Social Media

In her final days at Balmoral, Queen Elizabeth II reportedly made a humorous comment about Boris Johnson’s departure as prime minister, remarking, "at least I won’t have that idiot organising my funeral now." This claim appears in Tim Shipman’s new book, *Out*, a political history that delves into the post-Brexit era. According to Shipman, the late Queen made this remark to amuse her family and close aides just two days before her passing, following her appointment of Liz Truss as her 15th and final prime minister. Shipman writes that Queen Elizabeth, known for her dignified and diplomatic public persona, showed a lighter side among family and close confidants, remarking on Johnson’s theatrical nature, calling him “perhaps better suited to the stage.” However, some sources close to the Queen have expressed doubt about the authenticity of these words, noting that it was unlikely she would misunderstand the role of the Earl Marshal, who oversees royal funerals. Buckingham Palace has declined to comment on these claims. The author sheds light on the Queen’s overall reaction to Johnson, describing her as having taken his political missteps in stride. When Johnson prorogued Parliament in 2019, a move that caused significant controversy, Shipman writes that Queen Elizabeth viewed him as a “roguish and comic figure,” handling the situation with calm acceptance. “One senior royal aide characterized her approach as, ‘These things happen,’” Shipman claims. This level-headed reaction stood in stark contrast to other royals’ views; Shipman reports that then-Prince Charles was “absolutely furious” over Johnson’s actions and was “outraged that Boris should treat the Queen like that.” Prince William’s aides also reportedly indicated that when he becomes king, there will be “more private, robust challenging of advice” between him and his prime ministers. The book also discusses an alleged interaction between Johnson and King Charles regarding the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting, during which the future king reportedly wanted to acknowledge the history of slavery. Shipman writes that Johnson, who had little patience for what he saw as “woke” culture, advised, “I wouldn’t talk about slavery if I were you, or you’ll end up having to sell the Duchy of Cornwall to pay reparations to the people who built the Duchy of Cornwall.” Shipman’s *Out*, published by HarperCollins and set to release on November 21, offers insight into the personal dynamics and occasional frictions between the Queen and her former prime ministers, particularly Johnson. It portrays the Queen as graciously enduring political turbulence, occasionally using humor to cope with the weight of her role, even in her final days. Based on a report by Daily Telegraph 2024-11-12

Metropolitan Police Sergeant Martyn Blake, recently cleared of murdering 24-year-old Chris Kaba, is now expected to be promoted to the rank of inspector. The promotion comes as the Met moves forward after Blake’s criminal trial concluded with his acquittal last month. However, the 40-year-old officer, a father of two, may still face a gross misconduct investigation related to the fatal shooting of Kaba in Streatham, South London, in 2022. The case against Sgt Blake centered around his decision to open fire on Kaba, a known member of the "67 Gang," as he attempted to evade police in an Audi that was reportedly linked to two gangland shootings. Blake testified in the Old Bailey trial that he acted out of fear for his colleagues’ safety, believing that Kaba's attempt to ram his way out posed a serious threat. The jury reached its verdict swiftly, acquitting Sgt Blake of murder after just three hours of deliberation. His acquittal marks a significant step in his career, which had been placed on hold as he awaited the outcome of the trial. Sgt Blake, who had passed his inspector’s exams shortly before the shooting, is expected to move from the firearms unit to another division of the Metropolitan Police Service if the promotion proceeds. Former Chief Superintendent Simon Ovens expressed support for the decision, noting that the promotion was “properly delayed until the outcome of the criminal trial.” With that behind him, Ovens suggested that Blake’s promotion should not be hindered further by the misconduct review, especially given the rigorous court scrutiny the evidence had already undergone. “Considering the evidence has been scrutinised in court, the misconduct review should not hold up his promotion,” Ovens stated, adding that it is unlikely Blake would face dismissal in any subsequent disciplinary hearings. He emphasized that the Met’s support of Blake signifies the organization’s confidence in his actions and capabilities. The Metropolitan Police has responded cautiously to inquiries about Blake’s anticipated promotion, stating, “Any query of this nature relates to personal information about an officer’s potential career intentions and is not something we’d discuss. Sgt Blake is entitled to the same level of privacy.” Blake had been suspended for more than two years since the incident, which left Kaba, a figure associated with the London gang scene, fatally wounded after Blake fired through the windscreen of the Audi. The controversial case drew considerable attention due to Kaba’s background and the high-stakes nature of the armed standoff. Now, with the criminal case behind him, Sgt Blake is positioned to resume his career, pending the outcome of any potential misconduct investigation. As the Metropolitan Police grapples with this sensitive case and the decision to promote Blake, it highlights broader issues of accountability, transparency, and trust within the force and its dealings with complex and high-risk incidents. Based on a report by Daily Telegraph 2024-11-12

In a terrifying incident caught on video, a masked man attempted to grab a six-year-old Hasidic Jewish boy from his father's arms in broad daylight as they walked along a busy Brooklyn sidewalk. The video, which has since circulated widely online, shows the father walking hand-in-hand with his two young sons at approximately 3:30 p.m. on Saturday in Crown Heights. Suddenly, a man in a blue and white letterman jacket appears, swiftly reaching for the young boy. Yaacov Behrman, a spokesperson for Chabad PR, expressed the community's alarm, stating, “This video is shocking.” He went on to emphasize, “Something is clearly going on in Crown Heights—there have been incident after incident over the past two weeks.” Crown Heights, known for its large ultra-Orthodox Jewish population, has unfortunately seen similar attacks in recent times. In August, another Jewish man, Yechiel Dabrowskin, was assaulted in an unprovoked incident. Dabrowskin was stabbed in the stomach by Vincent Sumpter, who reportedly shouted “Free Palestine” before the violent attack. Dabrowskin suffered internal injuries as a result, and Sumpter was later arrested with bail set at $100,000. Incidents like these have heightened tensions and raised questions about safety and security in this vibrant, historically Jewish neighborhood. While the recent attack ended without physical harm, the emotional impact on the family and the community is profound. Based on a report by NYP 2024-11-12

In a show of solidarity with Britain’s farmers, Jeremy Clarkson is set to join a large-scale protest on November 19 aimed at reversing new government inheritance tax rules on agricultural estates. The former *Top Gear* presenter and star of *Clarkson’s Farm* has become an unexpected advocate for the farming community and is in discussions to address a crowd of thousands expected to converge on Westminster for the demonstration. The protest, dubbed the “tractor tax” rally, was sparked by Chancellor Rachel Reeves’ recent budget announcement. Under the new rules, agricultural estates worth more than £1 million will no longer qualify for full inheritance tax exemptions, with a 20% tax slated to take effect in April 2026. Labour introduced this tax to prevent wealthy investors from using farmland as a tax haven. However, many farmers argue the policy unfairly impacts families who have owned and worked their farms for generations, fearing they may be forced to sell their land due to the new tax burden. Clarkson, who has chronicled his own experiences managing a 1,000-acre farm in Chipping Norton on his Amazon Prime series *Clarkson’s Farm*, was vocal in his criticism of the policy shortly after it was announced. Writing on X (formerly Twitter), he expressed his frustration, saying, “Farmers. I know that you have been shafted today. But please don’t despair. Just look after yourselves for five short years and this shower will be gone.” His involvement in the upcoming rally is expected to amplify the voices of farmers who feel betrayed by the policy change. In addition to the demonstration in Parliament Square, another event, organized by the National Farmers’ Union (NFU), will be held on the same day at Church House in Westminster. This separate gathering will focus on lobbying Labour MPs and encouraging discussions with members who represent rural constituencies. With over 100 Labour MPs now representing rural areas following the recent election, the NFU hopes to rally enough support to convince the government to reverse the inheritance tax changes or introduce modifications that better protect small and family-owned farms. While the NFU isn’t directly organizing the Westminster rally, the union has publicly expressed support for the protest. Organizers of the rally, which will include a march through Westminster and speeches in Parliament Square, have made it clear that they want the focus to remain on the impact of the tax change on farmers and their families, avoiding political point-scoring. Tory MPs, already vocal in their opposition to the tax, have cited reports that some farmers are even considering boycotting UK ports as evidence of the intense dissatisfaction within agricultural communities. Many believe the change will place an insurmountable financial burden on families with little income but significant land assets, forcing them into decisions that could undermine the future of their farms. Clarkson’s presence at the rally underscores the frustration felt by many in the farming community. Known for his outspoken personality, Clarkson has become an unexpected yet powerful voice for farmers through his television series, where he highlights the challenges of running a farm amid changing economic and environmental conditions. The rally on November 19 promises to draw attention to the fears of countless British farmers who are determined to preserve their land and livelihoods from what they see as punitive new regulations. As the government faces mounting pressure, it remains to be seen whether the voices of farmers, amplified by prominent advocates like Clarkson, will be enough to prompt a re-evaluation of the tax policy. For now, the upcoming protest represents a collective stand by Britain’s agricultural community, united in their fight to protect their future against the perceived injustice of the new inheritance tax. Based on a report by Daily Telegraph 2024-11-12

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have delivered a powerful message to the United Nations, urging immediate action to end violence against children. Appearing together in a joint video address to a conference in Colombia on Friday, November 8, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex spoke out on the need to prioritize child safety, particularly in the digital realm. In the video, Harry underscored the gravity of the issue, stating, "We are at a crossroads." He emphasized that the time has come to "reassess and redefine our approach to protecting children," pointing to the increased urgency around keeping young people safe in an ever-evolving digital world. Meghan echoed Harry's sentiments, acknowledging both the benefits and challenges brought by today’s interconnected age. "My husband and I recognize that today’s reality is marked by greater connectivity and advanced technology which, of course, has many positives. However, it also compels us to better understand how digital violence against children is manifesting itself in this age," she said. Their message comes amid growing global concerns over online threats to children, such as cyberbullying, exploitation, and exposure to harmful content. By speaking directly to the United Nations, Harry and Meghan add their voices to a broader movement calling for comprehensive action to make the digital world a safer place for children everywhere. Based on a report by the Independent 2024-11-12

Carrdus School, a well-regarded preparatory school in Oxfordshire and a part of the Tudor Hall school network, has announced it will close its doors in the coming spring unless a buyer is found. The decision, which has left parents and faculty in shock, comes in response to financial pressures brought on by new government tax policies affecting private schools. The Chair of Governors at Tudor Hall, Alison Darling, explained in a letter to parents that reduced enrollment at Carrdus, driven by recent changes in VAT policies on school fees, as well as increased National Insurance contributions, made it financially unsustainable for Tudor Hall to continue funding the school. Darling wrote, “You will know only too well that the introduction of VAT on independent school fees has put a great deal of pressure on parents and schools.” She further criticized the government's decision not to delay the implementation of a 20% VAT on private school fees, which was enacted in January despite strong opposition. “Despite the support of our professional associations in lobbying the Government in recent months, the Government has not responded to the call to reconsider its policy nor, even, to delay implementation until September 2025,” she stated. This timing has put many private schools under intense financial strain, particularly those with already declining enrollment rates. The letter outlined how the new VAT on fees prompted many parents to withdraw their children from Carrdus, either at the end of the autumn term or the academic year. Darling added, “The combination of VAT across both schools, further compounded by the increase in employers’ National Insurance contributions, and the Carrdus pupil roll falling further below a sustainable number, means that Tudor Hall is no longer able to make the substantial financial commitment to Carrdus School that is required.” The Good Schools Guide, a respected directory for independent schools, has described Carrdus as a "gem," recognizing the school’s excellence in educating over 100 boys and girls between the ages of 3 and 11. However, it now joins a growing list of private schools facing closure due to enrollment declines linked to VAT and other rising operational costs. This recent development comes amid broader concerns that such tax policies could lead to an exodus of students from the private sector into the already stretched state school system. Warnings from industry experts suggest that tens of thousands of students could soon flood state schools, raising questions about how prepared these institutions are to accommodate the potential influx. Based on a report by Daily Mail 2024-11-12

In a significant show of military might, the United States appears to have stationed nuclear-capable bombers at an air base in Qatar, a move aimed at deterring Iran amid ongoing regional tensions. Satellite images shared by Hans Kristensen, director of the Nuclear Information Project at the Federation of American Scientists, show six B-52H Stratofortress bombers at Al Udeid Air Base in Qatar. The images, provided by California-based Planet Labs and posted by Kristensen on X (formerly Twitter), indicate that at least five of the six bombers have the capability to carry nuclear weapons, though they are not currently equipped with them. The B-52H Stratofortress is one of the two types of American bombers capable of deploying nuclear weapons. The U.S. Air Force operates a fleet of 76 Stratofortress bombers, 46 of which are configured to carry the AGM-86B nuclear air-launched cruise missile, boasting a range of over 1,500 miles. In addition to the B-52H, the U.S. possesses a fleet of 19 B-2 Spirit bombers, which can deploy nuclear gravity bombs. Together, these nuclear-capable aircraft form a critical part of the U.S. nuclear triad, a three-pronged strategy that includes land-based intercontinental ballistic missiles, submarine-launched ballistic missiles, and strategic bombers. In January, CNN reported that the U.S. had extended its agreement with Qatar to continue operations at Al Udeid Air Base, the largest American military installation in the Middle East, for another ten years. Located southwest of Doha, the base plays a pivotal role in the U.S. military’s global strategic flexibility. The Pentagon underscored that the U.S. can rapidly deploy forces worldwide to address “evolving national security threats” and issued a warning to Iran and its allies, cautioning against any potential attacks on American personnel or interests in the region. Based on a report by Newsweek 2024-11-11

Concerns are escalating within the UK’s armed forces as military families, advocacy groups, and defense insiders warn that the government’s decision to apply VAT to private school fees could have a severe impact on personnel retention. This potential crisis comes amid concerns that military families will be faced with tough financial decisions, leading to further losses in experienced personnel unless exemptions are granted. A source close to the military revealed to Sky News that frustration has been growing internally over what has been termed a “damaging” policy. The recent budget announcement by the Chancellor, Rachel Reeves, left many feeling the government had not done enough to shield military families from this additional financial burden. Though a small increase in the Ministry of Defence’s (MoD) Continuity of Education Allowance (CEA) was proposed to help offset these costs, many families argue it falls far short of what’s needed. Without a substantial revision to the policy, military insiders warn that highly trained officers and enlisted personnel could leave in significant numbers. “I will have to leave military service, as I will not inflict another school move on my child,” said one soldier, speaking anonymously. He added, “On one side, the chancellor wore a poppy during her budget announcement, and then proceeded to deal a damaging blow to members of His Majesty's Armed Forces by not including a simple exemption.” The strain is also felt deeply by military spouses, who often bear the weight of maintaining family stability amid the demands of mobile service life. One army spouse, who wished to remain anonymous to protect her husband’s service status, expressed her frustrations to Sky News: “This is people's children. This is people's money in their pocket.” She explained that with the added costs from VAT, even military families’ loyalty may waver if a civilian job becomes available: “If there is a nice job offer outside the military… that is going to look way, way more attractive than it did a few months ago. The army is in a recruitment and retention crisis, so why would you do something like this?” The Army Families Federation, a UK charity advocating for service members and their families, also weighed in on the issue. The federation reported that nearly 70% of families who shared feedback expressed that without any protection from this VAT burden, they would seriously consider leaving the armed forces. Military life often necessitates frequent relocations within the UK and abroad, forcing service families to uproot and resettle every few years. To minimize the educational disruption for their children, many parents choose private or boarding schools to give their children a stable learning environment. Over 2,000 military personnel, most of whom are in the army, rely on the CEA provided by the MoD, which covers up to 90% of school tuition fees. However, even with the MoD’s help, families are responsible for a minimum of 10% of the cost—an amount that can still reach tens of thousands of pounds per year. With VAT added to this out-of-pocket expense, families could be facing even greater financial strain. For those serving abroad, pulling a child from school mid-year due to affordability issues could become an unavoidable yet devastating outcome. Additionally, there are many military families who do not qualify for the MoD’s education allowance, which has strict eligibility requirements, but still decide to send their children to boarding schools. These families, too, will now have to bear the full cost of the VAT. Shadow Defence Secretary James Cartlidge has highlighted the extent of the issue after receiving numerous messages from impacted families. “The emails I've had are saying: I’ve got to choose between my child and serving my country,” Cartlidge said. “The government really needs to respond to this quickly.” A Ministry of Defence spokesperson responded, saying, “We greatly value the contribution of our serving personnel and we provide the Continuity of Education Allowance to ensure that the need for the mobility of service personnel does not interfere with the education of their children.” The MoD spokesperson added that despite the VAT changes, the MoD plans to maintain its commitment by continuing to cover up to 90% of private school fees through updated cap rates. As families and advocates await further action, the pressure on the government to address the unintended consequences of this policy continues to mount. Failure to provide a solution could mean that skilled personnel, pushed to their financial limits, may ultimately choose family stability over their military careers, impacting both retention rates and national security. Based on a report by Sky News 2024-11-11

Donald Trump has secured a sweeping electoral victory, clinching the White House by flipping all seven key battleground states, including Arizona and Nevada. The announcement of Arizona's shift to a Republican majority on Saturday evening marked a significant milestone in Trump’s remarkable electoral comeback, as he garnered all 11 of the state's Electoral Votes. This swing from 2020, when Arizona supported Joe Biden, contributed to Trump's substantial Electoral College total of 312, compared to Vice President Kamala Harris's 226. In Arizona, the Trump campaign found significant traction among voters frustrated with border issues, as many voiced dissatisfaction over the migrant crisis. Trump’s hardline immigration stance resonated with the state’s voters, many of whom echoed his concerns. His recent rally at Arizona State University in Tempe underscored his uncompromising position on illegal immigration. He passionately declared, “It’s the first time I have ever said that and every time I get up and talk about what they’ve done to our country I get angrier and angrier.” He condemned current policies as turning America into “a dumping ground” and “a garbage can for the world.” Politico reports that Trump’s sweeping wins extended across Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. In Nevada, Trump took all six of the state’s Electoral College votes with a decisive 51% to 47% margin over the Democrats. This marked the first Republican presidential victory in Nevada in 20 years, the last being George W. Bush’s success. Trump's campaign efforts in Nevada similarly highlighted issues of national security and border control, key concerns for the state's voters. Trump’s victories also imply significant shifts in federal governance. With Republicans expected to hold majorities in both the Senate and the House, along with a strong conservative presence on the U.S. Supreme Court, Trump could wield considerable influence over American policy as he re-enters office. Based on a report by Daily Beast 2024-11-11

One of the most alarming prospects is the potential role Robert F. Kennedy Jr. (RFK Jr.) could play in the Trump administration's handling of public health. After abandoning his own bid for the presidency, RFK Jr. threw his support behind Donald Trump, helping to fuel his campaign with the promise of significant influence in shaping U.S. health policy. Trump has openly stated that he intends to give Kennedy a “big role” in guiding health initiatives, enabling him to make sweeping changes in areas like food, medicine, and public health. This could have disastrous consequences—not only for the United States but for global health as well. The implications of Kennedy's potential role are wide-ranging. For one, his rhetoric about returning health agencies to a “gold-standard, evidence-based science” is at odds with his history of spreading unproven treatments and rejecting established medical knowledge. In the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic, both Trump and Kennedy promoted unverified treatments like hydroxychloroquine, which has since been proven harmful to many patients. RFK Jr. is also well known for his crusade against fluoride in drinking water—a substance that has played a major role in reducing tooth decay in the U.S. and around the world. His anti-fluoride stance has gained traction among a vocal minority, and should he gain power, he may attempt to roll back fluoridation programs, undermining one of the most significant public health achievements in history. The potential for such a rollback of public health protections is alarming. If Kennedy's influence expands, outbreaks of preventable diseases like measles could rise, especially as vaccine hesitancy grows. His legacy, framed under the banner of “Make America Healthy Again,” could in fact leave the U.S. with a sicker, more vulnerable population. The impact wouldn’t be limited to the U.S. alone. In 2019, Kennedy’s anti-vaccine organization visited Samoa, where a misinformation campaign about the safety of the measles vaccine led to a catastrophic outbreak, killing 83 people. His insistence that a defective vaccine caused the deaths was disproven, but the damage had already been done, with vaccination rates in the country plummeting to just 31%. This is just one example of the global ripple effect that RFK Jr.'s dangerous influence can have. The Trump administration's embrace of Kennedy as a health czar raises troubling questions about the future of public health worldwide. If Kennedy, who has openly criticized the rapid development of COVID vaccines, were to hold a position of power during a future pandemic, the U.S. would likely be much less prepared to respond. The success of Operation Warp Speed, which led to the rapid development of vaccines during the COVID-19 pandemic, would be unlikely to repeat itself if Kennedy were in charge. Ultimately, the health of Americans—and the world—could be at risk. With a distorted reality based on misinformation, RFK Jr.’s rise to power would signal a dangerous departure from scientific consensus, and his policies could lead to the erosion of vital health protections. The risk of increased vaccine-preventable diseases, reduced access to safe medicines, and the spread of dangerous pseudoscience could have long-lasting consequences for global health, far beyond the borders of the United States. Based on a report by The Conversation 2024-11-11

In a move that has sparked widespread outrage, Iraq’s conservative Shia Muslim political factions are pushing a new law that would drastically lower the age of consent for girls, from 18 to just nine. This proposed amendment, if passed, would not only allow men to marry young girls but also strip women of basic rights such as divorce, child custody, and inheritance. The law in question, known as Law 188, was originally introduced in 1959 and is seen as a progressive piece of legislation in the Middle East. It established a set of rules that governed family matters across Iraq, regardless of sect or religious affiliation. But now, under the influence of conservative Shia factions, Iraq’s parliament is on the verge of repealing this landmark law in favor of an amendment that aligns with a strict interpretation of Islamic law. The proposed changes are chilling, particularly for Iraq’s women and girls. The age of consent would be slashed, allowing men to marry girls as young as nine—a move that is being framed as a means to protect “young girls” from “immoral relationships.” Furthermore, the amendment would erase women’s rights to divorce, child custody, and inheritance, essentially placing women under the control of their male relatives. Dr. Renad Mansour, a senior fellow at Chatham House, noted that this is the closest the amendment has come to passing, citing the significant political backing from Shia Islamist parties. "It has more momentum than it's ever had, primarily because of the Shia parties," Mansour explained, emphasizing how these groups are seeking to consolidate their power and regain legitimacy by pushing for the amendment. If passed, the law would be a devastating blow to Iraq’s social fabric. Human rights experts, such as Sarah Sanbar of Human Rights Watch, warn that the amendment would not merely undermine the rights of women but would actively erase them. These changes would further entrench a system where women are denied access to education, health care, and financial independence. Athraa Al-Hassan, an international human rights legal adviser, expressed concern that this shift could pave the way for Iraq to adopt the Guardianship of the Jurist system—a form of religious rule that places supreme authority in the hands of a religious leader, similar to the system in place in Iran. Al-Hassan fears that such a change would not only harm women but could also destabilize Iraq’s already fragile governance. Already, child marriage is a significant issue in Iraq, with some 28% of women married by the age of 18, according to the United Nations Children’s Fund. A loophole in the current personal status law allows religious leaders, rather than the courts, to officiate marriages, some involving girls as young as 15. This practice often leaves these girls in marriages that are unrecognized by the state, denying them a range of legal protections, including health care access and rights to inheritance. The new amendment would legitimize these religious marriages, exposing young girls to even greater risks of physical and sexual violence. It would also make it more difficult for women to escape abusive situations or pursue opportunities for education and employment. The impact of the proposed amendments goes beyond women’s rights, with fears that they could deepen Iraq’s sectarian divides. While the law would offer citizens the option to choose between secular or religious legal systems, it would also prioritize the sect of the husband in cases of dispute, stripping women of their agency and reinforcing patriarchal control. Protests have already erupted across Iraq, with activists calling out the government for attempting to legalize child marriage and institutionalize gender inequality. One such activist, Al-Hassan, condemned the proposal as a "very dangerous" infringement on Iraq's constitution and democratic principles, adding that it would set the country back decades in its quest for progress and equality. “Iraq is a civil state,” she argued. “We aspire to progress, not regress.” As Iraq faces this critical juncture, the battle for women’s rights and gender equality is intensifying. The outcome of this proposed law could determine the future of not only women’s freedoms but also the nation’s ability to heal from the divisions that have long plagued it. If passed, it would signal a significant retreat into a patriarchal, theocratic system that would jeopardize the rights of the most vulnerable members of Iraqi society. The world is watching to see whether Iraq will choose progress or regression. Based on a report by Daily Telegraph 2024-11-11

In the heart of Santiago, Chile's bustling capital, a small yet growing group of individuals has begun to challenge the longstanding dominance of Catholicism in the country's spiritual landscape. On a typical Friday night, a diverse group of 15 members of the Temple of Satan gathers in a downtown apartment, their gathering marked by the scent of incense, tobacco, and the glow of black candles flickering atop an altar adorned with symbolic chalices and knives. They are preparing for a ritual, one that does not invoke the worship of Satan as commonly imagined, but instead represents a rebellion against religious dogma and societal expectations. Five years after the Satanic Temple in the United States made headlines by securing legal recognition as a church, a similar movement is gaining momentum in Chile. Despite the country's deeply Catholic roots—about half of its 18 million citizens identify as Catholics—the Temple of Satan in Chile is pushing for government recognition as a legitimate religious entity. The request for official status comes amid a broader cultural shift in Chile, where many have lost faith in the Catholic Church, partly in the wake of ongoing sexual abuse scandals that have rocked the institution. Luis Bahamondes, a professor at the University of Chile's Center for Judaic Studies, explains that Chile's religious landscape is undergoing significant change. "These types of organizations now feel they have greater support to challenge what was virtually impossible before," he says. He notes that the Catholic Church, which historically held considerable influence over the nation’s politics, economics, and social norms, has lost much of its power and credibility. The Temple of Satan in Chile, while invoking the name of Satan, is not what one might expect from popular media portrayals of Satanism. The group, which has around 100 members, does not engage in ritualistic sacrifice or the worship of an evil deity. Instead, its members—who include professionals such as lawyers, psychologists, police officers, and firefighters—embrace Satanism as a philosophy of individualism, rationality, and personal freedom. They view the figure of Satan not as a supernatural being but as a symbol of defiance against oppressive traditions and authority. "You are the owner of your present and future, there is no God that makes decisions for you," says Haborym, a spokesperson for the Temple, as he walks through the General Cemetery of Santiago. The group’s rituals are designed to evoke emotions and foster a connection to the present moment, leaving aside intellectual constraints. Haborym emphasizes that Satan is not a figure they worship but one they use symbolically to represent human autonomy and freedom of thought. Despite its controversial name, the Temple of Satan in Chile is committed to principles that oppose many of the darker, more sensationalized aspects of Satanism depicted in films like *Rosemary’s Baby* or shows like *True Detective*. Modern Satanists, including those in Chile, are staunchly against animal cruelty and violence, particularly in the name of Satan. "We don’t want people killing in the name of Satan," Haborym asserts firmly. The process of becoming a member of the Temple of Satan in Chile is rigorous and includes background checks, interviews, and psychological evaluations to ensure applicants are aligned with the group’s values. Those accepted into the Temple are given the option to adopt a new name—often that of a demon or fallen angel—under which they will be known among fellow members. While the Chilean government has yet to decide whether it will officially recognize the Temple of Satan as a religious organization, the mere existence of the group has already sparked a broader conversation about faith, morality, and the role of religion in a rapidly changing society. The push for recognition reflects the core values of Satanic philosophy: a challenge to the status quo, a rejection of outdated traditions, and a call for greater freedom of thought and expression. "We comply with everything that is requested of us as a religious entity," says Haborym. "So there would be no reason to reject us beyond the fact that we’re a controversial figure." Whether or not the Temple of Satan in Chile receives legal recognition, its presence has undeniably opened a space for dialogue about the future of religion in a country where the traditional dominance of Catholicism is slowly, but surely, being questioned. Based on a report by ABC News 2024-11-11

In the unlikely arena of modern warfare, an unexpected weapon might emerge, one that could be a game changer in the event of a conflict between the West and China: online pornography. Recent reports from the front lines of the war in Ukraine, where North Korean soldiers are reportedly fighting alongside Russian forces, reveal a striking development: these soldiers, having lived in a strictly controlled society where pornography is banned, have become addicted to explicit material after being exposed to it for the first time. North Korea's strict control over its citizens' access to the internet has made such content virtually non-existent in the lives of its people. For the thousands of soldiers sent to Ukraine, their exposure to online pornography is a shock to their system. The initial reactions have been dramatic, with reports suggesting that these soldiers have become “hopelessly addicted” to the material. Once disciplined and focused, these men are now described as “drooling, glassy-eyed, good-for-nothing layabouts” after just a short period of immersion in this new, intoxicating world. The consequences of this shift in behavior could be far-reaching. These soldiers, who once followed orders with the precision of trained combatants, are now distracted and demoralized, unable to focus on their mission. It’s a shift that might seem trivial in isolation, but it could be part of a larger strategic opening for the West in the event of a broader military conflict with China, particularly if the Chinese military is similarly unprepared for such a distraction. Why is this important? The answer lies in China’s own censorship laws. Like North Korea, China restricts access to pornography. While Chinese soldiers may have some familiarity with explicit content through underground networks or black-market channels, the vast majority of them have not had widespread exposure. This presents a potential vulnerability. Should the West be faced with the daunting task of confronting China’s massive military, a strategic use of the material that has so thoroughly derailed the North Korean soldiers could offer an unconventional, but highly effective, edge. Imagine the scene: instead of bombing Chinese military installations, Western forces could deploy planes to drop old copies of magazines like *Penthouse* and *Razzle* onto Chinese military bases. While it may sound absurd, the idea is that these soldiers, unfamiliar with such material, would be entranced and distracted, unable to focus on the task at hand. The result? A significant weakening of morale, and with it, a tactical advantage. This strategy might seem ludicrous at first glance, but history has shown that the most unlikely solutions can sometimes prove effective. The magazine industry, once a thriving corner of Western pop culture, is now mostly a relic of the past, with publications like *FHM*, *Nuts*, and *Zoo* long gone. These magazines, often dismissed as crass and unworthy of attention, could now take on an entirely new role. If the West is truly up against a military power like China, and if warfare reaches the extremes of World War Three, these discarded magazines might just have the power to do what bombs cannot: destabilize an entire fighting force. It’s a curious thought, but perhaps it’s time to reconsider what truly constitutes a weapon in the modern world. In the right circumstances, even something as seemingly innocuous as a magazine could become a tool of warfare—one that, for all its absurdity, might just save the world. Based on a report by Daily Telegraph 2024-11-11

Donald Trump has made a pledge that, when returns to the White House, he will immediately restore the bust of Winston Churchill to its rightful place in the Oval Office as a tribute to the iconic British leader. The move would reverse a controversial decision made by President Joe Biden, who replaced the bronze bust of Churchill with one of Hispanic civil rights leader Cesar Chavez following his victory in 2020. Trump, a self-professed Anglophile with Scottish heritage, has long expressed his admiration for Churchill, often referring to him as his idol. A source close to the former president revealed that returning the bust of Churchill would be one of Trump's first acts upon taking office. "Donald idolizes Churchill and believes he’s the greatest leader the world has ever seen," the source said. "He will restore him to a position of honor as a mark of respect." Trump’s admiration for Churchill is no secret. He has called the film *The Darkest Hour*, in which Gary Oldman portrays Churchill, "my favorite film ever." The bronze bust of Churchill, crafted by renowned British sculptor Sir Jacob Epstein, was originally gifted to President Lyndon B. Johnson in 1965 by the Wartime Friends of Winston Churchill. It remained in the Oval Office until 2009 when Barack Obama replaced it with a bust of Martin Luther King Jr., a gesture that sparked criticism in the UK. Former British Prime Minister Boris Johnson, a biographer of Churchill, had famously described Obama’s decision as a sign of "an ancestral dislike of the British Empire." When Trump won the presidency in 2016, he immediately reinstated the Churchill bust, removing the statue of Martin Luther King Jr. in the process. Trump had condemned the Black Lives Matter protesters who defaced a statue of Churchill in London, calling their actions "shameful" and a disrespect to the man who "saved the world from the tyranny of Hitler." Trump’s commitment to Churchill goes beyond mere symbolism. During his first term, Trump formed a close bond with Churchill’s descendants, including the 12th Duke of Marlborough, whom Trump affectionately refers to as "The Dook." The two men became fast friends, with the Duke even visiting Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida in 2019. This new promise to bring back the bust of Churchill to the Oval Office is likely to draw mixed reactions. While it is seen as a symbol of the enduring bond between the United States and Britain, it also has the potential to stir political tensions. Foreign Secretary David Lammy, a vocal critic of Trump, once described him as a "deluded, dishonest, xenophobic narcissist," making it unclear whether the return of Churchill’s bust will ease relations between Trump and the UK’s Labour government. Despite these potential tensions, historians and public figures have praised Trump’s decision. Andrew Roberts, a renowned Churchill biographer, expressed approval, calling it "excellent news," though he urged Trump to back up the gesture with action. "This makes sense if President Trump also adopts Churchill’s policy of defiance against totalitarian regimes that invade their neighbors," Roberts said. Rory Stewart, a broadcaster and former Conservative MP, also welcomed the news, emphasizing the importance of maintaining a positive relationship between the UK and the U.S. "Whatever we all think of Donald Trump—and I am, to put it mildly, no fan—it’s very important for Britain that we retain a positive relationship with the President of the United States," Stewart remarked. "The U.S. remains the indispensable power in the world and the linchpin of the international order." Lord Michael Dobbs, author of the *House of Cards* trilogy, also expressed his support for Trump’s decision, noting Churchill’s American roots. "It’s a beautiful sculpture. Churchill himself was half-American—his mother was born in Brooklyn," Dobbs said. "He believed that the partnership between our two countries was the best guarantee of a safe world." Even Churchill’s grandson, Lord Nicholas Soames, shared his approval. "I am very glad, obviously. That’s lovely. I am delighted," Soames told the *Mail on Sunday*. The potential return of the Churchill bust to the Oval Office stands as a potent symbol of Trump’s enduring admiration for the British leader, one that could shape both the cultural and political dynamics of his second term in office, should he win the presidency once again. The move underscores the significance of U.S.-UK relations, even as it highlights the deep divisions within the political landscape. Based on a report by BBC 2024-11-11

A woman who alleges she was raped by Irish mixed martial arts star Conor McGregor in 2018 has faced intense cross-examination in a Dublin court, with defense lawyers accusing her of fabricating parts of her story. Nikita Hand, who is seeking civil damages from McGregor and another man, claims she was sexually assaulted by McGregor in a hotel room in December 2018. During her testimony, Hand described a harrowing encounter in which she says McGregor pinned her to a bed and raped her. The case, which has drawn considerable attention, saw Hand recount the trauma of the alleged assault, though her credibility came under close scrutiny as the defense raised inconsistencies in her statements. Hand's emotional testimony was followed by pointed cross-examination from Remy Farrell SC, the defense attorney representing McGregor. Farrell highlighted a key contradiction in Hand’s account: she had allegedly told her ex-partner that McGregor had threatened to kill her after the assault. However, when questioned, Hand struggled to recall whether McGregor had made such a threat. "You told your former partner that 'he told me he'd kill me'. That was a reference to McGregor, wasn't it?" Farrell asked. Hand confirmed the statement but then failed to substantiate the claim during subsequent police interviews or in court. "Is that something that happened or didn’t?" Farrell pressed. Hand’s response was unclear: "I can't remember." Further discrepancies were uncovered as the defense challenged Hand on statements she made about the events following the alleged assault. She had reportedly told her ex-partner she had taken a taxi with a friend after leaving the Beacon Hotel, where the attack supposedly took place. Hand admitted under cross-examination that this was untrue and that she had been alone in the taxi. She explained she had made the statement to reassure her ex-partner that she was okay, but Farrell suggested that these fabrications were part of a broader "web of lies" she had woven. "You were telling lies to your ex-partner and he was catching you out on some," Farrell remarked. Hand responded tearfully, explaining that she had been in a state of shock and distress after the alleged assault. "I was raped and battered a few hours before that, so my mind wasn’t perfect at the time," she said. "I didn’t care about anything at the time. All I cared about was my body and how hurt I was." Meanwhile, another aspect of the case involving James Lawrence, a co-defendant, was raised during the trial. Lawrence, who is accused of being involved in the events of that night, was implicated in the case primarily due to his own statements to police. Lawrence had reportedly told authorities in January 2019 that he and Hand had engaged in consensual sex. His defense lawyer, John Fitzgerald SC, further claimed that during the evening in question, McGregor and Hand were heard having "pleasurable" sex in the hotel room, while Lawrence and Hand’s friend were also engaged in sexual activity in the next room. Fitzgerald suggested that Hand was fully aware of what was happening with her friend and Lawrence, alleging that she had seen them together. "I think this is another made-up story," Hand responded firmly, denying Fitzgerald's assertions. The defense also questioned Hand's denial of having sex with Lawrence, who reportedly told police they had engaged in intercourse twice. "Lies," Hand declared, dismissing the claim as untrue. When asked directly by Fitzgerald, "You think he's lying about having sex with you?" she responded with a resolute "Absolutely." As the trial continues, the contrast between Hand's testimony and the defense’s claims has raised significant questions about the truth of her allegations. Hand’s emotional distress and contradictions in her statements have complicated the narrative of what transpired on that night in December 2018, as the court grapples with the complex and contentious nature of the case. The trial is set to continue as both sides prepare to present further evidence. Hand’s pursuit of civil damages remains at the heart of the legal battle, while McGregor and Lawrence continue to deny all allegations. Based on a report by BBC 2024-11-11

Rudy Giuliani, the former mayor of New York City and staunch ally of Donald Trump, is facing severe financial pressure following a defamation suit that has left him struggling to pay his bills. The legal battle, stemming from false claims Giuliani made about Georgia election workers after the 2020 election, has resulted in a staggering $148 million judgment against him. In response, the embattled former attorney has taken to social media, claiming that he is now too broke to afford basic necessities like food. In a post on X (formerly Twitter), Giuliani lamented his financial woes, accusing the Wilkie Farr Law firm and U.S. District Judge Lewis Liman of making it impossible for him to earn a living. “Wilkie Farr Law firm and Judge Liman are trying to inhibit me from making a living,” he wrote. “They seized my measly checking account so I can’t buy food. Help me fight.” Giuliani linked the post to a fundraising campaign hosted on GiveSendGo, a crowdfunding platform often associated with right-wing causes and, controversially, white nationalist movements. His appeal seemed to resonate with some supporters, as the campaign raised nearly $100,000 within just a few hours. The description of the fundraising campaign paints Giuliani as a victim of a political and legal system bent on persecuting him due to his support for Trump. “America’s Mayor, Rudy Giuliani, has been persecuted to the highest level through lawfare due to his support of President Donald Trump,” the campaign read. "Therefore, we are raising funds to go directly to his legal defense.” Despite the funds raised, Giuliani has yet to pay any of the hefty judgment owed to Ruby Freeman and Shaye Moss, the Georgia election workers who sued him for defamation after he falsely accused them of election fraud. Giuliani’s financial difficulties are not limited to his inability to pay the judgment. On Thursday, Judge Liman ordered him to turn over valuable assets as part of the legal proceedings. Giuliani has complied by handing over access to his Manhattan apartment, but a number of luxury items, including signed memorabilia, valuable watches, and a vintage Mercedes that once belonged to actress Lauren Bacall, remain at the center of the dispute. Among the most contentious items are four Yankees World Series rings that Freeman and Moss have laid claim to as part of the judgment. Giuliani initially claimed that the rings, estimated to be worth around $200,000, had been given to his son Andrew as a gift. However, when Freeman and Moss attempted to collect the rings, Giuliani’s story was called into question. In response, Judge Liman authorized Freeman and Moss’s legal team to subpoena Giuliani’s accounting firm, allowing them to review his tax returns to verify whether Giuliani’s claim about the rings was legitimate. This move has further intensified the legal battle, as the former mayor continues to fight the judgment and the collection of assets. Giuliani's financial troubles and his growing legal problems have become a major public spectacle, with his latest social media appeals adding to the drama. Despite his claims of poverty, many critics have pointed out the irony of a man once known for his wealth and high-profile career now struggling to meet the financial obligations resulting from his own actions. As Giuliani continues to fight the defamation lawsuit, his legal battles and fundraising efforts are likely to remain a focal point of public attention for some time. Based on a report by Daily Beast 2024-11-11

Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has pointed to President Joe Biden's delayed exit from the presidential race as a factor in the Democrats' disappointing performance in Tuesday’s election. In an interview with *The New York Times*, Pelosi expressed that if Biden had stepped down earlier, the party may have had better results. “Had the president gotten out sooner, there may have been other candidates in the race,” Pelosi said, adding her voice to a growing chorus within the Democratic Party assessing blame for the recent loss of the White House and potentially both chambers of Congress. Pelosi is reported to have been one of the primary advocates pushing Biden to step down after a particularly poor debate performance against Donald Trump. Biden eventually ended his campaign in late July, endorsing Vice-President Kamala Harris as his successor. However, Harris lost to Trump on Tuesday, a defeat some Democrats attribute to the president’s timing. “The anticipation was that, if the president were to step aside, that there would be an open primary,” Pelosi noted, explaining that a competitive primary could have bolstered Harris’s candidacy and strengthened her prospects in the general election. “But we don’t know that. That didn’t happen. We live with what happened,” she said. Pelosi also remarked that Biden’s immediate endorsement of Harris essentially foreclosed the possibility of a primary, making it “almost impossible to have a primary at that time.” Had Biden exited earlier, Pelosi believes the race would have been more dynamic and beneficial for the party. Harris aides have echoed Pelosi’s sentiments, suggesting that Biden’s delayed exit hampered the campaign. One unnamed Harris aide told *Politico*, “We ran the best campaign we could, considering Joe Biden was president. Joe Biden is the singular reason Kamala Harris and Democrats lost tonight.” However, a former Biden aide refuted this narrative, telling *Axios* that Harris's team was avoiding responsibility. “How did you spend $1 billion and not win?” the aide asked, adding an expletive for emphasis. Further complicating matters, a former Biden aide told *Politico* that former President Barack Obama’s advisers had exacerbated tensions by promoting intraparty discord to hasten Biden's exit. According to this aide, the Obama camp “publicly encouraged Democratic infighting to push Joe Biden out” and didn’t fully support Harris as the nominee. Several prominent Democrats have also weighed in, each highlighting different issues they believe contributed to the loss. Pennsylvania Senator John Fetterman criticized the faction that pushed Biden out of the race, suggesting they should bear responsibility for the election's fallout. “For those that decided and moved to break Biden, and then you got the election that you wanted, it’s appropriate to own the outcome and fallout,” he told *Semafor*. In New York, Congressman Tom Suozzi said the Democrats' electoral struggles were partially due to an excessive focus on “being politically correct.” He argued that the party failed to effectively counter Republican criticisms on issues such as “anarchy on college campuses, defund the police, biological boys playing in girls' sports, and a general attack on traditional values.” Similarly, Congressman Ritchie Torres criticized the “far left” for alienating a broad base of voters. He posted on X, “The far left managed to alienate historic numbers of Latinos, Blacks, Asians, and Jews from the Democratic Party with absurdities like ‘Defund the Police’ or ‘From the River to the Sea’ or ‘Latinx.’” Meanwhile, Independent Senator Bernie Sanders, who ran as a Democrat in the 2016 and 2020 presidential elections, criticized the party leadership for losing touch with working-class Americans. “While the Democratic leadership defends the status quo, the American people are angry and want change,” Sanders wrote. He expressed doubt that Democrats would learn from their recent defeat. In response, Democratic National Committee Chairman Jaime Harrison posted on X, refuting Sanders' critique, calling it “straight up BS.” Based on a report by BBC 2024-11-11

Troll posts from the usual suspect @thaibeachlovers removed.

A post @thaibeachlovers making numerous rambling unsubstaniated claims removed along with an off topic response to it.

The U.S. government has charged an Iranian national, Farhad Shakeri, in connection with an alleged plan to assassinate Donald Trump. In an indictment unsealed by the Department of Justice, Shakeri, 51, is accused of being directed by an Iranian Revolutionary Guard official to develop a strategy to surveil and kill Trump. Prosecutors revealed that Shakeri has not been apprehended and is currently believed to be in Iran. Attorney General Merrick Garland stated, “The Justice Department has charged an asset of the Iranian regime who was tasked by the regime to direct a network of criminal associates to further Iran’s assassination plots against its targets, including President-elect Donald Trump.” The indictment alleges that Shakeri’s orders to formulate an assassination plan came in September. Initially, he informed Iranian officials that he did not intend to devise a plan within their requested seven-day timeline, prompting the officials to postpone their directive. Shakeri later claimed that his contacts within the Iranian government believed it would be simpler to attempt the assassination following the election, under the assumption that Trump would lose. In addition to Trump, two other individuals—Carlisle Rivera, 49, and Jonathon Loadholt, 36—have been charged in connection with the case. The two men were allegedly recruited by Shakeri to target an American journalist who has publicly criticized Iran. The journalist, identified by Brooklyn-based reporter Masih Alinejad as the intended victim, reported that the FBI intervened to arrest two men for attempting to kill her outside her home. “I came to America to practice my First Amendment right to freedom of speech—I don’t want to die,” she stated on social media, adding, “I want to fight against tyranny, and I deserve to be safe.” Prosecutors revealed that Shakeri’s orders extended beyond Trump and Alinejad. Allegedly, the Iranian government also sought to kill two Jewish American businesspeople in New York who supported Israel on social media. Shakeri also claimed that his Iranian contacts had requested a plan for a mass shooting to target Israeli tourists in Sri Lanka, allegedly planned for October 2024. Shakeri’s background includes a 14-year prison sentence for robbery before his deportation in 2008. Since then, prosecutors allege he has used a network of criminal associates to conduct surveillance on Iran’s targets. Shakeri reportedly promised Rivera and Loadholt $100,000 to murder the targeted American journalist. All three men now face charges of murder-for-hire, money laundering conspiracy, and conspiracy to commit murder-for-hire, which carry potential sentences ranging from 10 to 20 years in prison. Based on a report by BBC 2024-11-09

Sainsbury's, one of the UK’s largest supermarket chains, is facing significant financial challenges following recent budget measures that will add a £140 million burden to its operating costs. Chief Executive Simon Roberts warned that this increase, stemming from the hike in employers' national insurance contributions, is likely to lead to further inflation and potentially tough choices for the company. Roberts noted the financial strain that the increased national insurance contributions will impose, saying, "This impact on national insurance was unexpected and is coming in fast, it will have a very significant impact, it will impact our costs base... and our suppliers' cost base." This unexpected financial weight will come into effect in April, following Chancellor Rachel Reeves' announcement in last week’s budget. The Sainsbury’s CEO expressed concerns about the inflationary impact of these new costs, noting that they are beyond what the company can absorb. "There’s a barrage of costs," he said, highlighting that Sainsbury’s customers might ultimately bear the financial brunt of these changes. Roberts pointed to the analysis of the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR), an independent forecaster, which suggested that Reeves’ budget measures will drive inflation higher than originally anticipated. "It’s difficult to disagree with" the OBR’s assessment, Roberts added. In addition to the national insurance increase, the new budget also raised the national minimum wage, another factor contributing to overall cost increases. While Roberts did not put a specific number on how much these changes would inflate prices, he acknowledged the growing pressure, saying, "There’s a lot of pressure in the pipeline... there’s pressure in the system in inflation already." Roberts expressed disappointment over the budget's impact on business rates as well. Many businesses had anticipated a reduction in these rates, but instead, they are now expected to rise next year. Roberts commented, "Business rates will go up this year. I certainly didn’t expect them to go up next year; I expected them to go down." As for the potential impact on Sainsbury’s workforce, Roberts stated that it is "too early to be specific," but he acknowledged that "difficult decisions" would likely have to be made. Although he did not elaborate on whether these decisions could involve staffing changes, he hinted that the combination of rising national insurance, minimum wage costs, and other pressures may lead to unavoidable adjustments in operations. Sainsbury’s is not alone in dealing with the implications of the new budget. Other major UK companies have reported similar concerns. JD Wetherspoon, the pub chain with more than 1,000 establishments, announced that the budget measures would increase its costs by £60 million next year. Marks & Spencer, another prominent UK retailer, expects to see a £120 million impact on its finances. These announcements highlight the widespread concerns across the retail and hospitality sectors, which are grappling with the same financial pressures as Sainsbury’s. Based on a report by Sky News 2024-11-09

Prince William has candidly described the past year as "brutal" and "probably the hardest year in my life" after both his father, King Charles, and his wife, the Princess of Wales, were diagnosed with cancer. In a rare and open interview concluding his tour in Cape Town, the Prince of Wales reflected on the emotional toll these challenges have taken, sharing insights into how his family has coped with these profound hardships. He expressed particular pride in Kate, calling her “amazing” and sharing that she is “doing well.” This praise for Kate reflects his gratitude for her strength and resilience as they navigate this challenging period together. Over the year, both King Charles and the Princess of Wales have periodically stepped back from their royal duties to focus on their health, which has added more responsibilities to William’s role. As the heir to the throne, William has taken on additional engagements, often attending events solo and fulfilling obligations that his father and wife were unable to manage. The Prince acknowledged the pressures he’s experienced but also shared his feelings about his evolving role as Prince of Wales. He explained, “It’s a tricky one. Do I like more responsibility? No. Do I like the freedom that I can build something like Earthshot? Then yes.” Prince William’s honesty in this interview provides a rare glimpse into his personal life, marking the first time he has openly discussed the impact of his father’s and wife’s health on his own well-being. While he continues to balance his public duties with family obligations, his reflections reveal the complex emotions he is facing as he supports his loved ones. In his words and demeanor, it’s clear that William remains deeply committed to his family and to the causes he champions, even as he endures one of the most challenging periods of his life. Based on a report by Sky News 2024-11-09

An independent review has exposed that the Church of England concealed “horrific” abuses committed by John Smyth, a lawyer and church volunteer, who inflicted physical, sexual, psychological, and spiritual abuse on children and young adults at Christian summer camps during the 1970s and 1980s. Despite learning of these abuses in 2013, the ceremonial head of the Anglican Communion failed to report Smyth’s actions to authorities, allowing the abuse to remain hidden until much later. The review, released on Thursday, details the findings in a 251-page report commissioned by the church. Smyth, who died in South Africa in 2018, is considered the most prolific serial abuser ever linked to the church. Over five decades, he targeted approximately 30 boys and young men in the United Kingdom and around 85 in Africa. According to Keith Makin, who led the review, “Many of the victims who took the brave decision to speak to us about what they experienced have carried this abuse silently for more than 40 years.” Makin further criticized the church, saying, “Despite the efforts of some individuals to bring the abuse to the attention of authorities, the responses by the Church of England and others were wholly ineffective and amounted to a coverup.” Smyth’s role as a volunteer leader at the Iwerne camps—a series of Christian camps associated with the Church of England and intended to train young men from prestigious schools for future leadership—gave him access to vulnerable young people. He used his position to manipulate campers, punishing them for what he defined as “sins” such as “pride,” making sexual remarks, masturbation, or, in one instance, simply looking at a girl for too long. According to the report, these punishments involved violent beatings in which both Smyth and his victims were often partly or fully naked. The report chillingly describes the extent of Smyth’s punishments, noting, “The scale and severity of the practice was horrific.” Instances included beatings of 100 strokes for masturbation, 400 for pride, and even one of 800 strokes for an unspecified “fall.” A minister secretly documented these abuses in 1982, yet no police report was ever filed. One church official, the late Rev. David Fletcher, defended his silence by saying, “I thought it would do the work of God immense damage if this were public.” Smyth eventually left the United Kingdom, moving to Zimbabwe with his family, with the encouragement and financial assistance of church officials who knew of his abusive actions. The report condemned these officials, stating, “Church officers knew of the abuse and failed to take the steps necessary to prevent further abuse occurring.” In 2013, another opportunity to report Smyth’s crimes emerged. Church leaders, including the Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby—who himself had attended Iwerne camps and knew Smyth—were informed of the past abuse. However, as the report outlines, they chose not to alert authorities, missing a critical chance to prevent any further harm. Welby later acknowledged his personal failure to act, stating, “Nevertheless the review is clear that I personally failed to ensure that after disclosure in 2013 the awful tragedy was energetically investigated.” Had the church reported Smyth at that time, the report suggests, law enforcement might have been able to bring him to justice. “In effect, three and a half years was lost, a time within which John Smyth could have been brought to justice and any abuse he was committing in South Africa discovered and stopped,” the report concludes. Public awareness of Smyth’s abuses did not emerge until a 2017 Channel 4 investigation, which finally prompted Hampshire Police to launch an inquiry. Authorities had planned to question Smyth and were preparing for a possible extradition before his death later that year. The report underscores a painful truth: had action been taken earlier, many victims might have been spared years of suffering, and the church might have avoided the lasting stain of complicity in a tragedy it helped to conceal. Based on a report by AP 2024-11-09

Donald Trump previously supported the United Kingdom’s claim over the Chagos Islands, a position that could disrupt Sir Keir Starmer’s recent deal to transfer control of the islands to Mauritius. During Trump’s last term as U.S. president, his administration filed a legal document backing Britain’s stance that the international courts should not intervene in the sovereignty dispute over the archipelago, according to information revealed by *The Telegraph*. The U.S. government’s legal support for the UK during Trump’s administration is a strong indication that he may oppose the current Labour plan to relinquish British control of the islands to Mauritius. The Chagos Islands hold strategic importance for both the United States and the UK, as they are home to an American military base on Diego Garcia, the largest island in the chain. Mike Pompeo, Trump’s former Secretary of State, previously emphasized that UK control of Diego Garcia was vital for maintaining U.S. military operations in the area. Nigel Farage, leader of the Reform UK party and an ally of Trump, noted that individuals close to the former president-elect are critical of Labour’s plan to cede the islands. The situation has led to speculation that Trump could oppose the deal, with two former UK Foreign Office officials telling *The Telegraph* they anticipate Trump may publicly contest it. The transfer of sovereignty to Mauritius, which Starmer announced in early October, remains in a legally uncertain phase as the treaty necessary to formalize the change is still under negotiation. The deal is an “agreement in principle,” and some senior Republicans in the U.S. have voiced concerns that the handover could empower China in the region. This cautionary perspective has been echoed by prominent UK officials, including Robert Buckland, former justice secretary and head of the UK’s case at the International Court of Justice (ICJ). Reflecting on the potential impact of Trump’s return, Buckland expressed hope that Trump would reconsider Starmer’s arrangement. He stated, “Along with many other countries, the previous Trump administration steadfastly and rightly opposed Mauritius’s use of the ICJ to resolve what is a sovereignty dispute. I hope that the new administration will come to our aid.” The fate of the Chagos Islands remains uncertain, as the legal process to solidify the change has yet to be completed. If Trump voices opposition to the deal upon assuming office, the future of Starmer’s agreement with Mauritius could be in jeopardy, adding a layer of complexity to the UK’s foreign policy in the Indian Ocean region. Based on a report by Daily Telegraph 2024-11-09

Former Republican White House candidate Nikki Haley has urged both sides of the political spectrum, as well as corporate and government institutions, to take the recent election results as a critical “wake-up call.” With her former primary rival, President-elect Donald Trump, defeating Vice President Kamala Harris, Haley emphasized the need for reflection and recalibration within the spheres of politics, business, and governance. Haley’s endorsement of Trump was a notable turn in her campaign narrative. Though she had been one of Trump’s more outspoken critics on the campaign trail, she ultimately chose to endorse him after dropping out of the race. This decision raised questions about her stance, but Haley has since voiced her support for his candidacy, positioning herself as a pragmatic figure willing to back the Republican cause in hopes of advancing the party’s overall goals. The former South Carolina governor’s remarks add to a broader dialogue within the Republican Party about how best to address national divides and strengthen the party’s appeal to a wider audience. Haley’s call for a return to a more centrist approach suggests her desire to attract a broader base while addressing concerns about an increasingly polarized political climate. For Haley, the recent election isn’t just a Republican victory—it’s a potential moment of reckoning for all players, from corporate leaders to political strategists, as they consider the way forward. Based on a report by the Hill 2024-11-09