Social Media

Trump Appointee Draws Scrutiny Over Kremlin Ties and Dismantling of U.S. Disinformation Unit Darren Beattie, a senior Trump administration official at the State Department, has come under intense scrutiny over his ties to Russia and a controversial decision to shut down the U.S. government’s main agency fighting Kremlin propaganda. Beattie, who was appointed acting under-secretary for public diplomacy and public affairs in February, is married to a Russian woman whose family has deep ties to the Kremlin. The revelations have sparked alarm among U.S. diplomats and national security officials, particularly in light of Beattie's outspoken admiration for Moscow and Beijing and his efforts to dismantle the government’s Counter Foreign Information Manipulation and Interference hub, known as R/FIMI. Beattie, a former Trump speechwriter who was dismissed from the administration in 2018 for reportedly attending a white nationalist event, reemerged as a figure in far-right media circles before returning to government. In 2021, he married Yulia Kirillova, a Russian national educated in Moscow and later in Canada and Washington, D.C. According to public records and social media, her uncle, Sergei Chernikov, is a wealthy Russian businessman with a history of political involvement and a documented relationship with Vladimir Putin. Chernikov once received a personal letter of thanks from Putin for his support during the Russian leader’s initial rise to power and later held posts in Russia’s natural resources ministry and as deputy governor in Siberia. The familial connection, combined with Beattie’s history of pro-Kremlin statements, has raised serious questions within the State Department. “The rise of non-woke (China) and anti-woke (Russia) geopolitical competitors to the Globalist American Empire is not a bad thing,” Beattie wrote in October 2021. In other posts, he praised Putin as “brave and strong” and declared that “Nato is a much greater threat to American liberty than Putin ever was.” He even went so far as to say, “The funny thing is just about every Western institution would improve in quality if it were directly infiltrated and controlled by Putin.” Sources within the State Department voiced concerns about Beattie’s security clearance, with some questioning whether he underwent standard vetting procedures. Trump had previously bypassed standard clearance processes during his presidency, citing backlogs. Beattie reportedly took a keen interest in classified information about Russia while pursuing his agenda to dismantle R/FIMI, the agency responsible for countering foreign disinformation from adversaries like Russia, China, and Iran. The unit, which had a modest budget of $50 million, was shuttered in April, with Beattie telling staff it was “severely misaligned” with the administration’s goals. Beattie’s media outlet, Revolver, had long campaigned against R/FIMI, accusing it of operating a “censorship network” aimed at silencing conservative voices. Upon his appointment, Beattie moved quickly to neutralize the agency, cutting off communications, firing contractors, and initiating what some insiders described as a “witch hunt” targeting staff correspondence with journalists and references to Trump and his allies. During the same period, Beattie reportedly sought to reestablish cultural exchange programs with Russia, including initiatives focused on ballet and hockey, raising further concerns about the direction of U.S. diplomacy. MIT Technology Review reported that he also attempted to obtain internal R/FIMI records shortly before its closure, suggesting he aimed to portray the agency as hostile to conservative politics. In a statement, Beattie dismissed the allegations as “malicious defamatory trash that is beneath the standards of even the British tabloid press.” A senior State Department official came to his defense, saying, “No one in America cares about a British gossip column. This is all fake news and low even for tabloid standards. Darren is a tremendous colleague who is committed to advancing President Trump’s America First agenda. In a few short months, he has been able to spearhead high-level projects that have been critical in advancing a foreign policy that puts our national interests first.” Beattie currently holds the role in an acting capacity and would need Senate confirmation to remain in the post permanently. Under federal rules, his tenure is limited to 210 days. Allies have suggested he may be moved to a different position that does not require Senate approval, as questions continue to mount about his background, intentions, and links to foreign powers. Adapted by ASEAN Now from The Telegraph 2025-06-05

Trump Policies Credited as Critics Mock Washington Post’s “Mystery” Over Fentanyl Decline The Washington Post is under fire from conservative circles and even the White House after publishing an article expressing confusion over a sharp decline in fentanyl trafficking across the southern U.S. border. Describing the drop as a “mystery,” the Post's framing has sparked widespread mockery, with critics accusing the liberal-leaning outlet of downplaying the effectiveness of the Trump administration’s border security measures. Fentanyl, a potent synthetic opioid responsible for tens of thousands of deaths annually in the U.S., is often smuggled in by drug cartels through both southern and northern border points. In 2024, the CDC linked fentanyl to 48,422 deaths nationwide, underscoring its lethal impact on American communities. As a central promise during his campaign, President Trump vowed to dismantle fentanyl trafficking networks by tightening border security and addressing illegal immigration. Since assuming office, he has mobilized U.S. troops to the southern border, designated drug cartels as “foreign terrorist organizations,” and imposed sanctions on cartel leaders in an effort to disrupt their operations. Recent statistics released by the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) suggest that these actions may be yielding results. According to the CIS, law enforcement seizures of fentanyl—a key indicator of broader smuggling activity—have decreased by 50% since the November election. The Washington Post acknowledged a similar trend, noting that seizures have dropped nearly 30% compared to the same period in 2024. However, the Post's interpretation of this decline puzzled many. “After years of confiscating rising amounts of fentanyl, the opioid that has fueled the most lethal drug epidemic in American history, U.S. officials are confronting a new and puzzling reality at the Mexican border. Fentanyl seizures are plummeting,” the article stated, referring to the trend as “something of a mystery.” The article speculated on several possible explanations, including internal cartel disruptions, alternative trafficking routes, raw material shortages, and even a potential dip in user demand. It also raised concerns that Trump’s budget cuts could jeopardize public health programs for addiction treatment and overdose reversal. The piece was met with derision from conservatives, who viewed the “mystery” framing as an unwillingness to credit the Trump administration. Rep. Tom Tiffany (R-Wis.) wrote on X, “The Washington Post is reporting a ‘mysterious drop’ in fentanyl seizures at the southern border. Mystery solved! The Trump effect is working.” Conservative commentator Charlie Kirk was more scathing, posting, “Four months into the Trump administration, The Washington Post is marveling at the ‘mysterious’ drop in fentanyl seizures on the Mexican border … Is the Post simply lying, or are their reporters as dumb as the people they’re writing propaganda for?” Even the Department of Homeland Security chimed in, replying via its official X account, “It’s no mystery. On day one, [President] Trump closed our borders to drug traffickers.” The department cited a 54% reduction in fentanyl trafficking at the southern border from March 2024 to March 2025, adding, “The world has heard the message loud and clear.” White House officials also responded with blunt remarks. Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt labeled the Post “pathetic,” while Communications Director Steven Cheung remarked, “They can’t stand that President Trump’s strong border policies have led to a DECREASE in fentanyl coming into the U.S.” Abigail Jackson, another spokesperson, reinforced this stance during an interview with Fox News Digital. “The drop in fentanyl seizures at the border is only a mystery to Washington Post,” she said. “As of March, fentanyl traffic at the Southern Border had fallen by more than half from the same time last year – while Joe Biden’s open border was still terrorizing America. Everyone else knows the simple truth: President Trump closed our border to illegal drug traffickers and Americans are safer because of it.” As of now, The Washington Post has not responded to Fox News Digital’s request for comment. Adapted by ASEAN Now from NYP 2025-06-05

Trump Justice Department Probes Biden’s Use of Autopen in Controversial Family Pardons In a move that has drawn sharp political scrutiny, the Trump administration’s Justice Department has launched an investigation into former President Joe Biden’s use of the autopen to sign a series of pardons and commutations during his final days in office. Among the pardons under review are those granted to five of Biden’s own family members, as well as 37 commutations that converted federal death sentences to life imprisonment. The investigation was confirmed by an internal email obtained by Reuters, in which Ed Martin, the Justice Department’s pardon attorney, told staff he had been instructed to examine the legality and propriety of the documents. “The investigation centred around whether Biden was competent and whether others were taking advantage of him through use of autopen or other means,” Martin wrote in the email. The autopen—a device that automatically reproduces a signature—has become the focal point of allegations first raised by conservative outlets and championed by Trump. The Heritage Foundation, a right-wing think tank, suggested earlier this year that nearly every document issued under Biden’s presidency bore the same signature, calling into question whether Biden personally approved them. The organization pointed to documents signed even while Biden was vacationing in the U.S. Virgin Islands in late 2022. Samuel Dewey, a lawyer affiliated with the Heritage Foundation, elaborated on the suspicions during an appearance on Real America’s Voice, stating that while most signatures looked machine-generated, the one on the pardon of Biden’s son Hunter appeared different. “Shaky,” he described it. Hunter Biden, who pleaded guilty to tax violations and was convicted on firearms charges, received a pardon from his father in December. Adding to the controversy, Biden also pardoned several other family members, including his brothers James and Frank Biden, his sister Valerie Biden Owens, and their respective spouses, John Owens and Sara Biden. While the internal email did not name which pardons were under direct investigation, Martin confirmed that the scope included the 37 death penalty commutations issued by Biden, as well as all family-related clemency orders. On January 20, just before departing the White House, Biden addressed his controversial decisions, stating that he aimed to shield his family from “future politically motivated investigations” likely to come under the returning Trump administration. Trump has repeatedly cast doubt on Biden’s mental acuity, particularly in the final stretch of his term. He has taken to Truth Social to allege that many pardons were issued without Biden’s knowledge or consent. “In other words, Joe Biden did not sign them but, more importantly, he did not know anything about them!” Trump wrote. He further accused members of the January 6 committee—some of whom received clemency—of engineering their own pardons while Biden was allegedly unaware, calling them “void, vacant and of no future force of effect.” Though Martin noted last month that he did not view autopen use as “necessarily a problem,” he nonetheless affirmed that the circumstances surrounding the Biden pardons “warranted scrutiny.” Amid growing questions about Biden’s health following his cancer diagnosis and his recent decision to withdraw from the 2024 race, the investigation into the final actions of his presidency has intensified partisan tensions. Despite the constitutional authority granted to presidents to issue pardons and commutations without oversight, Trump’s Justice Department appears determined to challenge the legitimacy of Biden’s final clemency decisions—especially those affecting political adversaries or members of his own family. Adapted by ASEAN Now from The Times 2025-06-05

BBC Accuses Security Service of Repeated Deception Over Neo-Nazi Agent MI5 deliberately and repeatedly misled the courts in its defense of a neo-Nazi informant who abused women, the BBC has claimed before a panel of High Court judges. In a case that has raised serious concerns about the integrity of the Security Service and the limits of government secrecy, the corporation argued that the threshold had been met for contempt of court proceedings to be initiated against MI5 and three of its officers. Sir James Eadie KC, representing MI5, issued what he called an "unreserved apology" on behalf of the agency but maintained that "the errors that had been made had not been deliberate." Despite this, the High Court panel—including Lady Chief Justice Baroness Sue Carr, Dame Victoria Sharp, and Mr Justice Chamberlain—reserved judgment on whether the case should proceed further. The dispute began in 2022 when MI5 attempted to prevent the BBC from publishing a report about the man known only as X, a violent neo-Nazi and misogynist who is alleged to have used his status as a state agent to intimidate and control a former partner, referred to publicly as "Beth." MI5 insisted in court that it had not broken its strict “neither confirm nor deny” (NCND) secrecy protocol regarding X’s status. However, in February, the BBC presented phone recordings and notes that showed otherwise. According to the BBC, an MI5 officer had explicitly confirmed X’s role as an agent while attempting to convince a journalist to drop the investigation. This revelation directly contradicted previous sworn statements made by the Security Service in three separate court proceedings. As a result, MI5 conceded in this week’s hearing that it could no longer maintain its NCND stance in this case. The fallout from this admission has far-reaching consequences, including the opening up of previously closed evidence that had excluded both the BBC and Beth from proceedings. Kate Ellis, solicitor for Beth, welcomed the development, stating, “It’s a huge outcome for Beth. She's had to fight this all the way to the High Court. This case has really undermined MI5’s credibility in the courts.” Beth’s barrister, Charlotte Kilroy KC, echoed the BBC's argument, telling the court there had been “copious levels of dishonesty” in MI5’s handling of the matter—failures which, she said, were not fully addressed in the agency's own internal investigations. Contempt of court, which can result in fines or imprisonment of up to two years, is a serious charge that applies to actions obstructing justice or compromising the legal process. The BBC’s legal counsel, Jude Bunting KC, asked the court to consider contempt proceedings not only against MI5 but also against three individual officers—one of whom directly confirmed X’s identity in a recorded phone call and another, known as Witness A, who delivered false evidence in court. Bunting criticized MI5’s internal review, conducted by Sir Jonathan Jones KC, noting that it had failed to interview two key witnesses and that the explanations offered to the court “lack candour.” “There is a real concern,” he said, “that the court has not been given a full explanation of what went wrong.” Sir James Eadie, speaking on behalf of the Attorney General and MI5, reiterated the agency's apology and insisted that senior leadership, including Director General Sir Ken McCallum, acted promptly once the issue came to light. “Everyone from the director general downwards acknowledges the seriousness caused,” he said. However, Eadie maintained that the internal investigation had been "full and comprehensive" and found that while mistakes were made, “there had been no misleading or lying.” The judges are now considering whether the case should move forward, in what may prove to be a landmark decision on the accountability of the UK’s intelligence agencies. Adapted by ASEAN Now from BBC 2025-06-05

Chinese Nationals Accused of Smuggling Agroterrorism Fungus into U.S. Lab Two Chinese nationals have been charged in the United States for allegedly attempting to smuggle a biological pathogen into the country, a case that federal authorities say poses significant national security risks. Yunqing Jian, 33, and Zunyong Liu, 34, face multiple charges including conspiracy, smuggling goods, false statements, and visa fraud, according to the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Michigan. The federal complaint alleges that Liu attempted to bring a dangerous fungus, Fusarium graminearum, through Detroit Metropolitan Airport. The fungus is known to infect vital crops such as wheat, barley, maize, and rice, causing a disease that can decimate agricultural yields. If consumed in contaminated food, the pathogen can lead to vomiting and liver damage. According to the U.S. Attorney’s Office, the fungus has been described in scientific literature as a “potential agroterrorism weapon,” responsible for “billions of dollars in economic losses worldwide each year.” Authorities allege that Liu intended to study the fungus at a laboratory at the University of Michigan, where Jian, his girlfriend, was employed. Investigators further claim Jian received research funding from the Chinese government and is a member of the Chinese Communist Party. United States Attorney Jerome F. Gorgon Jr. did not mince words in describing the severity of the situation. “These two aliens have been charged with smuggling a fungus that has been described as a ‘potential agroterrorism weapon’ into the heartland of America, where they apparently intended to use a University of Michigan laboratory to further their scheme,” he stated. “The allegations raise the gravest national security concerns.” The joint investigation was conducted by the FBI and U.S. Customs and Border Protection. Jian is scheduled to appear in court in Detroit, Michigan, on Tuesday. As of now, there has been no public comment from the University of Michigan or the Chinese embassy in Washington, D.C., though both have reportedly been contacted for a response. This case surfaces amid increasing tensions between Washington and Beijing. The charges were filed just days after the Trump administration announced plans to “aggressively” revoke the visas of Chinese students studying in the United States. On the diplomatic front, Beijing has criticized Washington for what it described as a severe violation of a recent trade truce reached in Geneva, where both nations had agreed to reduce tariffs on a range of goods. Adding to the tense atmosphere, another Chinese national—this time a student at the University of Michigan—was charged earlier this week with voting illegally in the 2024 U.S. election, further fueling debate about the presence and activities of foreign nationals in sensitive U.S. institutions. The case involving Jian and Liu is now seen as part of a broader narrative of deteriorating U.S.-China relations, with implications stretching beyond criminal courtrooms and into the spheres of national security, agriculture, and international diplomacy. Related Topic: Trump Administration Targets Chinese Students in New Visa Crackdown Adapted by ASEAN Now from BBC | X 2025-06-05

Labour Rift Deepens as Rachel Reeves Faces Spending Review Showdown Chancellor Rachel Reeves is at the centre of an escalating internal battle within the Labour cabinet as tensions mount over her upcoming spending review. The conflict, described by insiders as a “proxy war”, is pitting senior ministers against each other and against Reeves, as concerns grow that key manifesto promises could be abandoned in the face of looming budget constraints. Reeves, tasked with defining the government’s fiscal direction, is under mounting pressure to explore alternative revenue sources—chief among them, wealth taxes—rather than resorting to spending cuts. The Treasury’s tight financial limits are leaving little room for manoeuvre, and this pressure is compounded by likely reversals on major cost-saving plans such as scrapping winter fuel payments for millions of pensioners and lifting the controversial two-child benefit cap. Combined, these changes could add up to £5 billion in additional spending, significantly narrowing Reeves' fiscal options. Major departments, including Yvette Cooper’s Home Office and Angela Rayner’s Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government, remain locked in budgetary disputes just days before the chancellor is due to present her plans on Wednesday, June 11. Although Education Secretary Bridget Phillipson is reported to have reached an agreement with the Treasury, most departments have not, despite an informal deadline having passed the previous weekend. Adding to Reeves’ challenges is the government’s pledge to raise defence spending to 3 per cent of GDP—a goal that has become more complicated following NATO’s call for members, including the UK, to increase their commitments further to 3.5 per cent. The internal discord has sparked fears that Labour's broader political strategy is faltering. “The chancellor's decisions over the next week will ‘see the ending of a number of manifesto pledges as actually being deliverable,’” a senior Labour source told The Independent. Reeves’ efforts to maintain fiscal discipline are already being likened by critics to “austerity 2.0”, stoking frustration among Labour MPs and trade unions who want her to consider taxing the wealthy instead of slashing budgets. Calls for alternative fiscal measures have been growing louder, with a leaked memo from Deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayner proposing eight wealth tax options. These include raising dividend tax rates for high earners and clamping down on property speculators who exploit corporate structures to avoid stamp duty. In the words of one senior Labour insider: “I think the spending review is becoming a proxy war to desperately try and stop Labour facing an existential crisis – the breathtaking collapse in support continues, and [the plan for the party is to] just try and deliver some of its manifesto so that ordinary voters can see and feel that they have.” They concluded with a stark prediction: “I cannot see how Rachel Reeves lasts.” Adapted by ASEAN Now from The Independent 2025-06-05

Police Chiefs Warn Starmer of Crime Fight Crisis Amid Looming Budget Cuts Senior police leaders, including Met Police Commissioner Sir Mark Rowley, have issued a stark warning to Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer, cautioning that planned spending cuts could cripple frontline crime-fighting operations. In a direct letter to the prime minister ahead of next week’s anticipated spending review, the UK's most senior police officers outlined the “far-reaching consequences” of Treasury-driven austerity-style reductions, warning that such decisions could force them to abandon investigations into certain crimes altogether. The warning comes amid deteriorating negotiations between the Home Office and the Treasury, with the outcome set to determine the future resourcing of both the police and the National Crime Agency (NCA). “We understand that the Treasury [is] seeking to finalise departmental budget allocations this week and that the negotiations between the Home Office and the Treasury are going poorly,” the chiefs wrote in the letter, as reported by The Times. Their concerns point to the impact of a funding model that has already failed to keep pace with rising demands and inflationary pressures. “We are deeply concerned that the settlement for policing and the [NCA], without additional investment, risks a retrenchment to what we saw under austerity. This would have far-reaching consequences,” the letter warned. The police chiefs painted a dire picture of overstretched resources and shrinking capacity. “Policing and the NCA have seen a sustained period where income has not kept pace with demand. Often, this has been masked by attempts to defer costs in the hope of more income in future, but that now leaves policing with very limited room for manoeuvre,” they wrote. The consequences of continued underfunding, they argue, would be unavoidable. “A settlement that fails to address our inflation and pay pressures flat would entail stark choices about which crimes we no longer prioritise. The policing and NCA workforce would also shrink each year.” These warnings arrive as Starmer’s government faces mounting internal tensions over the spending review. Chancellor Rachel Reeves is under growing pressure from within the Labour Party to abandon plans for departmental cuts and instead introduce taxes on the wealthy to shore up public spending. Critics argue that Reeves is veering too close to what some have dubbed “austerity 2.0,” and fear that slashing budgets now will mean discarding key promises made to voters. The dispute has been described by Labour insiders as a “proxy war,” with key departments still locked in budget negotiations just days before the spending plan is due to be unveiled. Among them are Yvette Cooper’s Home Office, which is central to the police funding talks, and Angela Rayner’s Ministry of Housing. As the clock ticks down to the announcement, the tension between the need for fiscal discipline and the pressure to maintain public services is becoming ever more pronounced. For police leaders, the message is clear: without urgent investment, the thin blue line may soon become even thinner. Adapted by ASEAN Now from The Independent 2025-06-05

Trump Camp Slams BBC for 'Bias' Over Gaza Reporting The Trump White House has taken a sharp swipe at the BBC, accusing the broadcaster of unquestioningly accepting Hamas’s narrative in its coverage of the ongoing Gaza conflict. Karoline Leavitt, press secretary for former President Donald Trump, issued the rebuke during a White House briefing, claiming the BBC had repeatedly misrepresented incidents on the ground and needed to issue several corrections. Leavitt’s criticism comes after a series of chaotic and violent incidents involving the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF), a newly established US- and Israeli-backed aid distributor. In recent weeks, emergency food distribution points controlled by the GHF have been overwhelmed by desperate Palestinian civilians on three separate occasions, resulting in bloodshed. While the BBC’s reporting on the events has been challenged before, the White House’s comments mark a new level of hostility toward the UK-based broadcaster. On Tuesday night, the BBC pushed back, denying Leavitt’s allegations and standing by the integrity of its reporting. However, Leavitt accused the broadcaster of jumping to conclusions based on claims from Hamas, a group she implied was not a reliable source. “Unfortunately, unlike some in the media, we don’t take the word of Hamas as total truth,” Leavitt said at the press conference. “We like to look into it when they speak … unlike the BBC.” She waved printed screenshots of BBC headlines covering the chaotic food distribution incidents and accused the outlet of shifting its narrative in a way that illustrated a lack of editorial rigor. She highlighted how the BBC initially claimed an Israeli tank was responsible for killing 26 people, only to later revise the death toll and eventually issue a correction. “And then, oh, wait, they had to correct and take down their entire story, saying we reviewed the footage and couldn’t find any evidence of anything,” she said. “So we’re going to look into reports before we confirm them from this podium or before we take action. And I suggest that journalists who actually care about truth do the same to reduce the amount of misinformation that’s going around the globe.” While the final version of the BBC story now states that 21 people were killed, the broadcaster also released a separate BBC Verify report. It found that a viral video reportedly depicting the aftermath of the aid point shooting had, in fact, been filmed at a different time and location. Leavitt’s broadside is just the latest in a string of controversies surrounding the BBC’s coverage of Gaza. The network was previously forced to withdraw a documentary on the conflict after it emerged that the narrator was the son of a Hamas government minister, prompting an apology over what the BBC admitted were “serious flaws” in its production. The BBC has also come under fire for refusing to label Hamas as a terrorist organisation, opting instead to refer to its fighters as “militants.” That editorial stance has drawn fierce criticism. Former UK defence secretary Grant Shapps called it “verging on disgraceful,” and Labour Party leader Sir Keir Starmer added that the BBC “needs to explain why it isn’t” using the term “terrorists.” The broadcaster’s Arabic-language service, BBC Arabic, has faced similar scrutiny, with critics accusing it of displaying consistent bias against Israel. Some contributors have reportedly made anti-Semitic remarks, both prior to and after the Hamas-led October 7 attacks. One particularly controversial moment came when the BBC’s flagship Today programme prominently broadcast a claim by UN humanitarian chief Tom Fletcher that 14,000 babies in Gaza could die within 48 hours. The claim was later walked back, with the BBC issuing a correction clarifying that the number referred to children at risk of “severe malnutrition” by the following March. By that time, however, the statement had already circulated widely and been referenced in the UK Parliament by nine MPs. Meanwhile, Israel’s military and diplomatic posture remains under intense international scrutiny. Its intensified operations in Gaza and the rollout of the GHF-led aid delivery system have sparked sharp criticism. Israel argues that the purpose-built aid hubs in Rafah demonstrate its commitment to humanitarian obligations while blocking Hamas from intercepting the aid. However, the United Nations and various NGOs have condemned the model, saying it undermines humanitarian principles and endangers civilians by forcing them to make long, perilous journeys just to access food and medical supplies. Related Topics: BBC Under Fire Again Over Gaza Analyst's Hamas Connections BBC Contributor in Gaza Sparks Outrage ‘We’ll burn Jews like Hitler did’ BBC Doc Features Son Of Hamas Leader but Fails to Disclose to Viewers BBC Faces Backlash Over Use of Term ‘Revert’ in Islam Coverage BBC Faces More Serious Accusations of Bias in Gaza Hostage Release Coverage "Controversy Surrounds BBC Arabic's Coverage of Israel-Gaza Conflict" BBC uses account of journalist working for Iran-backed news agency in Gaza deaths article MPs demand inquiry Gaza doctors at centre of harrowing BBC report are Hamas supporters BBC criticized For failing To Disclose Affiliations of Palestinian Journalists Hamas Ties BBC Faces Backlash Over Terminology in Hamas Coverage BBC Chairman Calls For a Thorough Review of Israel-Hamas War Bias BBC Accused of Bias in Israel-Hamas Coverage: Over 1,500 Breaches of Guidelines Jeremy Bowen Defends BBC Amid Allegations of Bias Over Israel-Hamas Coverage New Report from former BBC Director Criticizes Coverage of Israel-Hamas Conflict Whistleblower Alleges Normalized Anti-Semitism at the BBC Adapted by ASEAN Now from The Telegraph 2025-06-05

@bannork a post making unattributed claims has been removed for you again. Comment on moderation also removed. "In factual areas such as news forums and current affairs topics member content that is claimed or portrayed as a fact should be supported by a link to a relevant reputable source."

Sex-Test Leak Intensifies Controversy Around Olympic Boxing Champion Imane Khelif A leaked medical report has reignited the storm surrounding Olympic boxing champion Imane Khelif, providing, for the first time, what appears to be official evidence that the Algerian athlete is biologically male. The document, surfacing just 36 hours after World Boxing demanded sex screening for Khelif’s future eligibility in the women’s category, has added fuel to the already fierce debate over fairness, inclusion, and the integrity of women’s sport. The medical report stems from testing conducted in March 2023 during the World Championships in New Delhi. Published by journalist Alan Abrahamson on the 3 Wire Sports website, the document from Dr Lal PathLabs—a lab accredited by the American College of Pathologists and the International Organisation for Standardisation—describes the chromosome analysis as “abnormal” and concludes: “Chromosome analysis reveals male karyotype.” The term "karyotype" refers to the full set of chromosomes in an individual, and in Khelif’s case, the report confirms the presence of XY chromosomes, which are typical of male biology. This revelation stands in direct opposition to the stance maintained by the International Olympic Committee (IOC), which has previously dismissed the findings as unverified and politically motivated. During a tense press conference at the Paris Games, IOC spokesman Mark Adams labelled the test results as “ad hoc” and “not legitimate.” IOC President Thomas Bach went further, alleging that the test was part of a Russian disinformation campaign, emphasizing that the International Boxing Association (IBA), which originally sanctioned Khelif, was no longer recognized by the IOC due to ethical and financial misconduct under the leadership of Russian official Umar Kremlev. Yet the authenticated credentials of the Indian laboratory now place mounting pressure on the IOC to justify its dismissal of the results. The implications for Khelif’s career are also profound. Although the 26-year-old has publicly maintained defiance and declared her ambition to defend her Olympic title in Los Angeles in 2028, her path forward has grown increasingly uncertain. World Boxing, the body provisionally approved to oversee boxing in LA, has ruled that any competitor over 18 must undergo a polymerase chain reaction (PCR) genetic test to determine sex. This test, which uses mouth swabs, saliva, or blood to detect chromosomal material, is the same type of test that led to Khelif’s disqualification in 2023. Despite being allowed to compete in Paris under a female passport, Khelif has not provided any documentation proving the presence of female chromosomes in the months since the issue came to light. World Boxing’s stricter policy is a direct response to the outcry that followed the Olympic Games, where both Khelif and Taiwan’s Lin Yu-ting won gold medals despite having previously been banned by the IBA for not possessing XX chromosomes. Critics from the boxing world have not held back. Italy’s Angela Carini, who was defeated by Khelif in Paris, said she feared for her life after being punched with such force. Similarly, Mexico’s Brianda Tamara, who fought Khelif in 2022, commented: “I don’t think I had ever felt like that in my 13 years as a boxer, nor in my sparring with men.” Latin American federations have emerged as key voices in demanding stricter sex verification standards. In correspondence seen by The Telegraph, the Honduran federation urged the Women’s Rights Network that “necessary measures should be taken so that only women by birth can compete in women’s competitions.” Peru’s federation echoed this, stressing the urgent need to “protect women.” As the controversy deepens, the collision between scientific findings, political tensions, and gender identity continues to shake the world of international sport. Whether Imane Khelif will ever fight again at the Olympic level remains unclear, but one certainty persists: the battle over what defines fair competition in women’s boxing is far from over. Adapted by ASEAN Now from The Telegraph 2025-06-04

Greta Thunberg’s Gaza Aid Voyage Sparks Controversy After Senator’s Mocking Remark Republican Senator Lindsey Graham has come under fire after making a sarcastic comment aimed at Greta Thunberg and fellow activists aboard a humanitarian flotilla headed to Gaza. The Swedish climate campaigner, 22, joined other international volunteers, including actor Liam Cunningham of Game of Thrones fame, on a symbolic aid mission organized by the Freedom Flotilla Coalition. Greta Thunberg seen on board ‘Freedom Flotilla’ ship as she is set to head to Gaza alongside 11 other Free Palestine activists. Thunberg is heading to Gaza to demand an end to the ‘siege’ and ‘apartheid.’ “Hope Greta and her friends can swim!” Graham wrote on X, formerly known as Twitter, in response to reports that the group had departed from Catania, Sicily, bound for Gaza. His post, referencing their peaceful mission, drew swift condemnation across social media, with critics accusing the senator of making light of a humanitarian effort in a region ravaged by conflict. The Freedom Flotilla Coalition described the mission as “a non-violent, direct action to challenge Israel’s illegal siege and escalating war crimes.” The organization’s voyage had already faced setbacks, including an alleged drone attack on one of its ships in Maltese waters earlier in May. Thunberg defended her participation in the mission before departure. “We are doing this because no matter what odds we are against, we have to keep trying, because the moment we stop trying is when we lose our humanity,” she said, reinforcing her commitment to nonviolent protest and humanitarian advocacy. The flotilla’s departure and Graham’s inflammatory comment have highlighted the increasingly complex intersection of climate activism, humanitarian advocacy, and global politics. Critics argue that dismissive remarks from high-profile officials do little to advance discourse, particularly when aimed at young activists engaging in peaceful protest. For her part, Thunberg has remained focused on the mission’s broader message — one that transcends climate activism and reaches into the heart of human rights. Whether this voyage will succeed in reaching its destination remains uncertain, but its symbolic weight has already stirred political reaction and public debate on a global scale. Adapted by ASEAN Now from The Times 2025-06-04

Rising Benefit Claims by Foreign Nationals Fuel Political Tensions Over Welfare and Immigration Benefit payments to households with at least one foreign national have surged to nearly £1 billion a month, a sharp increase from £461 million in March 2022, according to newly released government figures. The amount—£941 million in March this year—now accounts for nearly a sixth of all Universal Credit payments, prompting renewed political pressure to curb access to state support for migrants. The data, obtained from the Department of Work and Pensions (DWP) through a freedom of information request, shows that claims by foreign nationals have risen almost 30 per cent in the past year alone. Neil O’Brien, a former Conservative health minister who uncovered the figures, wrote in The Telegraph, “The growth of benefit spending and the rate of migration are both much too fast, and the Government is doing far too little to change either trend. Migrants know that if they can make it to the UK, they will be allowed to stay. As long as that is true, we’ll see more and more coming. Our soft-touch welfare state makes this worse.” The revelations have reignited debate within the Labour Party. A leaked memo from Deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayner advised Chancellor Rachel Reeves to consider limiting access to Universal Credit for immigrants. The memo also warned of rising numbers of people becoming eligible for indefinite leave to remain due to high immigration levels in the early 2020s, increasing the strain on the welfare system. Graham Stringer, a senior Labour backbencher and former leader of Manchester City Council, expressed his concerns about the spending. “Given the state of the country’s finances, everything has to be looked at and reassessed. This expenditure [on foreign claimants] in my opinion is not a priority. We have to be absolutely clear on what our priorities are and in my view these people are not a priority,” he said, comparing the rising cost to cuts in Personal Independence Payments and winter fuel allowances for British citizens. The DWP categorises a foreign claimant as someone who does not hold British or Irish nationality and has passed the Habitual Resident Test, which checks for legal residency and physical presence in the UK. Even if other household members are British, joint claims that include at least one non-British or Irish national are counted as foreign. With net migration hitting a record high of over 900,000 in 2023, Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer has recently proposed extending the qualification period for indefinite leave to remain from five to ten years. His plan would delay access to benefits for tens of thousands, with exceptions made only for those who make a “real and lasting contribution” to the UK economy and society. A government spokesperson responded to the mounting criticism, saying, “We inherited a spiralling benefits system that was out of control. Since last July, we have reduced the proportion of benefit payments to nationals outside the British Isles. Refugees and non-UK or Irish citizens can only access these payments once their immigration status is formally verified by the Home Office, and they satisfy strict tests.” Neil O’Brien warns that Universal Credit is only part of the story. “The soaring bill for Universal Credit payments to people from overseas is the tip of the iceberg,” he said. “Universal Credit only accounts for about half of working age welfare spending.” He added that many council houses in Greater London are occupied by households led by someone born abroad, and questioned the fairness of such distribution when many British taxpayers are struggling. The commentary reflects broader discontent over the intersection of welfare generosity and migration policy. O’Brien concluded, “Both the explosion of welfare spending and the surging numbers arriving in small boats are driven by the same rights culture. Sadly, we have a PM who is a human rights lawyer, who used to sign letters opposing the deportation of criminals. As long as he’s in office, the bills for those who play by the rules will just keep on rising.” Adapted by ASEAN Now from The Telegraph 2025-06-04

Lords Defy Government Again Over AI Copyright Battle as Artists Demand Stronger Protections The UK government has suffered a fourth defeat in the House of Lords over its proposed Data (Use and Access) Bill, as peers continue to push for greater protections for artists and creators in the age of artificial intelligence. In a vote on Monday, the Lords backed a transparency-focused amendment by 242 to 116, despite the measure being rejected multiple times by the House of Commons where the government holds a majority. This persistent standoff between the two Houses of Parliament is highly unusual, with no side showing signs of retreat or compromise. “This is uncharted territory,” said one source from the Lords' camp, underlining the growing momentum behind those seeking to challenge the government's approach. At the heart of the dispute is how best to balance the interests of two powerful industries: technology and the creative arts. The Data (Use and Access) Bill was expected to pass into law smoothly, but now finds itself stuck in a political tug-of-war, with the potential to be shelved entirely. If that happens, other key elements of the legislation—such as proposals to give bereaved parents access to their children’s data, improved NHS data sharing, and a comprehensive 3D map of underground utilities—would also fall away. The core issue revolves around how AI companies use copyrighted material to train their models. The government’s current proposal would allow developers to access any content unless the individual owner explicitly opts out. However, critics argue this amounts to giving tech firms a free pass to exploit creative work without consent or compensation. Baroness Beeban Kidron, a crossbench peer and former film director, is among the most vocal opponents. She warned that ministers are “knowingly throwing UK designers, artists, authors, musicians, media and nascent AI companies under the bus,” describing the current system as “state sanctioned theft.” She has called for an amendment that would require Technology Secretary Peter Kyle to report to Parliament within 15 months of the law’s enactment on its impact on the creative industries. Mr. Kyle has himself acknowledged that copyright law is no longer adequate for the AI era. “Copyright law was once very certain,” he said, “but is now not fit for purpose.” His remarks reflect the ongoing struggle to reconcile legal frameworks with rapid technological advancement. Among those backing the government’s stance is Sir Nick Clegg, former Deputy Prime Minister and now a leading figure at Meta. He has warned that requiring explicit permission from every copyright holder could “kill the AI industry in this country.” Supporters of this view argue that if the UK becomes too restrictive, tech firms will simply move operations abroad, taking investment and jobs with them. Artists and musicians, however, remain outraged. Sir Elton John has been especially outspoken, accusing the government of planning to “rob young people of their legacy and their income,” and branding the current administration “absolute losers.” His comments echo a broader backlash from creators who feel exploited by AI tools that use their work without acknowledgment or payment. This backlash stems from how AI companies originally developed their tools. Before the AI boom, developers scraped vast amounts of content from the internet—much of it created by artists, writers, and musicians—arguing it was publicly available. That scraped data now powers AI systems that can produce images, text, and music in moments, often mimicking specific styles. For example, a recent trend saw people sharing AI-generated images in the style of Studio Ghibli. Yet Hayao Miyazaki, the studio’s co-founder, once called AI in animation “an insult to life itself.” As debate intensifies, the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology insists that changes to the bill will only be considered if they are proven to work for creators. Still, the future of the legislation remains uncertain. With both sides dug in and public support for creators growing, the fight over AI and copyright may well define the next phase of the UK’s digital future. Adapted by ASEAN Now from BBC 2025-06-04

Transgender Community Faces Rising Hate Amid Political Attacks and Social Backlash Transgender and gender-nonconforming individuals were the targets of more than half of all anti-LGBTQ+ incidents tracked by GLAAD over the past year, according to a new report, underscoring the heightened vulnerability of this community amid a surge of political and social hostility. GLAAD's Anti-LGBTQ Extremism Reporting Tracker (ALERT) recorded over 930 anti-LGBTQ+ incidents from May 2024 through April 2025, spanning 49 states and Washington, D.C. Despite a slight decline in the overall number of incidents from the previous year, those specifically targeting transgender and gender-nonconforming people rose by 14%. The report reveals a grim toll: 84 injuries and 10 deaths resulted from violent attacks, while protests, verbal threats, vandalism, and other forms of harassment comprised the bulk of recorded incidents. "When we allow our politicians and our leaders to spread this anti-trans rhetoric, we see the very real impacts of that on the lived experiences of trans people," said Sarah Moore, who oversees the ALERT tracker for GLAAD. She emphasized that the tracker includes both criminal and non-criminal expressions of hate, because "LGBTQ people are going to experience these things as acts of hate, regardless of if they're prosecuted as that." Incidents aimed at state and local governments spiked by 57% compared to the previous year. GLAAD attributes this rise to a wave of anti-LGBTQ+ bills introduced during the 2025 legislative sessions. These measures, often justified as protecting children or traditional values, have added fuel to a culture increasingly hostile toward transgender people. President Trump has issued multiple executive orders targeting the transgender community, threatening access to gender-affirming health care and federal recognition of gender identity. While these policies may not directly incite violence, their dehumanizing rhetoric has created a permissive environment for hate. “It is building a civic society and understanding ... that trans involvement, trans presence, is a threat,” said Minnesota state Rep. Leigh Finke, the first openly transgender member of her state’s legislature. “Either we're too strong for sports or too weak for the military.” Finke has used her platform to champion LGBTQ+ rights but has faced relentless personal attacks. “The most rewarding” professional year of her life has also been “easily ... the worst year, personally, that I’ve ever had.” The threats have lessened, but the scrutiny remains intense, particularly with Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz under national attention and political rivals targeting his support for trans rights. Finke pointed to the brutal killing of Sam Nordquist, a Black transgender man in Minnesota, as an example of the deadly consequences this climate can breed. Nordquist was tortured and murdered by a group that included a woman he had met online. “The truth is that I can tell you how terrible it is for me to be constantly harassed,” Finke said. “But our Black trans family are getting murdered.” While the White House, through spokesperson Harrison Fields, stated that Trump takes all acts of violence or threats seriously and aims to “Make America Safe Again for all Americans,” Finke stressed that rhetoric matters. The “language of dehumanization and ... language of eradication” carries real-life consequences. Federal protections are urgently needed, Finke argued, though she acknowledged the political odds are long. Still, she believes cultural transformation is essential. “We have to continue to make our stories known,” she said. “That’s going to continue to be hard and create pushback, but ... it’s what we have to do.” Adapted by ASEAN Now from Axios 2025-06-04

Fetterman Breaks Ranks with Democrats Over Border Policy, Israel, and Party Direction Senator John Fetterman has intensified his criticism of the Democratic Party, blasting the Biden administration's handling of the U.S.-Mexico border as a “mistake” and voicing growing discontent with his party's stance on immigration, Israel, and internal cohesion. His remarks, delivered during a debate in Boston with Republican Senator Dave McCormick, underscored a widening rift that has prompted speculation about a potential party switch—rumors Fetterman has continued to reject. “I thought the border was really important and our party did not handle the border appropriately. Look at the numbers — 260,000, 300,000 people showing up our borders,” Fetterman told the audience at the Edward M. Kennedy Institute for the United States Senate. “We can’t pretend we can take care of 300,000 people showing up every month,” he continued, referencing the peak in migrant encounters under Biden in December 2023. “That’s roughly the size of Pittsburgh. Now, that’s unacceptable, and that’s a national security issue, and that’s chaos.” Fetterman acknowledged that his views, including support for immigrants and willingness to back Trump-era border investments like a $12 billion security package, place him in direct conflict with his party. “It puts me at odds with my party and my base,” he said. His criticism extended to the Democratic response to the Israel-Gaza war and the campus-based pro-Palestinian protests that have erupted across the U.S. “That’s not free speech, building tent cities on a campus and terrorizing and intimidating Jewish students, that’s not free speech,” Fetterman argued. “And now we really lost, we’ve lost the argument in parts of my party, and for me, that moral clarity, it’s really firmly on Israel.” Fetterman’s divergence from the Democratic base has become more apparent over time, particularly through his legislative record. He supported the Laken Riley Act, which mandates the federal detention of undocumented immigrants accused of various crimes, and voted to confirm Trump figures such as Attorney General Pam Bondi. These choices, coupled with his critiques of party leadership, have stirred anxiety among fellow Democrats. “We really got our a**** kicked in, and especially in the Senate, we could have been left a gigantic, smoking hole in the ground,” he told Politico. “We could have easily lost Michigan, Nevada and Wisconsin, and we could be staring down, 56-44.” Despite widespread speculation, Fetterman has denied plans to join the GOP. “I’ve been on record ... saying I am not going to become a Republican, you know, although maybe some people might be happy on one side,” he said earlier this year. “But I would make a pretty terrible Republican, because, you know, [I’m] pro-choice, pro really strong immigration, pro-LGBTQ … I don’t think I’d be a good fit.” Concerns about Fetterman’s well-being continue to circulate, especially following a May exposé in New York Magazine. The article quoted current and former staffers claiming the senator struggles with mental health and the demands of office. It described an incident in which Fetterman, amid the contentious confirmation hearings for Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, “spent part of the day locked in his office, fighting with [his wife] Gisele and crying while FaceTiming with staff.” The report also claimed he was involved in a 2024 car crash that injured his wife, despite warnings from staff that he should not be driving. Fetterman responded by denouncing the piece as a “hit job” from “best friends – Adam Jentleson and Ben Terris – who sourced anonymous, disgruntled staffers with lies or distorted half-truths.” He added, “My ACTUAL doctors and my family affirmed that I’m very well,” in a statement to The Independent. Adapted by ASEAN Now from The Independent 2025-06-04

Free Speech or Blasphemy? Court Conviction Sparks Outrage Over Koran Burning Case A recent court ruling in the UK has reignited a national debate over the boundaries of free speech and the perceived resurgence of blasphemy laws, following the conviction of a man who burned a copy of the Koran during a protest in London. The case of 50-year-old Hamit Coskun has become a lightning rod for concerns about freedom of expression, especially in criticism of religion. Sam Armstrong: "We DO NOW have a blasphemy law in this country - that is the undeniable logic of this verdict." In his ruling, Judge McGarva dismissed the idea that the prosecution sought to revive blasphemy laws, which were formally abolished in the UK in 2008. “A decision needs to be made as to whether your conduct was simply you exercising your right to protest and freedom of speech or whether your behaviour crossed a line into criminal conduct,” he said. Addressing Coskun directly, he added, “You believe Islam is an ideology which encourages its followers to violence, paedophilia and a disregard for the rights of non-believers. You don’t distinguish between the two. I find you have a deep-seated hatred of Islam and its followers.” Coskun, who is currently claiming asylum in the UK after fleeing persecution in Turkey, called the verdict “an assault on free speech” and questioned whether he would have faced prosecution had he burned a Bible outside Westminster Abbey. “Christian blasphemy laws were repealed in this country more than 15 years ago, and it cannot be right to prosecute someone for blaspheming against Islam,” he said. “As an activist, I will continue to campaign against the threat of Islam.” His defence barrister, Katy Thorne KC, argued that the prosecution criminalised the public burning of any religious text, which she said was tantamount to the reintroduction of blasphemy laws. “It is effectively chilling the right of citizens to criticise religion,” she said, insisting that Coskun’s actions were directed at the religion itself, not its followers. The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) denied that the case was about blasphemy. Philip McGhee, representing the CPS, said, “He is being prosecuted for his disorderly behaviour in public.” He emphasized, “Nothing about the prosecution of this defendant for his words and actions has any impact on the ability of anyone to make any trenchant criticism of a religion.” Shadow Justice Secretary Robert Jenrick sharply criticised the ruling, saying, “This decision is wrong. It revives a blasphemy law that parliament repealed. Free speech is under threat. I have no confidence in Two-Tier Keir to defend the rights of the public to criticise all religions.” The National Secular Society and the Free Speech Union, which funded Coskun’s legal defence, have vowed to appeal. A spokesperson for the FSU said, “This is deeply disappointing. Everyone should be able to exercise their rights to protest peacefully and to freedom of expression, regardless of how offensive or upsetting it may be to some people.” They added, “Religious tolerance is an important British value, but it doesn’t require non-believers to respect the blasphemy codes of believers.” Coskun has been ordered to pay a £240 fine. His legal team, along with the FSU and NSS, have signalled that they intend to take the case as far as the European Court of Human Rights, if necessary. Adapted by ASEAN Now from The Telegraph | X 2025-06-04

Ukraine Demands Return of Kidnapped Children at Istanbul Peace Talks Peace talks between Ukraine and Russia resumed briefly in Istanbul, with both sides exchanging proposals for a possible ceasefire and humanitarian measures. During the one-hour meeting, Ukrainian negotiators handed their Russian counterparts a list of 339 children allegedly abducted and forcibly taken to Russia or Russian-occupied territories—a gesture that underscored the deep emotional and legal tensions that persist amid the ongoing war. The meeting took place at Istanbul’s historic Ciragan Palace, now a luxury hotel, and ended after just over an hour. The two sides presented memorandums outlining their respective visions for ending the conflict. Ukraine’s memorandum, which was made public prior to the session, called for a full ceasefire and concrete guarantees of the country’s security and territorial integrity. Rustem Umerov, Ukraine’s defence minister, led Kyiv’s delegation and was joined by other senior officials including Andriy Yermak, President Volodymyr Zelensky’s chief of staff. Yermak confirmed that the list of missing Ukrainian children had been formally submitted to Russia’s delegation. “Their return is non-negotiable,” he said, stressing that children, under international law, cannot be part of prisoner exchange agreements governed by the Geneva Conventions. “They must be returned,” he added, reinforcing Ukraine’s position that these removals constitute a violation of international norms. Vladimir Medinsky, Russia’s chief negotiator, dismissed the handover of the children’s list as political theatre. He accused Kyiv of “putting on a show” for Western audiences, but nevertheless stated that Russia would cooperate to help reunite the children with their families in Ukraine—“if they can be found.” Russia had not released its proposals ahead of the meeting, but its state media later reported that Moscow’s demands included a full Ukrainian withdrawal from Zaporizhzhia, Kherson, and Donbas—regions Russia claims but does not fully control—as well as limitations on Ukraine’s armed forces. While the two sides remain far apart on political and territorial issues, they did reach limited agreements on humanitarian matters. They pledged to exchange all seriously wounded and sick prisoners, as well as prisoners of war under the age of 25. Additionally, both sides agreed to repatriate the remains of approximately 6,000 fallen soldiers. Medinsky announced that Russia had also offered a temporary ceasefire—lasting two to three days—along certain sections of the front line to allow commanders to collect the dead. It remains unclear whether Ukraine has accepted this offer. Despite the brevity of the talks, one Ukrainian official noted a shift in tone compared to earlier meetings. “The tone was better in this meeting than the last one,” the official said. “Steps taken on humanitarian matters make [the Russians] realise progress can be made.” The latest talks followed a major Ukrainian military strike conducted just hours earlier. In one of the most daring operations of the war, Ukraine reportedly targeted and struck over 40 Russian warplanes stationed thousands of miles from Ukrainian territory—a strike that had been planned for more than 18 months. Meanwhile, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has offered to convene a future summit involving Zelensky, Russian President Vladimir Putin, and former U.S. President Donald Trump. When asked about this proposal, the White House press secretary confirmed that Trump is open to participating “if it comes to that,” but insisted that he wants “both of these leaders and both sides to come to the table together.” While the road to peace remains uncertain, the humanitarian commitments—particularly concerning children and prisoners—are seen as fragile yet essential building blocks in a conflict that has otherwise shown little sign of de-escalation. Adapted by ASEAN Now from The Times 2025-06-04

Ukraine Claims Underwater Strike on Strategic Crimean Bridge Ukraine’s Security Service (SBU) announced on Tuesday that it had successfully carried out a covert underwater operation targeting the bridge that links mainland Russia to the occupied Crimean Peninsula. This marks the third time Ukraine has attacked the strategic Crimean Bridge, a vital supply route for Russian military operations in southern Ukraine. In a message posted to Telegram, the SBU stated: “The Security Service of Ukraine carried out a new unique special operation and struck the Crimean Bridge for the third time – this time underwater! The operation lasted several months.” While specific details about the explosives or the precise damage inflicted have not yet been disclosed, the emphasis on the long duration and underwater execution of the mission suggests a high level of sophistication and planning. The Crimean Bridge, also known as the Kerch Bridge, has been a consistent target for Ukraine since Russia’s full-scale invasion began. Serving as a critical logistical artery between Russia and occupied Crimea, the bridge carries both road and rail traffic and has significant symbolic value for the Kremlin, which has invested heavily in its construction and security. This latest strike follows closely on the heels of another bold Ukrainian military maneuver. On Sunday, the SBU was behind an audacious air raid on a Russian air base housing nuclear-capable strategic bombers. That operation, too, was touted as a high-risk, high-impact mission aimed at degrading Russia’s offensive capabilities. These escalating strikes by Ukraine come amid a broader strategy of targeting critical Russian infrastructure far beyond the immediate front lines. Kyiv has consistently aimed to disrupt supply chains, limit Russia’s military mobility, and send a message of operational reach and resilience despite ongoing pressure on Ukrainian forces. There has been no immediate comment from Russian authorities regarding the reported underwater attack on the Crimean Bridge. In previous incidents, Russia has typically downplayed or denied the extent of the damage, while stepping up defensive measures around critical infrastructure. The latest claim underscores Ukraine’s growing confidence and capability in conducting unconventional warfare. As the conflict grinds on with no clear end in sight, such tactics may become increasingly central to Ukraine’s efforts to erode Russia’s strategic advantages and reassert control over its territory. Adapted by ASEAN Now from CNN 2025-06-04

A deadly incident unfolded early Tuesday in the Rafah region of southern Gaza, where 27 Palestinians were killed and more than 90 wounded by Israeli gunfire while reportedly waiting for humanitarian aid. The information was released by the Gaza health ministry, which is operated by Hamas. The Israel Defence Forces (IDF) acknowledged firing shots in the vicinity of an aid distribution site but claimed the shooting occurred approximately half a kilometre away from the official aid location. According to the IDF, the shots were aimed at individuals they believed posed a threat, having approached the military in a suspicious manner. “Earlier today (Tuesday), during the movement of the crowd along the designated routes toward the aid distribution site—approximately half a kilometre from the site—IDF troops identified several suspects moving toward them, deviating from the designated access routes,” the military said in a statement. “The troops carried out warning fire, and after the suspects failed to retreat, additional shots were directed near a few individual suspects who advanced toward the troops.” The Gaza government’s media office, also under Hamas control, responded to the deaths with strong condemnation. In a statement, it accused Israel of intentionally turning aid centres into deadly zones. “Israel is transforming aid distribution centres into mass death traps and bloodbaths,” it said, highlighting that 102 people had died and 490 more were injured since aid operations began on May 27. The aid site in question was operated by the US-backed Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF), which clarified that the distribution of aid had proceeded safely within its grounds and that no incident had occurred directly at the site. However, the foundation acknowledged reports of injuries nearby. “While the aid distribution was conducted safely and without incident at our site today, we understand that IDF is investigating whether a number of civilians were injured after moving beyond the designated safe corridor and into a closed military zone,” the GHF said. “This was an area well beyond our secure distribution site and operations area.” In a statement Tuesday morning, GHF said it handed out “21 truckloads of food this morning, totaling 20,160 boxes.” “We understand that IDF is investigating whether a number of civilians were injured after moving beyond the designated safe corridor and into a closed military zone,” GHF said. ” We recognise the difficult nature of the situation and advise all civilians to remain in the safe corridor when travelling to our distribution sites,” the organization added. Tuesday’s tragic event underscores the increasingly perilous environment surrounding humanitarian aid operations in Gaza. As military tensions persist and desperation for food and supplies intensifies, civilians are caught in the crossfire, with aid efforts now shadowed by repeated violence and growing mistrust. Adapted by ASEAN Now from Sky News 2025-06-03

A posts making unsubstantiated inflammatory & racist slurs, an off topic link and a comment on moderation by the same poster has been removed. @NorthernRyland

Please continue in the topic already running from 2 weeks ago. //closed//

Bernie Sanders Sparks a Progressive Surge After Democratic Defeat Senator Bernie Sanders is once again mobilizing his formidable political machine — not for a presidential run, but to reshape the Democratic Party's direction after what he views as a failure to connect with working-class Americans in 2024. In doing so, he’s aiming to fill what he sees as a glaring void left by party leaders, including Vice President Kamala Harris. In an interview with The Washington Post during his recent “Fighting Oligarchy” tour, Sanders didn’t hold back. While maintaining that Harris is a friend, he was blunt about her presidential campaign. “The campaign she ran went around the country with Liz Cheney, had billionaires talking for her, basically did not talk to the needs of the working class of this country,” Sanders said. Now, the Vermont senator — who caucuses with Democrats but maintains his status as an independent — is stepping up efforts to push the party toward more progressive policies and grassroots engagement. He has called for recruiting working-class candidates who reject funding from billionaires and lobbyists, people he says have constrained the Democratic agenda. His political group, Friends of Bernie Sanders, has already attracted about 7,000 interested recruits, half of whom are considering running as independents. “Do Democrats do enough? No,” Sanders said. “The difference that I have with the Democratic leadership is not in the need to vigorously oppose Trump. It’s to bring forth an agenda that resonates with working-class families. And I think there are a number of Trump people who will support that agenda.” This effort hasn’t been met with universal enthusiasm. Some party veterans fear Sanders could further splinter the Democrats at a time when unity is crucial. “If the Democrats have a shot at winning the House and the Senate, they need to be firing on all cylinders and not just steering to the hard left or the hard right,” said Steve Israel, former chair of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. “The point of politics is winning in order to govern, not passing ideological purity tests.” Still, Sanders seems undeterred. His team is planning staff hires in more than three dozen districts across 18 states to oppose former President Donald Trump’s agenda and to train activists to pressure Republicans against slashing the social safety net. Sanders himself has already endorsed four Democratic candidates: Adelita Grijalva in Arizona, Robert Peters in Illinois, Troy Jackson for Maine governor, and Abdul El-Sayed for Senate in Michigan. “We have to keep our eye on who really is the enemy,” said former DNC chair Jaime Harrison, voicing concern about primary fights and potential vote-splitting. But Sanders is thinking long-term. He laid out a three-phase strategy in recent calls with supporters: block Trump’s legislative agenda, retake the House in 2026, and reduce the political influence of wealthy donors. “All that we ask from you is that you have courage to stand up with a battered working class in this country. Have the courage to take on the wealthy and the powerful,” Sanders told the Zoom audience. Though Sanders says he’s unlikely to run for president again, his movement shows no signs of slowing. Recent rallies with Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez drew large crowds, fueling speculation about who might carry the torch next. His campaign’s coffers are ready, with over $11.5 million raised in the first quarter of the year and nearly $20 million on hand. Sanders remains skeptical of the Democratic Party’s current organizing efforts, especially in red states. “There are a number of states around the country where it almost virtually does not exist,” he said. Democratic Party chairman Ken Martin has increased funding to state parties, including in conservative strongholds, and emphasized a renewed focus on uniting working-class families across all demographics. Yet Sanders’s team insists their recruits are different. “These are people who know why they are running,” said Sanders adviser Faiz Shakir. “It’s a vision of taking on the elite, taking on the powerful, taking on the establishment to make working-class lives better. That is what motivates them.” Related Topics: Bernie Sanders Defends Private Jet Use During Anti-Oligarchy Tour: “No Apologies for That” Adapted by ASEAN Now from Washington Post 2025-06-04

Weathering the Climate Debate: Meet the Young Meteorologist Challenging the Hysteria In the quiet town of Charles Town, West Virginia, a young voice is rising above the din of climate alarmism. Chris Martz, a 22-year-old meteorologist fresh out of Millersville University, is challenging the prevailing narrative on climate change — and he’s not doing it quietly. “I’m the anti-Greta Thunberg. In fact, she’s only 19 days older than me,” Martz says with a confident grin. He’s made it his mission to counter what he calls climate hysteria, with science and data at the center of his argument. While Greta Thunberg became a global symbol of climate urgency through emotional pleas and activism, Martz has taken a more analytical route. “I’ve always been a science-based, fact-based person,” he explains over lunch. His father’s advice stuck with him: “If you’re going to put something online, especially getting into a scientific or political topic, make sure what you’re saying is accurate. That way you establish a good credibility and rapport with your followers.” He began tweeting about weather in high school and now commands an audience of more than 100,000 followers. Among them are powerful political figures, including Senators Ted Cruz and Mike Lee and Representatives Chip Roy and Thomas Massie. Florida Governor Ron DeSantis even paraphrased one of Martz’s tweets last year to push back against claims that Hurricane Milton was a product of climate change. “It was word-for-word my post,” Martz says. “His team follows me.” Martz has caught the attention of notable figures outside of politics too. Former EPA Administrator Andrew Wheeler recently hosted him for lunch in Washington, and Hollywood celebrities like Dean Cain and Larry the Cable Guy have become admirers. “They didn’t have to be as nice as they were. They just treated me like I was their next-of-kin,” Martz says. Born to a mechanic father and a mother working in federal water science, Martz’s fascination with meteorology began early. But his drive wasn’t fueled by storm-chasing fantasies — it came from skepticism. He recalls sweating in church on Christmas Eve 2015 during an unseasonably warm day. “Everyone seems to remember white Christmases when they were a kid, but the data doesn’t back that up. It may be that we’re remembering all the movies where it snows at Christmas,” he notes. That curiosity turned into a full-blown mission after he investigated Hurricane Harvey in 2017. Contrary to media narratives, Martz found there had been a 12-year drought of major hurricanes making landfall in the U.S. “That was the longest period on record,” he says, referencing data going back to the 1700s. Martz calls himself a “lukewarm skeptic,” acknowledging some warming and the role humans may play, but attributing most changes to natural variability. “Models are not evidence,” he says, cautioning against overreliance on climate projections. “Since 1979, there’s been an eastward shift in Tornado Alley. Okay, that’s evidence of climate change. That’s not evidence that humans caused it.” He believes many natural phenomena, like tornado patterns and forest fires, have historical precedents that debunk the idea of a new, human-driven climate apocalypse. “Between 900 and 1300 AD, there was a 400-year-long drought that was worse than today’s in the southwestern United States,” he says, disputing popular claims about worsening wildfires. For Martz, the true danger lies not in carbon emissions but in the politicization of science. “It’s all a giant money-making scheme,” he asserts. “Politicians and bureaucrats latch on to scientific issues to try and get certain policies implemented. In usual cases, it’s a left-wing, authoritarian kind of control.” Though he’s faced smear campaigns and attempts to have him expelled during college, Martz remains undeterred. “They don’t seem to realize yet that cancel culture doesn’t work anymore,” he says. “They’re getting angry because they’re losing their grip on the narrative.” With youth on his side and data in hand, Chris Martz represents a rising countercurrent in the climate conversation — one that insists truth must take precedence over panic. Adapted by ASEAN Now from NYP 2025-06-04

Elon Musk Calls Out Cory Booker’s Gesture, Claims Media Double Standard Elon Musk reignited controversy over Nazi salute accusations this weekend by targeting Democratic Senator Cory Booker, claiming the New Jersey lawmaker mimicked the infamous gesture during an event in California. Booker’s team swiftly rejected the accusation, calling it a mischaracterization of a simple wave and highlighting what they say is bad-faith outrage from Musk and his supporters. The moment in question occurred Saturday night during the California Democratic Convention, where Booker concluded his speech by placing a hand on his heart before extending his arm toward the audience. Musk quickly seized on the motion, accusing the senator of hypocrisy given the backlash Musk himself received earlier this year for a gesture some believed mirrored a Nazi salute. “Legacy media lies,” Musk posted on X, formerly Twitter, quote-tweeting a video of the event and criticizing the lack of media scrutiny directed at Booker. He didn’t stop there. On Sunday, Musk escalated the rhetoric, posting an image collage of prominent Democrats—Barack Obama, Elizabeth Warren, Kamala Harris, and Hillary Clinton—with their arms extended in similar poses, captioned, “We know where Cory Booker learned his Nazi salute from,” followed by a raised eyebrow emoji. Booker’s spokesperson, Maya Krishna-Rogers, dismissed the accusation in a statement to Forbes. “Cory Booker was obviously just waving to the crowd. Anyone who claims his wave is the same as Elon Musk’s gesture is operating in bad faith. The differences between the two are obvious to anyone without an agenda.” The flare-up echoes a similar controversy from January, when Musk drew widespread criticism after making a gesture during an event supporting Donald Trump. Musk pounded his fist to his chest and then thrust his right arm into the air twice—actions that triggered condemnation from international figures, including Spain’s labor minister and Germany’s health minister. At the time, Musk did not explain the gesture but argued that critics were engaged in politically motivated attacks. “The ‘everyone is Hitler’ attack is sooo tired,” he said on X. The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) weighed in after Musk’s incident, stating the tech billionaire had likely made “an awkward gesture in a moment of enthusiasm, not a Nazi salute,” and encouraged the public to extend “a bit of grace.” The ADL has not yet commented on the allegations against Booker. Adding to the debate, Rep. Elise Stefanik, R-N.Y., came to Musk’s defense on Sunday. “The mainstream media is totally corrupt,” she posted on X. “They were hyperventilating about this false smear of Elon… Neither Elon Musk or @CoryBooker are giving the Nazi salute. Americans see thru this obvious and destructive double standard by the totally broken media and Democrat Party.” Musk replied, “they are such hypocrites.” While the debate continues online, observers note that accusations of Nazi symbolism—once reserved for extreme cases—are increasingly being thrown around in political discourse, raising concerns about desensitization and partisan misuse. Still, Musk’s reaction highlights ongoing tension between him and Democrats, particularly over what he sees as selective outrage by media and political opponents. Booker, for his part, has not publicly addressed Musk’s accusation directly, leaving his spokesperson’s remarks to stand as the campaign’s official response. Meanwhile, the broader conversation reflects an increasingly polarized environment where even a wave can spark a firestorm. Adapted by ASEAN Now from Forbes 2025-06-04

Pressure Mounts on UK Government Over Golden Temple Massacre Inquiry Thousands gathered in central London, renewing calls for the UK government to honour its long-standing pledge to investigate Britain’s potential involvement in the 1984 Golden Temple massacre. Amid growing pressure, Sky News has been told that an inquiry into the UK’s military role is now “under consideration”. The massacre, known as Operation Blue Star, saw Indian forces storm the Golden Temple in Amritsar, Sikhism’s holiest shrine, in June 1984. The operation targeted armed separatists advocating for an independent Sikh homeland. The Indian government maintained it was a counterterrorism measure, but hundreds of civilians were killed in the operation. For decades, the Sikh community has sought answers about the extent of foreign support provided to the Indian government. The issue gained renewed urgency in 2014 when classified documents revealed that the Thatcher government had sent a British SAS officer to India to assist with planning the raid. While a subsequent internal UK review concluded that Britain's involvement was “purely advisory” and “limited”, many in the Sikh community rejected the findings, pointing to the narrow scope and speed of the investigation. Calls for a comprehensive, independent inquiry have only intensified since. “My message to the government is that it’s about time that the Sikh community got their truth and transparency,” said Tan Dhesi, Britain’s most prominent Sikh MP and Labour chair of the House of Commons Defence Committee. “That can only come about through an inquiry to establish the extent of the Thatcher-led government’s involvement.” Dhesi also revealed to Sky News that he has been in contact with ministers and officials at Number 10 who have confirmed that an inquiry is “under consideration”. However, nearly 11 months into Labour’s time in office, there has been no formal update from the government. During Sunday’s rally, community leaders and activists demanded that Labour follow through on its prior commitments. While in opposition, Labour pledged an independent inquiry in its 2017 and 2019 manifestos, and again in 2022 through a letter from Sir Keir Starmer addressed to the Sikh community. “A future Labour government will open an independent inquiry into Britain’s military role in the Indian army’s 1984 raid on the Golden Temple in Amritsar,” the letter said. Angela Rayner, now Deputy Prime Minister, reinforced the promise in a social media post just before the last general election, stating: “Labour stands with the Sikh community in calling for an inquiry into the historic role Britain played.” Yet, Labour’s silence since entering office has drawn criticism. Speaking at Sunday’s protest, Dabinderjit Singh OBE, lead executive for political engagement at the Sikh Federation (UK), stated: “It is totally unacceptable that the Labour leadership remains silent on its promise. A judge-led public inquiry must take place so we have the full truth. If Labour breaks its promise, it will be an act of betrayal. Labour will lose much of the Sikh vote if they let us down.” In January, during a House exchange, Leader of the House Lucy Powell addressed the matter, saying: “I know that this matter is of great importance to the Sikh community across the UK. We need to get to the bottom of what happened, and I will ensure that the ministers responsible are in touch with him [Mr Dhesi] to discuss the matter further.” Over 400 Sikh organisations have also written directly to Prime Minister Starmer this year, urging him to make good on his word. Yet, according to Sky News, there are ongoing concerns within government over how a public inquiry might affect the UK’s diplomatic relationship with India, given the countries’ increasingly close economic and political ties. For the Sikh community, however, the issue remains one of principle and justice. As protestors made clear on Sunday, only a full and independent investigation will suffice — and the longer the silence, the deeper the mistrust grows. Adapted by ASEAN Now from Sky News 2025-06-04