcast accusations labeling Labour as a Zionist party. Ms. Iqbal explained how the aggressive nature of the campaign forced her to stop bringing her baby son with her while canvassing. "I got shouted at about being a child killer," she recalled. This constant harassment created an environment where it was nearly impossible to campaign calmly. The candidate also revealed the growing pressure on Muslim Labour members in Dewsbury to quit the party due to its stance on Gaza. Ms. Iqbal stated that children of these members were being bullied at school simply because their parents were associated with Labour, particularly after Hamas's attack on Israel on October 7. A major point of contention during the campaign was Ms. Iqbal’s first name, which led to her Muslim identity being questioned. "Whether I was Muslim or not was constantly questioned, with constant criticism of my first name," she said, noting that this occurred even in community meetings held by her opponent, Mr. Mohamed. The hostility didn't end with personal insults. Ms. Iqbal and her team were routinely followed by a van that would appear shortly after they began door-knocking, broadcasting accusations of being “genocide agents” and “child killers.” She stated that the campaign atmosphere was so toxic it made it difficult for her to engage with voters properly. “It felt like every day you had to look over your shoulder because the language was set from the top,” she said. In contrast, Ms. Iqbal criticized Mr. Mohamed for failing to address or condemn the behavior of his supporters. "If the independent MP is confident in his views, he should not need to get his campaign to do stuff like that," she said, expressing frustration at his silence. She added that the fact she was the only woman running made it all the more important for Mr. Mohamed to step in and call for restraint. The Labour candidate also spoke of her near-daily contact with the police in the lead-up to the election, following the troubling events of a previous local election. She recounted how groups of men had gathered outside polling stations, creating a hostile and intimidating environment. “The week leading up to the general election, I really did feel really intimidated,” Ms. Iqbal said. Dewsbury, a town with a large Muslim population, has been a Labour stronghold for much of the last century. However, recent elections have exposed deep divisions within the electorate. In the 2024 general election, Mr. Mohamed, a pro-Gaza independent candidate, won with 15,641 votes, while Labour trailed significantly with 8,707 votes. This election marks yet another sign of the growing influence of Middle Eastern politics in British local elections, as seen in the 2021 Batley and Spen by-election, where George Galloway nearly won the seat by focusing on Muslim voters’ concerns about the Middle East. Heather Iqbal’s experience reveals the complexity of navigating such fraught political environments, where personal identity, party affiliation, and international issues collide in ways that can significantly impact campaigns and voter behavior. Jackie Ramsay, Ms Iqbal’s election agent, said the canvassing team had been much depleted because Labour members had felt “bullied” into leaving. “As people are going to the mosque, people in the community are saying to them: ‘Why are you still in that genocidal party?’” she recalled. Ms Ramsay said she reported independent supporters to the police on three occasions. On one occasion, while a small group was canvassing in a Muslim area of Batley, an independent supporter ran up and “very aggressively shouted at us that we weren’t welcome in that area”. “He collected leaflets from some of the doors that we had delivered to. He said it was an independent area; if we didn’t get out he would be calling people so that they would remove us. “Labour Party members started to leave. There was intimidation going on. People were expected if they were from the Muslim faith to leave the ‘genocidal party’ or the ‘party that supports the killing of babies’.” “I witnessed it at Thornhill Lees and Savile Town where people were being told what box to vote for. You had to run a bit of a gauntlet [to get in].” Ms Iqbal said: “I think that there is a group of people who are exploiting the emotions that Gaza brings. “Not only do they intimidate people into feeling like they couldn’t vote Labour because of their religion. That emotion overwhelms how you might feel about your local services or public policy generally. As the dust settles on the 2024 election, Ms. Iqbal notes that there are many Labour members who feel "silenced" due to the growing pressures in constituencies like Dewsbury. Based on a report from: Daily Telegraph 2024-09-24

Former President Donald Trump’s plan for mass deportations of illegal immigrants may face strong resistance from the U.S. military, according to legal analyst Joseph Nunn. As the 2024 presidential election nears, immigration has emerged as a central issue, particularly with the ongoing surge in migrant border crossings. U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) data shows that over 2.4 million encounters occurred at the U.S.-Mexico border during the 2023 fiscal year, up from around 1.7 million in 2021. Trump, the Republican presidential nominee, has repeatedly promised mass deportations as part of his campaign, vowing to enlist the Army and local law enforcement to remove millions of illegal immigrants. His campaign spokeswoman, Karoline Leavitt, reiterated Trump’s plans, stating that he "would marshal every federal and state power necessary to institute the largest deportation operation of illegal criminals, drug dealers, and human traffickers." However, Nunn, counsel at the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University’s School of Law, believes the U.S. military is unlikely to cooperate with such a plan. He explained, "The military is going to see this and say this is not the kind of duty that soldiers signed up for. This is getting the military involved in domestic politics in a way the military doesn’t like to do." While Nunn acknowledged that Trump’s proposal could be legally viable, he highlighted the logistical challenges it would pose. "The military is not going to like doing it, and they are going to drag their feet as much as they can, but it is possible, so it should be taken seriously." Former senior Homeland Security official John Sandweg expressed similar doubts, emphasizing the practical challenges of executing Trump’s plan. "On a practical level, it will be nearly impossible for [Trump] to do the things he's talking about, even if he could bring in the military," Sandweg said. Trump has indicated that he would prioritize the deployment of the National Guard, whose troops can be activated by state governors. According to Stephen Miller, Trump’s chief immigration policy advisor, sympathetic Republican governors would send National Guard troops to neighboring states that refuse to participate. Miller explained last year that, for example, the "Alabama National Guard is going to arrest illegal aliens in Alabama and the Virginia National Guard in Virginia. And if you're going to go into an unfriendly state like Maryland, well, there would just be Virginia doing the arrest in Maryland." Nunn’s remarks came after Trump announced that the mass deportation plan would begin in Springfield, Ohio, and Aurora, Colorado—cities that have been central to anti-immigration rhetoric in recent weeks. Trump claimed that a Venezuelan gang had taken over parts of Aurora and made unfounded accusations that Haitian migrants in Springfield had been eating residents' pets. "We’re going to have the largest deportation in the history of our country, and we’re going to start with Springfield and Aurora," Trump declared. However, both cities have pushed back on these claims. Aurora’s mayor, Mike Coffman, told Newsweek that while some apartment complexes had experienced issues with the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua, the gang was not in control of the area. Similarly, Springfield officials have debunked rumors about Haitian migrants eating pets and condemned Trump’s comments for sparking community tension. Last week, Springfield’s city hall, along with two elementary schools and the Clark County courthouse, had to be evacuated after a bomb threat containing "hateful language toward immigrants and Haitians" was sent. As the debate over immigration continues to heat up, Trump’s deportation plan may face significant hurdles—not only from legal and logistical challenges but also from a military unwilling to engage in domestic enforcement of immigration laws. Based on a report from: Newsweek 2024-09-24

Homelessness in the United States is reaching unprecedented levels, driven by a surge in illegal migrants and a variety of economic factors, according to a recent report. As cities scramble to fund shelters, a Wall Street Journal analysis suggests that the number of homeless people could soon surpass the highest levels ever recorded. As of January, approximately 550,000 people were reported homeless, a figure that coincided with the highest number of border crossings the US has ever seen in a single month. This marks at least a 10% increase from January 2023, which had already set a record for homelessness, according to data going back to 2007, when the government first started tracking these numbers. The January 2024 tally is expected to grow even further, as cities like New York, which have significant homeless populations, have yet to report their official figures. Given current trends, the US is on pace to exceed 2023’s record of 653,000 homeless individuals. The increase in homelessness has paralleled a record number of migrants crossing the border illegally, seeking asylum, and then being transported to major cities like New York, Chicago, Boston, and Denver. This has stretched local resources thin, leading to rising crime and gang violence in some areas. Massachusetts, for example, reported that nearly half of the more than 7,000 families in its family shelters were migrants. The state expects to spend over $1 billion housing migrants during this fiscal year alone, according to the Wall Street Journal. In Chicago, migrants made up more than 70% of the homeless population, pushing the city's homeless count to triple what it was before, with over 18,800 people living on the streets or in shelters in January. Similarly, Denver has seen a 42% spike in homelessness, with fresh waves of migrants contributing to the city's struggles. The Journal also points to the rise in fentanyl use, skyrocketing housing and rent costs, and the end of pandemic-era tax credits as factors that have pushed many families into homelessness. California, long grappling with the largest homeless population in the country, remains at the epicenter of the crisis. In 2023, the state had more than 180,000 homeless people, according to the most recent data from the US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). Democratic Governor Gavin Newsom has been urging cities to dismantle homeless encampments, but the situation continues to worsen. While HUD has not yet released its official 2024 report, the Wall Street Journal, with the help of 250 organizations across the country, expects this year’s numbers to be even higher. The Journal suggests its estimates might be more accurate, as HUD’s data are often seen as undercounts influenced by volunteer availability and weather conditions during data collection. The combination of rising migrant numbers, economic instability, and housing shortages has brought the homelessness crisis in the US to a breaking point, with no immediate solution in sight. Based on a report from: NYP 2024-09-24

Troll posts together with unsubstaniated claims removed @ThaiFelix

Despite growing international pressure to de-escalate, both Israel and Hezbollah signaled a readiness to intensify their cross-border conflict. On Sunday, Hezbollah’s deputy chief, Naim Qassem, declared that the militant group had entered a "new phase" in its battle against Israel. Meanwhile, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu stated that Israel had inflicted "a series of blows on Hezbollah that it could have never imagined" following intense rocket fire from Lebanon. Hezbollah hit residential area in Haifa Israel’s military focus appears to be shifting toward Hezbollah, an Iran-backed group, following nearly a year of sporadic cross-border clashes that began in October. An Israeli airstrike on Friday in southern Beirut, a Hezbollah stronghold, killed Ibrahim Aqil, the head of Hezbollah’s elite Radwan Force. Lebanon’s health ministry reported that the strike killed 45 people. The violence escalated after a series of blasts targeting communication devices across Lebanon earlier in the week, which killed 39 people and injured nearly 3,000, actions that were attributed to Israel. At Aqil’s funeral, Hezbollah’s Naim Qassem vowed that the group was ready to face any military scenario. "We have entered a new phase, namely an open reckoning," Qassem said. "Threats will not stop us... We are ready to face all military possibilities." Hezbollah’s Radwan Force has played a pivotal role in ground operations, and Israel has repeatedly demanded that its fighters withdraw from the border areas. UN special coordinator for Lebanon, Jeanine Hennis-Plasschaert, voiced grave concerns, warning that the region was "on the brink of an imminent catastrophe." Israel’s military reported that more than 150 rockets, missiles, and drones were fired into its territory on Sunday, most originating from Lebanon. In response, Israel targeted Hezbollah positions in southern Lebanon. The Lebanese health ministry confirmed that three people were killed in these strikes, while Hezbollah reported the loss of two fighters. As the violence continues, both sides seem locked in a cycle of retaliation, with Hezbollah chief Hassan Nasrallah declaring that Israel would face consequences for the recent attacks. Meanwhile, truce talks remain stalled, as the exchanges of fire claim lives and displace tens of thousands on both sides of the border. Credit: RFI (Radio France Internationale) | X 2024-09-23

In the midst of growing criticism over Vice President Kamala Harris' limited media presence, one of her top advisers, former Atlanta Mayor Keisha Lance Bottoms, defended the vice president's lack of interviews by highlighting her demanding schedule. Harris, 59, is on track to grant the fewest interviews of any major party's presidential nominee, having done just six sit-down interviews since President Joe Biden formally stepped down from his re-election bid on July 21. During a recent appearance on CNN’s "The Lead with Jake Tapper," Bottoms suggested that Harris’ packed agenda is the reason behind her scarce media appearances. “She’s a very busy person,” Bottoms explained. “She’s the vice president as well as a candidate.” While many have criticized Harris for her reluctance to engage with the press, Bottoms pointed to the fact that Harris continues to voice her stance on key issues in public forums, even if not in the traditional interview format. “We heard her today talk about her views on these policies,” Bottoms continued. “It may not be in the format that the media would like. It may not be that she’s sitting down doing a one-on-one interview, but we heard her today in Georgia talk about her stance on reproductive freedom.” Harris’ first formal interview since being named the Democratic Party’s candidate for president took place nearly a month after Biden announced he was stepping aside for her. On August 29, Harris sat down with CNN’s Dana Bash, with her running mate, Minnesota Governor Tim Walz, by her side. Aside from this interview, Harris has made a few other appearances, including an interview with Philadelphia's ABC station, an interview with Spanish-language radio host Chiquibaby, and a panel at the National Association of Black Journalists (NABJ) gathering. Despite these appearances, the criticism persists. Harris’ media approach has drawn comparisons to that of former President Donald Trump, who, at 78, has conducted at least three times as many interviews in the same period, including a one-hour interview with Tesla and SpaceX CEO Elon Musk on X Spaces. Meanwhile, Ohio Senator JD Vance, the Republican vice-presidential nominee, has become a familiar face on Sunday morning talk shows, maintaining a regular presence on network public affairs programs. As Harris continues her campaign alongside Governor Walz, it remains to be seen whether her media strategy will evolve or whether the defense offered by Bottoms — that Harris is simply too busy — will hold in the face of further scrutiny. Credit: NYP 2024-09-23

Amid Russia's ongoing population decline, President Vladimir Putin has made a strong appeal for women to embrace both professional careers and motherhood. Speaking at the fourth annual Eurasian Women’s Forum, Putin called on Russian women to help address the country's falling birth rates by having large families while continuing to participate in the workforce. According to a Kremlin transcript, the forum, which ran from September 18 to 20 in St. Petersburg, focused on women’s professional and humanitarian contributions. “Russia is traditionally respectful of women," Putin said. "In this regard, our state policy relies on the National Strategy of Action in the Interests of Women.” He emphasized the state’s efforts to support women by creating an environment where they can be successful in their careers while also serving as "guardians of the hearth and lynchpins of large families with many children." Putin highlighted the unique qualities he believes women bring to both motherhood and the workplace, stating that women can manage the dual roles because they are "beautiful, caring, and charming," adding that women "possess a secret that men are unable to fathom." He extended his best wishes for their success, noting it would benefit "peace, creation, and progress." The appeal comes at a time when Russia's birth rate has reached its lowest level in 25 years, a trend exacerbated by rising death rates and significant emigration, particularly related to the ongoing war. Health Minister Yevgeny Shestopalov, earlier this week, made headlines by suggesting that Russians should take advantage of breaks at work to engage in procreation as a measure to combat the declining birth rate. "Life flies by too quickly," Shestopalov said, urging citizens to prioritize having children. Putin’s comments are part of a broader effort by Russian authorities to reverse the nation’s demographic decline. During the forum, which reportedly hosted over 1,500 attendees from 126 countries, other politicians also weighed in on the issue. Member of Parliament Tatyana Butskaya suggested that employers evaluate the birth rates of female staff members, while fellow lawmakers Anna Kuznetsova and Zhanna Ryabtseva advocated for younger women to start families as early as 18 to 20 years old in order to maximize their fertility. In addition to social pressure, the government has implemented financial incentives. In some regions, women are compensated for having children while still full-time students, and fertility testing programs have been expanded for women aged 18 to 40 in Moscow. This initiative follows a long history of government attempts to encourage higher birth rates, including the reintroduction of the "Mother Heroine" award last year, which offers a substantial monetary reward to families with ten or more children. The one-off payment is worth one million rubles, or approximately $16,000. Despite these efforts, the nation’s population continues to decline. Russia’s Federal State Statistics Service (Rosstat) has projected that the country’s population could drop by as much as 15.4 million people by 2046. Currently, Russia has a population of 140.8 million, but the birth rate remains well below the replacement level. According to the United States Census Bureau, the average number of children per Russian woman stands at 1.5, far below the 2.1 needed to maintain a stable population. As Putin noted earlier this year, families need to have at least two children to ensure the survival of Russia’s ethnic groups, and three to promote population growth. As the Kremlin continues to push for solutions to its demographic crisis, it is clear that both economic incentives and cultural expectations are being employed to encourage Russian women to take on the dual challenge of professional work and raising large families. Credit: Newsweek 2024-09-23

As more women come forward with allegations of sexual assault against the late Mohamed Fayed, questions have been raised about the Crown Prosecution Service's (CPS) handling of cases involving powerful figures. This scrutiny comes more than a decade after the CPS, then under Sir Keir Starmer, was criticized for its failure to prosecute Jimmy Savile, one of Britain’s most notorious sexual predators. Recently, the CPS has faced further backlash for delays in announcing charges against BBC presenter Huw Edwards, who was accused of accessing indecent images of children. It took over a month for the CPS to reveal it had brought charges against Edwards, and he later avoided jail with a six-month suspended sentence. Critics, including Kemi Badenoch, decried the decision as an example of “two-tier” justice, calling for an overhaul of sentencing rules. The case of Mohamed Fayed has once again highlighted what many campaigners and legal experts see as a reluctance by British authorities to challenge wealthy and well-known individuals. Fayed was questioned by police in 2008 after a 15-year-old girl accused him of sexual assault. The CPS ultimately decided not to press charges, citing “no realistic prospect of conviction.” Similar decisions were made regarding allegations against Jimmy Savile, with the full extent of his crimes only emerging after his death in 2011. Despite the high-profile nature of these cases, Prime Minister Rishi Sunak’s office has stated that neither the Fayed nor Savile cases crossed Starmer’s desk during his tenure at the CPS. Nonetheless, the pattern of non-prosecution has fueled concerns about the CPS’s approach toward prosecuting the rich and famous. Lawyers and activists argue that Britain’s justice system is too deferential to those in power. Richard Scorer, head of abuse law at Slater & Gordon, pointed to the UK’s strict libel laws, which he said have a “stifling effect” on victims coming forward. He contrasts this with the United States, where free speech protections make it easier to report and investigate allegations of abuse against high-profile figures. “The knowledge about what al Fayed was alleged to have done was out there in the world but the trap never sprung shut on him,” said former BBC journalist Meirion Jones. Scorer also noted the underfunding of the UK’s criminal justice system, which has exacerbated delays in bringing cases to trial. Sexual assault and rape cases now take up to six years to reach court, a situation Scorer described as “totally unacceptable.” Sir Bob Neill, chair of the Commons justice committee, added that this problem is worsened when the accused is a public figure, as victims fear they won’t be believed. Scorer’s third critique is that the UK lacks the direct political accountability found in the U.S. legal system. He highlighted the fact that in the U.S., prosecutors often pursue high-profile cases as a route to political advancement, whereas in the UK, the risk of failure can dissuade authorities from taking on such cases. “If you go after someone famous, you’ll likely tie up huge amounts of resources and there’s a huge downside if the case fails,” Scorer explained. Victims' groups argue that the reluctance to prosecute powerful figures is rooted in the UK's deeply embedded social inequality. Andrea Simon, executive director of the End Violence Against Women Coalition, stated, “We live in an unequal social system that puts men in a position of power relative to women and girls. Sexual violence is a consequence of this, with women and girls comprising the vast majority of victims.” She added that wealthy perpetrators often use legal tools, such as non-disclosure agreements, to silence victims. Britain’s justice system, still grappling with cases like those of Fayed and Savile, continues to face criticism for its perceived inability to hold the powerful to account. Credit: Daily Telegraph 2024-09-23

Scientists probing deep beneath Antarctica’s Thwaites Glacier, ominously known as the "Doomsday Glacier," have uncovered alarming signs of accelerated melting, which could trigger catastrophic sea level rise. Using advanced technology, such as ice-breaking ships and underwater robots, researchers from the International Thwaites Glacier Collaboration (ITGC) have revealed that the glacier may be on an irreversible path to collapse. Since 2018, the ITGC team has been examining Thwaites closely to better predict its potential breakdown. Their comprehensive studies have painted a stark picture of the glacier’s future. In a report released Thursday, the scientists emphasized that the outlook is “grim,” detailing the results of their six-year investigation. The data suggests that rapid ice loss is set to increase significantly this century, with Thwaites' retreat accelerating over the past 30 years. Rob Larter, a marine geophysicist from the British Antarctic Survey, noted, “Our findings indicate it is set to retreat further and faster.” The potential consequences of Thwaites’ collapse are dire. The glacier holds enough water to raise sea levels by more than two feet, but its collapse could eventually trigger an even greater rise of up to 10 feet, due to its role as a “cork” holding back the vast Antarctic ice sheet. Such a dramatic increase in sea levels would devastate coastal cities around the world, from Miami to London, as well as vulnerable regions like Bangladesh and the Pacific Islands. Thwaites has long been considered at risk, in part due to its unique geographical position. The land beneath the glacier slopes downward, allowing more ice to come into contact with relatively warm ocean water as it melts. Yet, until recently, scientists knew little about the specific mechanisms driving its retreat. The ITGC emphasized that “Antarctica remains the biggest wild card for understanding and forecasting future sea level rise.” Over the last six years, the team employed a variety of methods to gain clarity. One significant breakthrough came from Icefin, a torpedo-shaped robot sent to explore Thwaites’ grounding line—the critical point where the ice sheet rises from the seabed and begins to float. According to Kiya Riverman, a glaciologist from the University of Portland, the first footage of Icefin approaching this vulnerable area was profoundly moving. “For glaciologists, I think this had the emotional impact that perhaps the moon landing had on the rest of society,” she said. “It was a big deal. We were seeing this place for the first time.” Through Icefin's imagery, the researchers discovered that Thwaites is melting in unexpected ways. Warm ocean water is funneled through deep cracks and “staircase” formations in the ice. Other experiments using satellite and GPS data revealed that seawater is able to penetrate more than six miles beneath the glacier, exacerbating the melting process. Further analysis of marine sediment cores by Julia Wellner, a professor at the University of Houston, shed light on Thwaites’ historical retreat, suggesting that it began retreating rapidly in the 1940s, likely triggered by a strong El Niño event. “These results teach us broadly about ice behavior, adding more detail than is available by just looking at the modern ice,” Wellner explained. Despite the bleak findings, there was one piece of good news. While scientists had feared that the collapse of Thwaites’ ice shelves could expose towering cliffs of ice that would repeatedly collapse into the ocean, recent computer models suggest this scenario is less likely than previously believed. However, this does not mean the glacier is safe. The researchers project that the entire Thwaites Glacier, along with the Antarctic Ice Sheet behind it, could be lost by the 23rd century. Even if global fossil fuel emissions were drastically reduced, it may already be too late to prevent its collapse. Eric Rignot, a glaciologist at the University of California, Irvine, voiced his concerns: “While progress has been made, we still have deep uncertainty about the future. I remain very worried that this sector of Antarctica is already in a state of collapse.” Though the current phase of the ITGC project is drawing to a close, scientists acknowledge that much more research is necessary to fully understand the complexity of the Doomsday Glacier and to determine whether its retreat can be stopped. Credit: CNN 2024-09-23

In response to growing calls from Labour MPs, Sir Keir Starmer, Angela Rayner, and Rachel Reeves have vowed to stop accepting free clothing. This decision follows mounting pressure for the Prime Minister to halt receiving gifts, particularly in light of recent criticism over Starmer's acceptance of donations. Sources from Number 10 confirmed that Starmer, along with Deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayner and Chancellor Rachel Reeves, will no longer take free clothing. The announcement comes just before the Labour Party's annual conference, which is set to begin in Liverpool this Sunday. The controversy stemmed from reports revealing that Sir Keir and his wife had accepted financial contributions from Labour peer Lord Alli for clothing. Additionally, Starmer had received donations to cover the cost of new glasses. These revelations led to a wave of negative headlines, sparking debates over the ethics of such donations. In recent days, Labour MPs urged Starmer to address the issue of gifts, with many concerned that these contributions were casting a shadow over his leadership. The public announcement to stop accepting free clothing reflects a shift in position, despite earlier attempts to downplay the matter. This move indicates that Number 10 had growing concerns about the potential damage the ongoing media coverage was inflicting. However, the new stance seems limited to clothing only. Other types of donations, such as those for glasses, football tickets, and concert passes, remain unaddressed for now, though these too have attracted scrutiny. The decision marks an attempt by Labour's leadership to mitigate the negative perceptions, especially in the lead-up to their conference, where the party's direction and policies are set to be discussed. By choosing to reject free clothing, Starmer and his colleagues may be hoping to steer the conversation away from personal donations and back to the larger political issues at hand. Still, it remains to be seen whether this move will quell concerns, or if further actions regarding other types of gifts will follow. Credit: Daily Telegraph 2024-09-23

Nigel Farage has made it clear that "bigots" and "extremists" have no place in Reform UK, signaling a move to "professionalise" the party following its recent electoral success. Speaking at the party's annual conference in Birmingham, Farage reflected on the party's journey since its rebranding, celebrating its first MPs elected in July but admitting that past mistakes had hindered its progress. During his speech, Farage emphasized that the party must remain vigilant against being infiltrated by "extremist groups," a challenge that new political movements often face. "We don’t want extremists, we don’t want bigots, we don’t want people who think that way, because we represent the silent, decent majority of this great country," he told the crowd. Farage’s address was delivered to a lively audience of 4,000 activists, the largest attendance the party has seen to date. To the sound of Eminem's hit song *Without Me*, Farage entered the auditorium at the National Exhibition Centre in Birmingham, waving to supporters as he made his way around the room. The party’s four other MPs, including Lee Anderson, who was perched atop an open-top double-decker bus in the conference hall, watched on as Farage took the stage. Elected as an MP in July on his eighth attempt, Farage spoke about his mission to "professionalise and democratise" the party, which he believes has already gained a crucial foothold in Parliament. He assured activists that Reform UK would not tolerate any form of extremism within its ranks. "We haven't got time, we haven't got room for a few extremists to wreck the work of a party that now has 80,000 members and rising," Farage declared, underscoring his commitment to steering the party towards long-term success. As Reform UK looks to expand its influence in British politics, Farage's vision for a more disciplined and inclusive party could be the key to securing its future as a major force on the political right. Credit: BBC 2024-09-23

Vice President Kamala Harris is holding former President Donald Trump accountable for the deaths of two women in Georgia, attributing their deaths to the abortion bans that have taken root after the overturning of Roe v. Wade. Speaking at a rally in Atlanta, Harris made an emotional connection between Trump’s appointment of conservative Supreme Court justices and the state’s restrictive abortion laws. ProPublica recently reported that two women were either denied or too afraid to seek emergency care due to Georgia’s ban on abortions after six weeks of pregnancy. Harris expressed that such tragedies will only become more frequent if Trump returns to office, stating, "Now we know that at least two women — and those are only the stories we know here in the state of Georgia — died because of a Trump abortion ban." She further emphasized that these are just the cases that have come to light, adding, "The reality is, for every story we hear of the suffering under Trump abortion bans, there are so many of the stories we’re not hearing, but where suffering is happening every day in our country." The vice president's remarks are part of a broader effort to make Trump accountable for the sweeping changes in abortion laws that have affected millions of women across the country. Harris has highlighted how state bans, such as Georgia's, have impacted women’s access to healthcare, especially during emergencies. These stories have become a central element in her campaign to mobilize voters around reproductive rights. Democrats are relying on abortion as a galvanizing issue in the same way it was during the midterm elections, hoping to counter Trump’s messaging on issues like the economy and immigration. Trump has tried to balance the abortion issue by promoting a "leave-it-to-the-states" approach, stating that each state should make its own decisions regarding abortion. He has also supported exceptions to abortion bans in cases of rape, incest, and to save the mother’s life. His spokesperson, Karoline Leavitt, reiterated this stance, stating, "President Trump has always supported exceptions for rape, incest, and the life of the mother, which Georgia’s law provides. With those exceptions in place, it’s unclear why doctors did not swiftly act to protect the lives of mothers." However, Harris strongly challenged this viewpoint, particularly the idea of leaving such life-and-death decisions to state lawmakers. She highlighted how Trump’s opposition to a proposed abortion-rights ballot measure in Florida, which would protect the right to abortion until fetal viability, threatens to maintain and even expand restrictions on reproductive healthcare. Harris passionately criticized Southern lawmakers for supporting strict abortion bans while their states struggle with high maternal mortality rates. "These hypocrites want to start talking about, this is in the best interest of women and children. Well, where you been? Where you been when it comes to taking care of the women and children of America?" Harris asked, fueling her argument against the conservative lawmakers. At the rally, Harris also told the tragic stories of two Georgia women, Amber Nicole Thurman and Candi Miller, who lost their lives due to complications following failed abortion attempts. Thurman, a 28-year-old, required emergency surgery after taking abortion pills out of state, but doctors delayed treatment for 20 hours because of Georgia's abortion ban. Miller, a 41-year-old mother of three, ordered abortion pills online but was too afraid to seek emergency help and tragically died at home. "We will speak her name," Harris said of Thurman, leading the crowd in a chant of “Amber Rose Thurman.” Both deaths were preventable, according to a state maternal health review board. In her speech, Harris argued that even Trump’s stated exceptions to abortion bans fail to protect women adequately. "We’re saying that we’re going to create public policy that says that a doctor, a health care provider, will only kick in to give the care that somebody needs if they’re about to die?" Harris asked, underscoring the dangers posed by current state laws. As reproductive rights continue to be a key issue in the upcoming elections, Harris’s stance on the matter represents one of the most forceful challenges to Trump’s policies, highlighting the life-or-death stakes for women across the country. Credit: Politico 2024-09-23

Pensioners can transition and be transgender, even if they have lived their entire life as one gender, according to new guidance provided to care homes. The advice, offered by researchers from the University of Kent, is part of a guide titled "Trans & Non-Binary Inclusion," which seeks to ensure that care homes are more inclusive towards older LGBTQ+ individuals. The guide encourages care home staff to recognize the possibility of elderly people identifying as transgender later in life. It urges workers to familiarize themselves with what it means to be trans or non-binary and to respect people's pronouns and chosen names, regardless of what legal documentation might state. However, this guidance, released in August 2024 in collaboration with the University of Surrey and the University of Hertfordshire, has sparked some criticism. A care worker from Somerset, speaking anonymously, expressed concerns about how the guidelines might clash with the beliefs of other residents, their families, or even the staff. "What about other residents or their families, or even care staff, that might have gender-critical beliefs?" the care worker questioned. “We know that those are protected under the Equality Act, so therefore nobody could be ‘made’ to use preferred pronouns. We also have to consider single-sex provisions. A female resident might be sharing some facilities with a trans-identifying male. This could compromise her right to dignity and privacy, but most of all her safety.” The guide has also been criticized for ignoring certain challenges that transgender care home residents face, particularly those with dementia. A 2019 study by the University of Ottawa revealed that transgender people with dementia might forget they had transitioned and revert to identifying with their birth gender. Helen Joyce, the director of advocacy at human rights charity Sex Matters, has voiced her opposition to the guide, stating: “This guidance for care homes is a shocking example of the way trans activism harms the most vulnerable in society. By imposing the fictions of gender identity ideology on gender-confused elderly people, it goes against the best interests of residents and staff.” She highlighted concerns about the distress experienced by dementia patients, saying, "The evidence of people with dementia being distressed by changes to their body that they no longer understand, such as breast implants, is deeply upsetting. Rather than offering practical, compassionate advice on how to provide care in these difficult situations, this guide treats vulnerable residents as props in a fantasy of gender affirmation." Despite the criticism, the University of Kent defends its work, explaining that the guide was created with input from older LGBTQ+ individuals and care providers. The university's larger research project, CIRCLE, which received funding from the National Institute for Health and Care Research, aims to address the unique challenges faced by older LGBTQ+ individuals in social care. Dr. Jolie Keemink, who contributed to the guide, emphasized that “research shows that the older LGBTQ+ population is expected to rely more heavily on social care than their cis-gender, heterosexual counterparts because they are less likely to have children and more likely to experience a lack of social support." The guide, which includes a poster to indicate a care home’s commitment to LGBTQ+ inclusion, will be available online and distributed at the Care Show, the UK's largest social care event, held in Birmingham in October. Dr. Keemink added, “There is an urgent need for improvements with regards to LGBTQ+ inclusion within care homes, and we hope that this guide can play a useful role in this.” Credit: Daily Telegraph 2024-09-23

Scaremongering unsubstaniated post removed. Second one today from the same poster.

A post on an unrealted 1920's bombing raid removed. Can I remind you off this topic: Revisiting History: The Unlikely Campaign to Vilify Winston Churchill In addition if you are going to make specific claims ensure you supply a credible link to them

In a widely anticipated event in Michigan, Vice President Kamala Harris and Oprah Winfrey came together to address pressing national issues, including immigration, the economy, reproductive rights, and gun violence prevention. The event, featuring a live audience of 400 people, had the feel of Winfrey’s iconic talk show, with additional participation from celebrities like Ben Stiller, Jennifer Lopez, Bryan Cranston, Chris Rock, Julia Roberts, and Meryl Streep, who joined virtually. Another poignant moment occurred during the segment on gun violence prevention, when Natalie, a survivor of the recent Georgia school shooting, recounted her harrowing experience of being shot twice in class. The shooting, which took place at Apalachee High School, left four people dead. Harris discussed the polarizing debate on gun control, saying, “I think for far too long on the issue of gun violence, some people have been pushing a really false choice to say you’re either in favor of the Second Amendment or you want to take everyone’s guns away. I’m in favor of the Second Amendment, and I’m in favor of assault weapons bans, universal background checks, red flag laws.” When Winfrey brought up Harris’s own ownership of a gun, the vice president replied candidly, “If somebody breaks into my house, they’re getting shot. I probably should not have said that. My staff will deal with that later.” The event also featured questions from voters on a range of issues. In response to a question about immigration, Harris reiterated her support for a bipartisan border deal that had been negotiated by senators but was opposed by former President Donald Trump. Harris stated she would sign the deal into law if it passed Congress. When asked about her plans for improving the economy, Harris touched on her initiatives to combat price gouging and support first-time homebuyers and small business entrepreneurs. She took a jab at Trump, saying, “We have so many entrepreneurs in our country who have great ideas, incredible work ethic, but not necessarily access to capital because not everybody, like my opponent, was handed $400 million on a silver plate that he filed bankruptcy six times on.” Grassroots organizations supporting Harris were also represented at the event, including groups like Republicans for Harris, Swifties for Kamala, and Black Women for Harris. Harris highlighted the importance of unity, saying, “This movement that is about reminding each other that we have so much more in common than what separates us is so critically important.” The event also featured enthusiastic praise for Harris from the celebrities who joined virtually. Chris Rock expressed his admiration for the vice president, saying, “I’ve always been a fan of Kamala… I’ve been writing her a check for a long time, and I want to bring my daughters to the White House to meet this Black woman president. I think she would make a great president, and I’m just, I’m ready to turn the page, man. All of the hate and negativity, it’s got to stop.” Credit: The Hill 2024-09-21

A man armed with two long knives went on a violent stabbing spree in Rotterdam, Netherlands, killing one person and seriously injuring another. The suspect, who allegedly shouted "Allahu Akbar," meaning "God is Greatest" in Arabic, during the attack, has been taken into police custody. The horrific incident unfolded near the iconic Erasmus Bridge, where the attacker, now severely injured himself, was eventually subdued by a heroic bystander. Dutch broadcaster NOS reported that several witnesses heard the suspect shouting the religious phrase as he carried out the brutal assault. One witness, a sports instructor who was teaching a class near the scene, recounted how he stepped in to overpower the attacker. "I saw a man with two long knives stabbing a young guy," he told NOS. "I eventually managed to get them away." Images from the aftermath showed a heavy police presence near the bridge, with emergency services setting up a medical tent and an ambulance at the scene. Dutch newspaper De Telegraaf reported that a man was stabbed beneath the bridge, as confirmed by bystanders passing over it. Several of them also stated that the suspect had shouted "Allahu Akbar" during the violent attack. Wessel Stolle, a police spokesman, confirmed that authorities were aware of the phrase being shouted during the incident and that it is part of the ongoing investigation. However, he also emphasized that there was no immediate information regarding the attacker's motive, and all possibilities are being explored. The attacker was subdued by Renil Renato David Litecia, a sports coach who witnessed the horrifying scene. Litecia described how he acted quickly to prevent further bloodshed. "I hit the attacker with two sticks after seeing him lunge at someone," Litecia said. "I managed to wrestle the knives away and throw them aside." Initially, Litecia thought the scene was a physical fight. "But when I started running in that direction, I saw that it wasn't a fight," he explained. "It was a man with two long knives who was stabbing another young guy. When I started shouting, he turned around and began approaching everyone nearby." Authorities have not yet released the identities of the victims or the suspect, but the investigation is ongoing, with police urging witnesses to come forward with any information that may assist in understanding the full scope of the attack. The city of Rotterdam is now grappling with the aftermath of this senseless act of violence, as the investigation seeks to uncover the motivations behind the deadly rampage. Credit: ABC 2024-09-21

More than 70,000 people fighting for Russia have now lost their lives in the ongoing war in Ukraine, according to data analyzed by the BBC. For the first time since the full-scale invasion began in 2022, volunteers—civilians who joined Russia's armed forces after the start of the war—constitute the highest number of battlefield deaths. Daily, the names of those killed, their obituaries, and images from their funerals are shared across Russian media and social platforms. BBC Russian, along with the independent website Mediazona, has been compiling these names from public sources, including official reports. They have verified that the information was shared by either authorities or relatives of the deceased and confirmed their deaths in combat. New graves in Russian cemeteries, often marked by defense ministry flags and wreaths, also provide names of soldiers who have died in Ukraine. BBC and Mediazona’s research has identified the names of 70,112 Russian soldiers killed in Ukraine, although the true number is likely much higher. Some families do not publicize the deaths of their relatives, and the analysis does not cover deaths in militia units in Russian-occupied regions like Donetsk and Luhansk. Among the confirmed dead, 13,781 were volunteers, constituting roughly 20%. This category now surpasses others, such as former prisoners, who previously accounted for 19% of deaths, and mobilized soldiers, who make up 13%. Since October 2022, weekly deaths of volunteers have consistently exceeded 100, with some weeks seeing more than 310 fatalities. In contrast, Ukraine has remained relatively silent about its losses. While President Volodymyr Zelensky stated in February that 31,000 Ukrainian soldiers had been killed, U.S. intelligence estimates suggest higher numbers. The story of Rinat Khusniyarov illustrates the experience of many Russian volunteers. Hailing from Ufa in Bashkortostan, Khusniyarov had been juggling two jobs at a tram depot and a plywood factory before enlisting in November last year at age 62. He was killed less than three months later, on February 27. His obituary on a local memorial website described him as "a hardworking, decent man." Data shows that most volunteers come from small towns in Russia where stable employment is scarce, and many appear to have enlisted voluntarily, although reports from Chechnya suggest some have faced coercion or threats. Some volunteers did not fully understand that the contracts they signed had no clear end date. Several have unsuccessfully sought help from pro-Kremlin journalists to leave the service. Military salaries, significantly higher than the average wages in less affluent regions, as well as benefits like tax breaks and free childcare, have lured many to enlist. One-time sign-up bonuses have also increased in value across Russia. Most of the volunteers killed are aged between 42 and 50, with 4,100 of them in this age range. A total of 250 volunteers over the age of 60 have died, including the oldest volunteer, who was 71. Rising casualties among volunteers are attributed in part to their deployment in the most dangerous front-line areas, particularly in the Donetsk region. Russian soldiers describe a "meat grinder" strategy where waves of troops are sent forward to exhaust Ukrainian forces, often with little equipment or artillery support. Drone footage shows Russian soldiers attacking Ukrainian positions without necessary military backing. In some cases, hundreds of soldiers have been killed in a single day. Recently, Russian forces have made desperate attempts to capture the eastern Ukrainian towns of Chasiv Yar and Pokrovsk, but have faced significant losses. According to an official study by the Russian defense ministry's medical directorate, 39% of soldiers die from limb injuries that could be prevented with better first aid and medical care. Despite these casualties, the Russian government appears reluctant to initiate a new wave of forced mobilization. Instead, it is intensifying efforts to recruit volunteers, offering greater incentives to enlist. Local officials are increasingly tasked with recruiting from their regions, often targeting men with financial or legal troubles. They have also conducted recruitment campaigns at universities. Since 2022, prisoners have been encouraged to enlist in exchange for pardons, and a new policy allows people facing criminal prosecution to avoid trial by agreeing to fight, with their cases being frozen or dropped. The war, which has already claimed tens of thousands of lives, continues to grind on with no clear end in sight. Credit: BBC 2024-09-21

Brian Jeffrey Raymond, a former C.I.A. officer, has been sentenced to 30 years in prison for drugging, sexually assaulting, and photographing more than two dozen women. His actions, carried out while he served in various international posts, came to light after years of abuse, according to federal prosecutors. Raymond, 48, of La Mesa, California, pleaded guilty in a U.S. District Court in Washington to four of the 25 charges against him. These included sexual abuse, abusive sexual contact, coercion and enticement, and transportation of obscene material. His sentence reflected the maximum punishment prosecutors had requested. "When this predator was a government employee, he lured unsuspecting women to his government-leased housing and drugged them," said U.S. Attorney Matthew M. Graves. "After drugging these women, he stripped, sexually abused, and photographed them." Prosecutors revealed that the assaults took place between 2006 and 2020 across multiple countries where Raymond had worked. During that time, he drugged and photographed or filmed 25 women while they were nude or partially nude. "Many of the recordings featured Raymond touching and manipulating the victim’s bodies when they were unconscious and incapable of consent," prosecutors added. When Raymond became aware of the investigation, he tried to delete the explicit images and videos. The most recent of Raymond’s crimes occurred in Mexico City between 2019 and 2020, where he was stationed at the American Embassy. Prosecutors said he raped six women while in Mexico, each assault following a similar pattern. He met his victims through dating apps, communicated in Spanish, and presented himself as a "high-level embassy employee in whom the government had reposed special trust." The investigation into Raymond began in May 2020 after authorities in Mexico responded to a report of "a naked, hysterical woman desperately screaming for help" from the balcony of his apartment. The FBI and State Department subsequently launched a probe into his actions. During his sentencing, several of Raymond’s victims shared the traumatic impact of his actions. One woman said, “My body looks like a corpse on his bed,” recalling a photo of herself. "Now I have these nightmares of seeing myself dead." Raymond addressed the court, acknowledging his actions. "It betrayed everything I stand for, and I know no apology will ever be enough. There are no words to describe how sorry I am. That’s not who I am, and yet it’s who I became," he said. The C.I.A. issued a statement condemning Raymond’s actions, saying, “We take any allegations of sexual assault or sexual harassment extremely seriously and have taken significant steps to ensure we maintain a safe, inclusive, and respectful environment for our workforce. There is absolutely no excuse for Mr. Raymond’s reprehensible, appalling behavior.” In addition to the 30-year prison sentence, Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly ordered Raymond to be on supervised release for life and to pay $260,000 in restitution to his victims. He will also be required to register as a sex offender. Credit: NYT 2024-09-21

Sean ‘Diddy’ Combs, the once-revered hip-hop mogul, is now facing serious allegations as reports of wild sex parties, drug use, and troubling behavior surface. According to a former drug dealer, Diddy hosted notorious "freak off" parties at his mansion in the Hamptons, where he allegedly brought celebrities into an environment of sex, drugs, and secrecy. The dealer recalled one particular party where he delivered cocaine to the music icon, who greeted him at the door wearing nothing but a robe. What followed left the dealer in shock. “Weird sh–t was starting to happen. Celebrity guys f—ing each other. There were back bedrooms and it was like the inner sanctum,” the dealer told *The Post*. He described seeing well-known figures engaging in sexual acts, an experience that, in his words, made him lose respect for certain rappers. “You’d see two people you would not think would be hooking up, rappers, that was what shocked me,” he said, though he declined to name names. The partygoers, a mix of celebrities, female rappers, and sex workers, were reportedly high on ketamine and GHB. The dealer admitted that the unsettling scene led him to leave the party quickly. Despite these wild claims, the dealer noted that he did not witness Diddy participate in any sexual activity during the event. Diddy’s infamous Hamptons mansion, a 4,500-square-foot property, was known as the venue for his annual star-studded "White Parties." These events attracted some of the biggest names in Hollywood, including Leonardo DiCaprio, Mariah Carey, and Jay-Z. However, there is no evidence suggesting that any of these celebrities were involved or present on the night the drug dealer attended. The accusations against Diddy have come to the forefront due to a federal indictment unsealed this week. The indictment details that Diddy allegedly orchestrated elaborate sex performances, referred to as “freak offs,” where he "arranged, directed, masturbated during, and often electronically recorded" the acts. These charges are part of a three-count sex trafficking indictment. On Tuesday, Diddy pleaded not guilty but was denied bail twice, resulting in his continued detention in Manhattan. The federal indictment also accuses Combs of using various forms of coercion to control his victims, including physical violence, career promises, and financial manipulation. Additionally, Diddy allegedly supplied his victims with controlled substances as part of his efforts to maintain control over them. Diddy's legal troubles do not end there. Numerous individuals have come forward accusing him of sexual misconduct, including his former protégé, Cassie Ventura. Ventura filed a lawsuit against Diddy, which was settled out of court within 24 hours. Despite the settlement, Diddy has consistently denied any wrongdoing in that case. Beyond Ventura, other lawsuits have emerged, including one from producer Rodney ‘Lil’ Rod’ Jones, who worked on Diddy’s last album. In response to Jones’s claims, Diddy’s lawyers have remained steadfast in their defense, with one attorney stating, “We look forward to proving – in a court of law – that all of Mr. Jones’s claims are made-up and must be dismissed.” As Diddy faces mounting legal challenges and disturbing allegations, his reputation as one of the most influential figures in hip-hop has come under serious scrutiny. Whether or not these accusations will be proven in court remains to be seen, but the revelations have undoubtedly cast a dark shadow over his legacy. Credit: NYP 2024-09-21

Italy has taken a significant step toward the possible legalization of chemical castration as a treatment for convicted rapists and pedophiles. On Wednesday, Members of Parliament (MPs) approved the creation of a committee to draft legislation on administering androgen-blocking drugs to violent sex offenders. The treatment is aimed at reducing the risk of reoffending and would be designed to be both consensual and reversible. Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni's right-wing government has made a firm stance on law and order a key focus of its administration since taking office in 2022. Over the past year, Meloni’s coalition has introduced new criminal offenses and strengthened penalties across various crimes. Meloni, who has personally spearheaded the redevelopment of Caivano, a deprived town near Naples, declared security as her priority for the coming months. Caivano became a symbol of criminality and social decay following the high-profile gang rape of two young cousins, a crime for which five people were convicted. The far-right League party, a member of Meloni’s coalition, has made the introduction of chemical castration a central pillar of its platform, particularly targeting sex offenders such as rapists and pedophiles. Under the League's proposals, convicted sex offenders could opt for hormone-blocking treatments in exchange for a suspended sentence. League leader Matteo Salvini hailed the advancement of the proposal, expressing his approval by writing, "Victory for the League!... Good. Another important step forward for our historic battle for justice and common sense: zero tolerance for rapists and pedophiles.” However, opposition voices strongly criticized the proposal. Simona Bonafè, an MP from the opposition Democratic Party, called the move unconstitutional and stated that it “undermines the foundation of our legal system that has overcome the use of corporal punishment for centuries.” Similarly, the Green and Left Alliance condemned what it called the League’s “endless vocation for repression.” Italia Viva’s Enrico Borghi added sarcastically on social media, "What’s next? Tar and feathers, or rope and soap?" Chemical castration involves administering drugs to inhibit the production of testosterone, which decreases sexual desire. While some countries such as Russia, Poland, and certain U.S. states allow the procedure for specific crimes, concerns remain about its effectiveness in preventing repeat offenses. Experts have also warned of the potential for both physical and psychological side effects. Feminist groups further argue that violent sexual crimes stem from cultural factors, not uncontrollable sexual urges. Interestingly, Italy’s current Justice Minister, Carlo Nordio, who now serves under Meloni’s government, opposed similar measures in 2019, describing them as “a return to medieval times.” Despite the controversial nature of the proposal, Italy's government seems determined to press forward, bringing the debate over chemical castration into the center of its justice reform efforts. Credit: Politico 2024-09-21

The Harris-Walz campaign is on track to set a new precedent in modern U.S. politics by engaging in fewer interviews and press conferences than any other major party presidential ticket. This approach, characterized by limited media interaction, has raised questions about their strategy, especially as many voters express a desire to know more about Vice President Kamala Harris and her running mate, Minnesota Governor Tim Walz. Despite the significance of this election cycle and the sudden withdrawal of President Biden from the race on July 21, Harris and Walz have avoided the media spotlight. Harris, a candidate for 59 days, and Walz, for 44 days, have held only a handful of interviews in contrast to their Republican counterparts, Donald Trump and JD Vance. Trump and Vance have taken part in over 70 interviews and press conferences during the same period, whereas Harris and Walz have participated in just seven, according to an analysis by Axios. While Trump and Vance's media appearances have included interviews with both local TV stations and national outlets, Harris and Walz have stayed largely out of sight. For instance, in local TV interviews since July 21, Trump has done seven, Vance 15, while Harris and Walz have only managed one and three, respectively. In terms of national TV interviews, Vance alone has taken part in 24, compared to Harris and Walz’s one each. Moreover, neither Harris nor Walz have held a single press conference, a stark contrast to Trump’s three and Vance’s 12. The avoidance of the press is a dramatic shift in tactics, especially for Walz, who was previously known for his media accessibility. As governor of Minnesota, he was a frequent presence in both local and national media, despite occasional gaffes or misstatements. However, since joining the Harris ticket, Walz has adopted a far more reserved approach. Journalists who traveled with him in early September observed that reporters were kept at least 10 feet away and that shouted questions were ignored. Harris has long maintained a distant relationship with the press, and her team appears to believe that reducing media appearances will limit negative moments. Harris' past interviews have sometimes led to unclear or flip remarks on key policies, which her campaign hopes to avoid by keeping her interactions with reporters to a minimum. The approach is not without precedent, as President Biden also limited his interviews during the pandemic in 2020, ultimately defeating Trump despite the restricted media presence. However, this strategy carries risks. Polls suggest that many voters still feel unfamiliar with Harris and Walz. An ABC poll conducted in mid-August, prior to the Democratic convention, revealed that nearly a third of voters had no opinion of Walz. The lack of media appearances could prevent the Harris-Walz campaign from addressing this gap in voter awareness, leaving their platform and policies less understood by the public. The Harris-Walz campaign has responded to criticisms of their media strategy by pointing out that they have been interviewed by various outlets and have participated in events like Harris' appearance at the National Association of Black Journalists. In a statement, the campaign emphasized that, in these settings, both candidates answer "tough questions" on the critical issues facing Americans in the upcoming election. While this defensive posture may shield Harris and Walz from negative press, it also leaves their opponents with a greater share of media attention. Trump and Vance, despite their frequent controversial statements, have remained highly visible to voters. Vance, for example, has had to defend inflammatory comments, including a widely criticized remark about "childless cat ladies" and spreading unverified rumors about immigrants in Ohio. Yet, even with this negative attention, their frequent interviews keep them in the public eye. Ultimately, the Harris-Walz campaign is betting that avoiding the press while running out the clock to Election Day will be more beneficial than potentially exposing themselves to blunders or controversies during interviews. But this strategy is not without potential pitfalls, especially in an era where voters increasingly want transparency and direct access to their leaders. As Election Day approaches, the question remains whether limiting press access will prove to be a winning tactic or if it will leave voters feeling more disconnected from Harris and Walz. For now, the campaign seems determined to stick with their approach, despite frustrations from journalists and growing calls for more openness from the public. Credit: AXIOS 2024-09-21

Sir Keir Starmer has firmly denied losing control of his government, even as tensions flare within Downing Street regarding Sue Gray's salary. The Prime Minister was compelled to defend his leadership after the revelation of Gray's £170,000 salary, which surpasses his own, sparked internal discord. The leak, seemingly from Whitehall, has raised suspicions of a politically motivated attempt to undermine Gray. Efforts are now underway to trace the source of the leak, as frustrations surrounding Gray's role as Starmer’s chief of staff mount. Gray, known for overseeing the "partygate" investigation into former Prime Minister Boris Johnson, has become a lightning rod for discontent among Labour advisers. The controversy threatens to cast a shadow over Labour's upcoming conference in Liverpool, the first in 15 years with the party in power rather than opposition. The conference, originally intended as a moment of celebration following Labour’s election victory, now risks being overshadowed by the internal strife surrounding Gray's salary and broader criticisms of Starmer's leadership. In a series of regional interviews ahead of the conference, Starmer was confronted with direct questions about his control over the situation and whether he had "lost grip" of his government. "I’m completely in control," Starmer stated. "I’m focused, and every day the message from me to the team is exactly the same: we have to deliver. We were elected on a big mandate to deliver change, and I am determined that we are going to do that." Pressed further on Gray’s salary, Starmer refused to engage in discussions about individual pay. "I’m not going to get into discussions about individual salaries of any members of my staff. I’m sure you wouldn’t expect me to," he responded to the BBC. However, concerns persist, particularly given that Gray’s pay was reportedly agreed upon outside formal procedures, raising questions about who initially proposed the figure. Signs of growing dissatisfaction within Starmer's team have emerged, with some advisers on lower salaries expressing frustration. One Labour adviser remarked, "Sue is seen as the driver behind a clampdown on both overall Spad [special adviser] numbers and pay, so there was a great deal of surprise when it emerged she was setting records for her own pay." This frustration has fueled calls for Starmer to take decisive action, with one ally urging him to "read the f------ riot act" to prevent further leaks. The situation has even led to speculation about future departures from the government. Simon Case, Britain’s top civil servant, is rumored to be preparing to resign following the conference season, with sources citing his strained relationship with Gray as a potential contributing factor. Beyond the Gray controversy, Starmer has faced scrutiny over his acceptance of donations and gifts, including more than £100,000 worth of free tickets and personal items since 2019. Defending his actions, the Prime Minister cited security concerns as the reason for accepting corporate tickets to Arsenal football matches, saying, "Since I’ve been Prime Minister, the security advice is don’t go in the stands, not least because it’ll cost a fortune to the taxpayer." However, critics have noted that Starmer received numerous free tickets during his tenure as opposition leader, before security concerns were a significant issue. Starmer has also defended donations for clothing and glasses, declaring, "The important thing in all of this is that we follow the rules, which is really important to me, and make the declarations so that everything is transparent." While some of Starmer’s supporters, like Baroness Harman, have suggested he could have handled the donations issue more gracefully, Harman acknowledged that it was "not a hanging offence." Instead, she proposed Starmer admit it was a misstep and move on. Amid all these controversies, Starmer has also acknowledged the difficulties faced by the NHS in Wales, which is under Labour control, describing the system as in "desperate" need of reform. With record-high waiting lists and persistently poor health outcomes, Starmer's comments reflect the challenges his party faces in delivering the change it promised during the election. As tensions over Sue Gray's salary, leadership questions, and donations persist, Starmer’s ability to steer his government through these crises will be tested, particularly as the Labour Party conference approaches. In his own words, however, Starmer remains confident: "I’m completely in control." Credit: Daily Telegraph 2024-09-21

Every day, Vladimir Putin’s forces launch relentless attacks on Ukrainian cities, targeting civilians and critical infrastructure, particularly as winter approaches. In response, Ukraine has proposed a logical and legally defensible course of action: it wants to use Western-supplied missiles to hit military targets in Russia—the very locations from which these devastating attacks originate. However, the United States, Ukraine’s most significant military supporter, has consistently denied this request, despite its legality and proportionality. Since the start of the conflict, the West has provided over $200 billion in aid, including weapons and financial support, to help Ukraine defend itself from Russian aggression, with another $100 billion expected. While this support has been vital, there has been a frustrating pattern. Time and again, Ukraine’s allies have delayed providing critical military equipment. Initially, they hesitated to supply tanks, then missiles, followed by anti-missile batteries, and more recently, fighter jets. As one Ukrainian front-line commander told *The Economist* during the summer, “They give us enough to survive, but not enough to win.” Next week, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky will meet U.S. President Joe Biden, where he is expected to renew his plea for permission to target Russian military positions directly. Both Britain and France have allowed their missiles, such as the Storm Shadow and SCALP, to be used against these targets. However, these weapons rely on American technology, and Washington has so far exercised a veto on their use in Russian territory. Germany has followed America’s lead, refusing to provide its own Taurus missiles. But Zelensky’s most urgent request is for permission to use the U.S.-supplied ATACMS missiles, which have a longer range and would provide Ukraine with a much-needed strategic advantage. While the Biden administration has expressed concerns over escalation, this fear is misplaced. Putin has threatened severe consequences if American missiles are used to strike Russian soil, claiming it would be equivalent to NATO entering the war. However, Russia is already pushing its offensive in Ukraine to the limits, short of deploying nuclear weapons. The real threat may lie in Russia retaliating by supporting adversarial forces in other regions, such as Iran or the Houthis, which could destabilize areas outside the immediate conflict. The West’s caution, particularly that of Biden and Germany’s Chancellor Olaf Scholz, only emboldens Putin. By holding back military capabilities, they inadvertently signal weakness and division within NATO. Putin sees these cracks and likely concludes that the West is tiring of the war and may soon seek a compromise. Peace talks might indeed begin, perhaps spurred by the U.S. election cycle, but to strengthen Ukraine’s position in such discussions, the West needs to fully back Zelensky’s efforts now. Allowing Ukraine to hit military targets inside Russia is not about expanding the war; it is about leveling the playing field and giving Ukraine the tools to defend itself. Restricting Ukraine's capabilities only rewards Russian recklessness and continues to put Ukrainian lives and sovereignty at risk. Mr. Biden’s reluctance to fully arm Ukraine for victory is a strategic miscalculation, one that should be urgently reconsidered. Credit: Economist 2024-09-21