Social Media

@MalcolmB enough of your trolling on this topic, two of your posts removed already

A post making false claims about Putin instructing Trump to withdraw from the Iran Nuclear treaty to destabilize NATO has been removed. @cjinchiangrai "Topics or posts deemed to be scaremongering, deliberately misleading or which deliberately distort information will be 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."

//Closed// The topic is already running here. Trump Moves to Dismantle Department of Education Having Signed Executive Order

A stark new report warns that climate change is spiraling out of control, with many of its effects now deemed irreversible. In 2024, records were shattered for greenhouse gas emissions, global temperatures, and sea level rise, marking an alarming acceleration in the planet’s warming trajectory. According to the World Meteorological Organization (WMO), last year was officially the hottest in the 175-year record and the first time the Earth's average surface temperature surpassed 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels. This threshold was set under the Paris Agreement as a critical limit, yet the consequences of breaching it, even temporarily, could be felt for centuries, if not millennia. The WMO's report highlights cascading effects on the planet’s climate system, including the rapid retreat of glaciers and ice sheets, intensified extreme weather events, and rising ocean temperatures. Although a warming El Niño event contributed to 2024’s extreme heat, scientists confirm that greenhouse gas emissions were the primary driver. Carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere reached an unprecedented 3.276 trillion tonnes—the highest in over 800,000 years. The concentration of CO2 hit 420 parts per million (ppm) in 2024, an increase of 2.3 ppm from 2022 and 151% above pre-industrial levels. “The latest planetary health check tells us that Earth is profoundly ill. Many of the vital signs are sounding alarms,” said Professor Stephen Belcher, chief scientist at the UK Met Office. Surface temperatures continued their upward trajectory, with 2024’s global mean surface temperature measuring 1.55°C above the pre-industrial average. While this figure is higher than the 1.5°C threshold set in the Paris Agreement, the agreement remains technically intact, as its warming limits are based on long-term averages rather than single-year data. The WMO estimates that the long-term warming trend now stands at 1.34–1.41°C above pre-industrial levels. The world’s oceans, which absorb 90% of the heat trapped by greenhouse gases, reached their highest temperatures in recorded history in 2024. The rate of ocean warming has also surged dramatically, with data showing that from 2005 to 2024, the pace of ocean warming more than doubled compared to the period between 1960 and 2005. Even in the most optimistic low-emissions scenarios, ocean temperatures are projected to continue rising for the rest of the century. Since CO2 lingers in the atmosphere for generations, the effects of today's emissions will be felt for centuries. “The data for 2024 show that our oceans continued to warm, and sea levels continued to rise,” said WMO Secretary-General Celeste Saulo. “The frozen parts of Earth’s surface, known as the cryosphere, are melting at an alarming rate: glaciers continue to retreat, and Antarctic sea ice reached its second-lowest extent ever recorded.” Both the maximum and minimum sea-ice extents in Antarctica in 2024 ranked as the second lowest since records began in 1979. This marks the third consecutive year that the minimum daily sea-ice extent has fallen below two million square kilometers. In the Arctic, the minimum sea-ice extent of 4.28 million square kilometers was the seventh lowest on record. Glacier loss is accelerating at an unprecedented rate. Over the past three years, the world has experienced the largest three-year loss in glacier size, with particularly severe shrinkage observed in Norway, Sweden, Svalbard, and the Andes. Earth's glaciers are now melting so quickly that they contribute 273 billion tonnes of ice into the ocean each year. Since 2000, this has raised global sea levels by 1.8 cm, making glacier melt the second biggest contributor to rising oceans. Sea level rise is now at its highest point since satellite records began in 1993. The rate of increase is also accelerating, with the annual rise from 2015 to 2024 doubling that of the period from 1993 to 2002, increasing from 2.1 mm per year to 4.7 mm per year. Extreme weather events intensified globally in 2024, displacing more people than in any of the previous 16 years. “Meanwhile, extreme weather continues to have devastating consequences around the world,” Saulo warned. As a warmer climate holds more moisture and energy, extreme weather events are becoming more frequent and severe. Some regions are experiencing rapid swings between extreme wet and dry conditions, a phenomenon scientists call “climate whiplash.” In the United States, Hurricanes Helene and Milton both made landfall on Florida’s west coast in October as major hurricanes, causing tens of billions of dollars in damages. Hurricane Helene alone was responsible for over 200 deaths due to extreme rainfall and flooding—the deadliest mainland U.S. hurricane since Katrina in 2005. Despite the dire findings, scientists insist that the worst impacts of climate change can still be mitigated. “We are making progress but need to go further and need to go faster,” Saulo stressed. She pointed out that only half of all countries worldwide have adequate early warning systems, a gap that must be addressed urgently. UN Secretary-General António Guterres echoed this sentiment, emphasizing that while the planet is sounding ever more urgent distress signals, action is still possible. “Our planet is issuing more distress signals—but this report shows that limiting long-term global temperature rise to 1.5 degrees Celsius is still possible,” Guterres said. Based on a report by Daily Mail 2025-03-21

The Treasury Department has appointed two IRS whistleblowers to examine alleged political interference in the investigation into Hunter Biden’s tax practices. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent announced Tuesday that Gary Shapley and Joseph Ziegler, both former IRS investigators who claimed the original inquiry was compromised, will serve as senior advisers at the department. Shapley and Ziegler’s new roles will focus on uncovering any misconduct within the IRS related to the case. “We’ll learn what’s been going on at the IRS, what’s been wrong, how could this Hunter Biden nonsense have happened. And we’re going to make sure it doesn’t happen to anyone again, whether they’re Republicans, Democrats or independents,” Bessent said during an appearance on Fox Business. He emphasized that they would have a year to investigate the issues surrounding the IRS’s handling of the matter. In addition to their investigative duties, Bessent stated that the two would contribute to broader IRS reforms. “They will help further the agency’s focus on collections, modernization, and customer service, so we can deliver a more effective and efficient IRS experience for hardworking American taxpayers,” he said in a separate statement. Senator Chuck Grassley, a senior Republican from Iowa and a longtime advocate for whistleblowers, welcomed the decision. He had previously urged Bessent to appoint Shapley and Ziegler to leadership roles within the IRS. “If we reinstate whistleblowers who have been retaliated against, it will send a clear signal that pointing out wrongdoing is an honorable thing to do,” Grassley said. Shapley and Ziegler have consistently argued that political pressure played a role in shielding Hunter Biden from more serious consequences in the tax probe. Their testimony before Congress, as well as public statements, have suggested that the Justice Department interfered in the yearslong investigation. Hunter Biden ultimately pleaded guilty last year in California to several federal tax offenses, after an earlier plea agreement collapsed. His father, former President Joe Biden, issued a pardon for his son late last year, just before leaving office. Shapley, Ziegler, and their congressional supporters have also claimed that the IRS retaliated against them for speaking out. Their new positions within the Treasury Department mark a significant shift, as they will now have the opportunity to scrutinize the very agency they accused of wrongdoing. Based on a report by Politico 2025-03-21

House Republicans are increasingly setting their sights on federal judges for impeachment, primarily targeting those who have issued rulings unfavorable to the Trump administration. This move marks a significant departure from historical precedent, as impeachment has traditionally been reserved for judges accused of gross personal misconduct, financial corruption, or other severe criminal offenses. Former President Donald Trump has actively encouraged the effort, calling for judicial impeachments, though some Republican lawmakers remain hesitant. U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts weighed in on Tuesday, issuing a rare statement to push back against the movement. "For more than two centuries, it has been established that impeachment is not an appropriate response to disagreement concerning a judicial decision," Roberts stated. "The normal appellate review process exists for that purpose." House Republicans have introduced or threatened impeachment articles against more than six federal district court judges who have ruled against Trump in various cases. While Republican leaders in the House have not dismissed the idea of moving forward with impeachment votes, their narrow two-seat majority—along with some Republican lawmakers' reluctance—makes such votes difficult to pass. Removing any of these judges would require all Senate Republicans and at least 14 Democrats to vote for conviction, a nearly impossible hurdle. Among the judges being targeted is Chief Judge James Boasberg of the District of Columbia, who angered Trump by ordering a plane deporting about 250 alleged Venezuelan gang members to turn around as he reviewed the administration's application of the Alien Enemies Act of 1789. Trump lashed out on Truth Social, saying, "This judge, like many of the Crooked Judges I am forced to appear before, should be IMPEACHED!!!" In response, Rep. Brandon Gill (R-Texas) introduced articles of impeachment the same day, with backing from five Republican co-sponsors. Judge Paul Engelmayer of the Southern District of New York also faces impeachment threats after ruling last month to block the Department of Justice from accessing Department of Treasury records containing sensitive personal data. Reps. Derrick Van Orden (R-Ariz.) and Eli Crane (R-Ariz.) introduced impeachment articles against Engelmayer, with Crane's measure garnering support from seven Republican co-sponsors. Judge John Bates of the District of Columbia drew the ire of Rep. Andy Ogles (R-Tenn.) after ordering the Trump administration to restore health agency websites that had been shut down under an executive order targeting Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) programs. Ogles introduced impeachment articles, accusing Bates of promoting "socially divisive and destructive LGBTQI+ content" and claiming his conduct was "so utterly lacking in intellectual honesty and basic integrity that he is guilty of high crimes and misdemeanors." Judge Amir Ali, also of the District of Columbia, ruled that Trump did not have "unbounded power" to withhold foreign aid appropriated by Congress and ordered the administration to resume frozen aid payments. Ogles introduced impeachment articles against Ali, denouncing the ruling as "arbitrary and capricious" and echoing similar claims of lacking integrity. Judge John J. McConnell Jr. of the District of Rhode Island has been targeted for impeachment after blocking an Office of Management and Budget order that temporarily froze all federal grants, loans, and financial assistance programs. Rep. Andrew Clyde (R-Ga.) recently announced his intention to introduce impeachment articles against McConnell. Judge Adam Abelson of the District of Maryland is also facing scrutiny after issuing a ruling last month blocking Trump's executive order to eliminate all federal funding for DEI-related programs. Eli Crane hinted at impeaching Abelson in a post on X, an idea that gained traction after receiving support from Trump confidante Elon Musk. Finally, Judge Theodore Chuang, also of the District of Maryland, is under fire for ruling that the Trump administration likely violated the Constitution by shutting down the U.S. Agency for International Development. Ogles, in a post on X, simply wrote: "Impeach him!" Despite the mounting pressure from Trump allies, the likelihood of these impeachment efforts succeeding remains low. With strong institutional resistance from the judicial branch and a divided Congress, removing federal judges over policy disagreements faces significant legal and political obstacles. Based on a report by AXIOS 2025-03-21

The NHS and police forces in the UK have been urged to collect data on biological sex rather than solely relying on self-declared gender identity, following an independent review commissioned under Rishi Sunak’s leadership. Currently, many public bodies record only an individual’s gender identity, meaning biological men who identify as women are officially listed as female. Critics argue that this practice undermines research into women’s issues and hinders the ability to identify trends in rape cases, medical studies, and gender pay disparities. The review has concluded that public bodies must not conflate sex and gender identity in their data collection. However, the government has not yet confirmed whether it will implement these recommendations. Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer has previously altered his stance on gender issues, stating in 2023 that “99.9 per cent of women haven’t got a penis” before later acknowledging “the biology” of “men having penises and women having vaginas.” Professor Alice Sullivan from the Social Research Institute at University College London, who led the review, emphasized that public bodies should record individuals' biological sex and, where applicable, separately note their gender identity. She warned that the increasing tendency to treat gender identity as interchangeable with sex has made public records unstable, posing risks to individuals, especially minors. The report highlighted an urgent need for the NHS to stop assigning new identification numbers based on self-declared gender identity, as this could lead to patients being invited to incorrect medical screenings. It also called on the Home Secretary to mandate all 43 police forces in England and Wales, along with the British Transport Police, to record sex rather than gender identity. Professor Sullivan argued that those possessing a Gender Recognition Certificate should be recorded according to their biological sex rather than their legal sex. She also recommended that official forms should avoid the phrase “sex assigned at birth,” stating that sex is determined at conception. Speaking to The Telegraph, Professor Sullivan described the conflation of sex and gender identity across public bodies as “systematic.” She said, “There seems to be a legal fiction that public bodies cannot collect data on sex. This report should show them that they can collect data on sex.” The report follows previous concerns about the recording of gender identity in official statistics. In 2021, the Office for National Statistics had to revise its data after a flawed wording in the census led to an overestimation of the number of transgender individuals in the UK. Professor Sullivan’s findings indicated that administrative and survey data in the health and justice sectors have become unreliable due to shifting definitions of gender over the past decade. She explained, “In some cases, the loss of data on sex poses risks to individuals. This is particularly apparent within health and social care. The risks are especially high in the case of minors.” She also found that organizations were frequently merging data on sex and gender identity. For example, rape crisis centres in Scotland used a data management system allowing multiple gender options for both victims and perpetrators, including male, female, intersex, genderqueer, and other categories. The report urged a clear distinction between biological sex and gender identity, recommending that the term “gender” be avoided altogether due to its multiple interpretations. Professor Sullivan explained that while some use it as a synonym for biological sex, others see it as referring to personal identity. Furthermore, the report emphasized that government departments should foster open discussions on sex and gender rather than silencing those with gender-critical views who emphasize the importance of biological sex. Explaining why people with a Gender Recognition Certificate should still be categorized based on their biological sex, she stated, “Sex as a biological category is constant across time and across jurisdictions, whereas the concept of ‘legal sex’ subject to a GRC may be subject to change in the future and varies across jurisdictions. Using natal sex future-proofs data collection against any such change, ensuring consistency.” The review, commissioned by former Conservative science secretary Michelle Donelan, was quietly published on the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology’s website. Maya Forstater, chief executive of women’s rights charity Sex Matters, described the review’s conclusions as “devastatingly clear” in outlining the damage caused by the mismanagement of sex data. She said, “This review is devastatingly clear about the harms caused by carelessness with sex data and a decade-long failure of the civil service to maintain impartiality and uphold data standards.” She argued that the loss of reliable sex data has caused real harm, impacting individuals and research while undermining the integrity of policy-making. “The destruction of data about sex has caused real harm to individuals and research and undermined the integrity of policy-making. The problems are everywhere, from NHS records that do not record biological sex to police forces that record male sex offenders as women. Conflating sex and gender identity is not a harmless act of kindness but a damaging dereliction of duty,” she said. Forstater further criticized bureaucrats for allowing data standards to deteriorate, attributing the situation to officials seeking recognition from advocacy groups like Stonewall. “These corrupted data standards have been set by bureaucrats insulated from the impact of their decisions, and competing for Stonewall awards,” she said. She concluded that the government should act quickly to adopt the review’s recommendations. “The Government should swiftly implement the recommendations of the Sullivan Review in order to restore administrative integrity in every place the state collects data on the sex of its citizens.” Based on a report by The Telegraph 2025-03-21

U.S. President Donald Trump has reportedly set a two-month deadline for Iran to reach a new nuclear agreement, according to a U.S. official and two sources briefed on the matter. The ultimatum was included in a letter sent to Iran’s Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, raising the stakes for potential diplomatic talks or military action. It remains unclear whether the two-month deadline began when the letter was delivered or if it will start once negotiations commence. However, if Iran rejects Trump’s proposal and refuses to negotiate, the risk of U.S. or Israeli military action against Iran’s nuclear facilities will significantly increase. Iran’s nuclear program has advanced considerably over the past four years, making it closer than ever to producing a nuclear weapon. According to the International Atomic Energy Agency, Iran possesses enough 60% enriched uranium to build six nuclear bombs if further enriched to 90%. Iran, however, denies that it is pursuing nuclear weapons. Two weeks ago, Trump disclosed in an interview with Fox News' Maria Bartiromo that he had sent a letter to Khamenei offering direct negotiations. The following day, he warned that the U.S. was "down to the final moments" regarding Iran’s nuclear ambitions. “We can't let them have a nuclear weapon. Something is going to happen very soon. I would rather have a peace deal than the other option, but the other option will solve the problem,” he stated. The letter was delivered recently by Trump envoy Steve Witkoff to the President of the United Arab Emirates, Mohammed Bin Zayed (MBZ), in a meeting in Abu Dhabi. The next day, MBZ’s envoy Anwar Gargash traveled to Tehran and handed the letter to Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi. Sources familiar with the letter described it as “tough.” While it proposed negotiations for a new nuclear agreement, it also included warnings about potential consequences if Iran rejected the offer and continued its nuclear program. Trump emphasized that he did not want open-ended negotiations and explicitly stated a two-month period for reaching a deal, according to two sources. Before delivering the letter, the White House briefed key U.S. allies, including Israel, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE, on its contents. Neither the White House nor the Iranian mission to the United Nations has commented on the matter. Last week, Khamenei dismissed Trump’s letter and proposal as “a deception” designed to create the impression that Iran was unwilling to negotiate. While he stated he was against talks with the U.S., the Iranian mission to the UN later released a statement that did not entirely rule out discussions. “If the objective of negotiations is to address concerns vis-à-vis any potential militarization of Iran’s nuclear program, such discussions may be subject to consideration,” the statement read. However, the Iranian mission made it clear that if the talks were aimed at dismantling Iran’s nuclear program to claim a diplomatic victory over the Obama-era nuclear deal, “such negotiations will never take place.” Iran’s Foreign Ministry recently told reporters that Trump’s letter is still under review and that a response is being prepared. Meanwhile, tensions in the region continue to escalate. Trump warned on Monday that the U.S. would hold Iran responsible for any further attacks by the Houthis in Yemen, threatening “dire consequences.” Iran has denied controlling the Houthis. On Wednesday, Trump claimed on Truth Social that there were reports of Iran reducing its military support for the Houthis but added that they were “still sending large levels of supplies.” He reiterated his demand for Iran to cease aiding the Houthis. Trump’s national security adviser, Mike Waltz, reinforced the administration’s stance, stating that Iran must “hand over and give up” all aspects of its nuclear program, including missiles, weaponization, and uranium enrichment, or face “a whole series of other consequences.” Waltz emphasized that Iran had been offered a diplomatic solution but warned that failure to comply could have severe repercussions. Based on a report by AXIOS 2025-03-21

A jury in North Dakota has ruled against Greenpeace, holding the environmental organization liable for defamation and other allegations tied to its opposition to the Dakota Access Pipeline. The verdict, delivered on Wednesday by a nine-member jury, found Greenpeace responsible for significant damages sought by Energy Transfer, the Dallas-based company behind the controversial pipeline. The legal battle stems from the widespread protests in 2016 and 2017 against the Dakota Access Pipeline’s route beneath the Missouri River, just upstream of the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe’s reservation. The tribe has long argued that the pipeline threatens their water supply, fueling a movement that drew international attention. Despite these concerns, the pipeline has been in operation since mid-2017, carrying crude oil across multiple states. Energy Transfer and its subsidiary, Dakota Access, filed the lawsuit against Greenpeace International, Greenpeace USA, and Greenpeace Fund Inc., accusing them of defamation, civil conspiracy, trespassing, nuisance, and other unlawful actions. The jury ultimately sided with the company, awarding them damages in the hundreds of millions. Attorney Trey Cox, representing the plaintiffs, argued that Greenpeace engaged in a deliberate effort to halt the pipeline’s construction. During his opening statement, Cox alleged that Greenpeace provided funding to bring outside activists into the protest area, supplied materials for blockades, facilitated protest training sessions, and spread false information about the project to obstruct its progress. Greenpeace, however, strongly denied these claims. Legal representatives for the organization maintained that there was no concrete evidence linking Greenpeace to the alleged misconduct. They asserted that Greenpeace employees had minimal to no direct involvement in the protests and insisted that the organization played no role in delaying the pipeline’s construction or affecting Energy Transfer’s financial operations. Following the verdict, Greenpeace representatives described the case as a significant challenge to First Amendment rights, emphasizing that the lawsuit could set a dangerous precedent for free speech and protest activities. The organization expressed concern that the ruling could have far-reaching consequences, potentially threatening its ability to advocate for environmental causes in the future. Energy Transfer, on the other hand, framed the lawsuit as a matter of legal accountability rather than an attack on free speech. A company spokesperson previously stated, "The lawsuit is about Greenpeace not following the law, not free speech." The ruling marks a major legal victory for Energy Transfer and raises questions about the future of advocacy groups involved in high-profile environmental protests. As Greenpeace weighs its next legal steps, the outcome of this case may shape the landscape for activism and corporate accountability in the years to come. Based on a report by NYP 2025-03-21

The Kurdish troops patrolling the sprawling detention camps of northeast Syria face constant danger. Stones and rocks pelting their armored vehicles are minor compared to the frequent knife attacks and bombings from ISIS-affiliated detainees. For over six years, these soldiers have guarded camps filled with the wives and relatives of ISIS fighters, but the threat is only growing stronger. Kane Ahmed, the commander of the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) troops overseeing the al Hol camp, paints a grim picture. “The threat of ISIS has increased both inside and outside the camp... especially after the fall of the Syrian regime. It’s gone up a lot, and we see attempts by them to escape on almost a daily basis.” The perimeter fence, reinforced multiple times, remains inadequate. Three round-the-clock CCTV rooms monitor the area, but intelligence reports confirm that ISIS cells outside the camp are smuggling in weapons and aiding escapes. “We know they are receiving help,” the commander explains. Delivery trucks have been used to hide detainees in hollowed-out seats, while waterways have become escape routes for smuggling children out. These children are the next generation of ISIS fighters, indoctrinated from birth. More than 60% of al Hol’s population consists of children—22,000 of them. Many have never known life beyond the confines of the camp. They regard outsiders with hostility, throwing stones at soldiers and journalists, kicking cameras, and shouting threats. Armed troops escort visitors, warning them to wear protective vests and helmets. “You will be attacked,” camp management cautions. Raids on tents frequently uncover weapons, homemade bombs, and grenades. The radicalization is evident in the children’s words. “We will behead you,” they chant. “One day we will be in charge. ISIS is coming back.” A woman cloaked in a burqa echoes their sentiments. “We love the Islamic State. We were free with them. Here, we are captives.” The fragile agreement between the Kurdish-led SDF and Syria’s interim president is seen as a step forward in relations between the Kurdish minority and the Islamist authorities now in power. However, the pressing question of what to do with the ISIS detainees remains unanswered. The power vacuum left in Syria is giving ISIS room to regroup and strengthen. Commander Ahmed delivers a stark warning: “We need help to control ISIS from the international coalition. We cannot do this on our own.” As the situation inside the camps worsens, the international community faces a looming crisis—one that could see ISIS rise again from within the very places meant to contain it. Based on a report by Sky News 2025-03-21

The grim reality of the events of 7 October can no longer be concealed. The 7 October Parliamentary Commission Report, chaired by Lord Andrew Roberts, has now been released, offering a meticulously detailed, forensic examination of the atrocities committed against Israel by Hamas. The report serves as a crucial document preserving the stark and harrowing truth of the mass murder, torture, and sexual violence inflicted upon innocent civilians. It stands as an unshakable testament, ensuring that these horrors are recorded in history, beyond the reach of those who might attempt to distort or deny them. The very necessity of such a report speaks volumes about the unsettling times in which we live. That Britain’s parliament must painstakingly document the massacre of nearly 1,200 people—marking the deadliest attack on Jews since the Holocaust—simply to ensure it is believed is both shocking and obscene. And yet, this is the reality of the modern world, where Jewish suffering is often met with skepticism, where atrocities against Israelis are subject to hedging, justification, or outright denial. It is for this reason that the work of Lord Roberts and his parliamentary colleagues is so vital. Their efforts go beyond merely recording history; they serve to prevent its manipulation and erasure by those with an agenda to obscure the truth. Lord Andrew Roberts, one of Britain’s most esteemed historians, is renowned for his scholarly works on Churchill, Napoleon, and World War II. His biography Churchill: Walking with Destiny has been widely praised for its meticulous research and analytical depth, while Napoleon the Great strips away myth to present an unvarnished portrayal of the legendary figure. However, Roberts is not merely a chronicler of the past; he is a custodian of truth in the present. He understands that historical memory is not just about preserving facts but about what society is willing to accept as truth. In an era where denial spreads faster than evidence, his determination to ensure the 7 October Report is published, studied, and widely disseminated is an act of profound moral significance. The report lays bare, with irrefutable detail, the full scale of the attack. It confirms that Hamas’ invasion of southern Israel was not an impulsive act but a meticulously planned operation, years in the making. As early as 2018, Palestinian armed groups had begun collaborating through the so-called ‘Joint Room for Palestinian Resistance Factions,’ pooling resources and strategies for a future large-scale assault. On the morning of 7 October, that plan was executed with chilling precision. More than 7,000 attackers breached Israel’s defenses at 119 separate points along the border. The assault was methodical, utilizing land, sea, and air forces. Terrorists deployed drones to disable surveillance systems, paragliders to bypass security barriers, and specialized explosives to break into safe rooms where civilians sought refuge. What followed was an unspeakable massacre. The report captures in shocking detail the mass slaughter that took place, including the horrific attack on the Nova music festival, where 375 people were killed as Hamas gunmen hunted down civilians, tossing grenades into bomb shelters and shooting those attempting to flee in their vehicles. Families were systematically targeted in their homes, women subjected to rape as a weapon of war, and bodies desecrated. The youngest victim, newborn Naama Abu Rashed, was shot while still in her mother’s womb, surviving for 14 agonizing hours before succumbing to her wounds despite desperate medical efforts. The oldest, 92-year-old Holocaust survivor Moshe Ridler, was murdered when Hamas operatives fired a rocket-propelled grenade into his safe room. The report further corroborates evidence of sexual violence, aligning with the findings of Pramila Patten, the UN’s special representative on such crimes. It confirms that Hamas terrorists gang-raped women before executing them, that female victims’ bodies were discovered stripped, bound, and mutilated. The report systematically dismantles Hamas’ denials, exposing their calculated deceit—even when confronted with video evidence recorded by the perpetrators themselves. It documents Hamas’ methodical approach, with instruction manuals found on captured fighters detailing procedures for taking hostages, pre-planned routes for looting, and organized destruction. This document is now a permanent parliamentary record, created to ensure that the events of 7 October cannot be rewritten by historical revisionists. The need for such a report in the UK—the fact that Jewish suffering must be chronicled with exhaustive, forensic precision to be acknowledged—reveals something profoundly troubling about today’s moral climate. Yet this publication remains indispensable. It is not merely a record of terror; it is a stand against those who would attempt to deny, justify, or downplay its significance. Thanks to this report, when future generations look back on 7 October 2023, they will not be forced to sift through conspiracy and distortion to uncover what truly happened. They will see the undeniable truth, laid bare in black and white. And that is what matters. Because history is not shaped by those who shout the loudest in protest or those who seek to bury the past beneath propaganda and slogans. It belongs to those who tell the truth. Based on a report by The Spectator | Original Report pdf Download 2025-03-21

UPDATE: Scientist who just returned from Antarctic SANAE IV base where assault occurred reveals harrowing details of living in extreme isolation: ‘Lot of unknowns’ Dr Herman Van Niekerk, a geologist at the University of Johannesburg, has just come back from a two-month expedition to SANAE IV, the Antarctic base where a South African team of scientists have pleaded for help following the “deeply disturbing” behavior of a crew member. “The Antarctic is often romanticized, but when people realize what’s waiting for them, well, there’s not a lot of people who feel they’re up to it,” Van Niekerk told The Telegraph. In a situation described as a “real-life horror movie,” one of the nine trapped crew members sent a desperate email about a coworker they said violently beat, threatened and sexually harassed at least two others on the base, as first reported by South Africa’s Sunday Times newspaper. They described their colleague’s descent into “deeply disturbing” behavior, saying it had created “an environment of fear and intimidation. I remain deeply concerned about my own safety, constantly wondering if I might become the next victim.” All crew members undergo “psychometric tests” before heading to the base, Van Niekerk explained, “but you just can’t predict how that will affect people in reality when there’s no life for miles.” Despite close vetting, Van Niekerk described the moment when one student freaked out. “People only reveal who they are when they’re exposed to the extreme conditions,” he said, describing how the student refused to leave their tent on the expedition while they were stranded some 124 miles from SANAE IV. The crew — stranded until at least December on the 1997-built base 2,500 miles from South Africa — includes engineers, scientists, and a doctor, but no one to manage security, Van Niekerk explained. “There’s a doctor, mechanics and members of the South African National Space Agency. But there is nobody in charge of security, no firearms or anything like that,” Van Niekerk said. On top of the deathly cold, with temperatures plummeting to lows of -9F, and winds reaching up to 135 mph, the upcoming Antarctic winter presents a fresh disorientating challenge. From March, the base will be in almost complete darkness for the next 10 months. As report by NYP 2025-03-21

Conor McGregor has declared his intention to run for President of Ireland, making the announcement after meeting with Donald Trump. The former UFC champion posed in front of a private jet, wearing a red hat emblazoned with the slogan "Make Ireland Great Again." Taking to Instagram, McGregor addressed the European Union Migration Pact, stating, "Ireland must fully implement the EU Migration Pact by June 12, 2026. So between now and 12 June 2026, several pieces of legislation have to be passed by both Houses of the Oireachtas & then signed by the President. The next presidential election must take place by 11 Nov 2025. Who else will stand up to Government and oppose this bill? Any other Presidential candidate they attempt to put forward will be of no resistance to them. I will!" He continued, "For clarity also, as President, I would put forth this bill to referendum. Although I oppose greatly this pact, it is neither mine nor governments choice to make. It is the people of Ireland’s choice! Always! That is a true democracy!" Earlier in the day, McGregor also took to X, formerly known as Twitter, to rally support. "Ireland, the choice is yours and it is an easy one. Vote for me as your President and we will SAVE IRELAND TOGETHER!" During a speech before a press conference with Donald Trump, McGregor criticized the Irish government, expressing concern that Ireland was at risk of "potentially losing its Irishness." He described the current administration as one of "zero action with zero accountability" and criticized government spending, saying, "Our money is being spent on overseas issues that is nothing to do with the Irish people." McGregor’s invitation to the White House followed Trump naming him as one of his favorite Irish figures. When the two met, McGregor praised the former U.S. president’s "work ethic" as "inspiring." The pair posed for photographs, shaking hands in front of a map labeled the "Gulf of America" in the Oval Office. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt remarked in a briefing, "We couldn't think of a better guest to have with us on St. Patrick's Day." McGregor’s appearance in Washington was met with criticism from Irish leaders. Taoiseach Micheál Martin stated that his remarks did "not reflect the spirit of St. Patrick’s Day, or the views of the people of Ireland." The fighter has previously hinted at a presidential run, particularly in December 2023 amid tensions surrounding riots in Dublin. At the time, he took to social media to argue why he would be a strong candidate. "Potential competition if I run. Gerry [Adams], 78. Bertie [Ahern], 75. Enda [Kenny], 74. Each with unbreakable ties to their individual parties’ politics," he wrote. "Regardless of what the public outside of their parties feel. These parties govern themselves vs govern the people. Or me, 35. Young, active, passionate, fresh skin in the game. I listen. I support. I adapt. I have no affiliation/bias/favoritism toward any party. They would genuinely be held to account regarding the current sway of public feeling. I'd even put it all to vote." McGregor has received support from high-profile figures, including Elon Musk, now acting as Trump’s cost-cutting adviser. Musk responded to McGregor’s post, saying, "I think you could take them all single-handed. Not even fair." Andrew Tate, who is facing legal issues in Romania, also endorsed McGregor, writing, "My grandfather is from Limerick. I have the Irish passport. I will vote for you. We must do something before it's too late." McGregor’s political ambitions come as he deals with ongoing legal issues. His visit to the White House followed a High Court ruling in Dublin, where he was found civilly liable in a case brought by Nikita Hand, also known as Nikita Ní Laimhín. Hand accused McGregor of raping her in a Dublin hotel in December 2018. Following a three-week trial, the jury ruled against McGregor, awarding damages and costs to Hand. A judge later stated that the jury had "conclusively determined" that McGregor had committed rape. Following the ruling, major retailers cut ties with McGregor, ceasing sales of his Proper No. Twelve Irish whiskey. He was also removed from the video game Hitman. McGregor is currently appealing the outcome of the civil case. Based on a report by Daily Mail 2025-03-21

US President Donald Trump has signed an executive order aimed at shutting down the Department of Education, marking the first formal step toward dismantling the federal agency. Speaking as he signed the order, Trump declared that "everybody knows this is the right thing to do" and expressed hope that Democrats would support the measure. "We have to get our kids educated," Trump stated, arguing that the US has failed to properly educate students for a long time. He emphasized that the federal government should not be in charge of education and that the responsibility should return to individual states. In his speech, Trump announced that the order would "begin eliminating the federal Department of Education once and for all," a statement met with applause from the audience. Among those present were Education Secretary Linda McMahon, whom Trump hopes will be the "last secretary of education," along with Texas Governor Gregg Abbott and Florida Governor Ron DeSantis, both of whom he acknowledged during his remarks. Trump insisted that the closure of the department would happen as quickly as possible, claiming that the US spends "more money on education by far than any other country" but ranks "near the bottom of the list in terms of success." He assured teachers that they would be supported regardless of whether they were part of a union and concluded his speech by wishing McMahon good luck, adding that they would "find something else" for her to do. Shortly after Trump signed the order, the Department of Education issued a statement calling it a "history-making action" that would "free future generations of American students and forge opportunities for their success." The statement echoed Trump’s assertion that eliminating the department would return education to the states, "where it so rightly belongs." A common misconception, the statement noted, is that the Department of Education directly operates schools or sets curricula, when in fact those responsibilities fall to states and local districts. Only about 13% of funding for primary and secondary schools comes from federal sources. The statement assured that closing the department "does not mean cutting off funds from those who depend on them," pledging continued support for students with special needs, college students, and other beneficiaries. "We’re going to follow the law and eliminate the bureaucracy responsibly by working with Congress and state leaders to ensure a lawful and orderly transition," the department said. However, despite Trump’s executive action, shutting down the Department of Education is far from certain. The president cannot unilaterally abolish the agency—he would need congressional approval, likely requiring a supermajority in the Senate, meaning 60 out of 100 senators would have to vote in favor. With Republicans holding a 53-47 majority, at least seven Democrats would need to support the move, making it a difficult political challenge. Even in the House of Representatives, the proposal faces strong resistance. A previous attempt to abolish the department failed when 60 Republicans joined all Democrats in voting against it. Trump has recently pushed to reduce the size of several federal departments, though the legality of these efforts has been questioned. Whether his bid to dismantle the Department of Education will gain the necessary legislative backing remains uncertain, but the order signals his determination to pursue one of his long-standing policy goals. Based on a report by BBC 2025-03-21

Russian President Vladimir Putin would break any peace agreement with Ukraine if it lacked strong security guarantees, UK Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer has warned following a high-level military meeting in London. He stressed that any ceasefire deal would only be sustainable if backed by solid security arrangements to deter Russian aggression. Speaking at the Permanent Joint Headquarters in Northwood, London, where over 20 countries convened for a confidential discussion on military support for Ukraine, Sir Keir underscored the necessity of military preparedness. He emphasized that the international community must move from "political momentum" to "military planning," stating, "It is vitally important we do that work because we know one thing for certain, which is a deal without anything behind it is something that Putin will breach. We know that because it happened before. I'm absolutely clear in my mind it will happen again." The UK prime minister made it clear that while support for Ukraine is crucial, British troops currently stationed in other countries, such as Estonia, would not be withdrawn to aid Kyiv. "There's no pulling back from our commitments to other countries," he affirmed. UK Defence Secretary John Healey was also present at the closed-door session, which involved military leaders from what Sir Keir has termed the "coalition of the willing." Downing Street indicated that these officials were engaged in "granular planning" regarding potential troop deployments, though the precise details remain under discussion. The UK initiated the meeting following a summit attended by 26 nations earlier this month. Military and diplomatic sources have suggested that any proposed troop presence should be framed as a "reassurance force" rather than a "peacekeeping force." Meanwhile, Armed Forces Minister Luke Pollard clarified that discussions were still in the early stages, stating, "We're not yet talking about numbers because we're still designing the shape of the force." He provided an example, explaining, "If one nation offers fast jet combat air, like a Typhoon aircraft for instance, how will the other nations work alongside it? Where will it refuel? How will it operate with other nations' capabilities?" His remarks underscored the complexity of coordinating multinational military efforts. Earlier in the day, Sir Keir visited the Port of Barrow in Cumbria, the site where the UK's nuclear submarines are built. He told reporters that the discussions in London focused on ensuring Ukraine's security across land, sea, and air. "We are looking at how to keep the skies, and the seas, and the borders safe in Ukraine," he said. As these talks unfold, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has urged Russia to cease its "unnecessary demands that only prolong the war." Speaking in Norway, he reinforced Ukraine's commitment to a peaceful resolution but stressed that Russia's stance remains a major obstacle. Additionally, he announced that Ukrainian officials would meet with their US counterparts in Saudi Arabia on Monday, coinciding with confirmed US-Russia discussions scheduled for the same day. These developments occur as the US continues efforts to negotiate a ceasefire between Russia and Ukraine after more than three years of conflict. Both Zelensky and Putin have agreed to a truce in principle during talks with US representatives, but disagreements over key conditions have so far prevented a formal agreement from taking shape. Based on a report by BBC 2025-03-21

Off topic video from unapproved Russian youtube source has been removed @beautifulthailand99

UPDATE: Strikes on Houthis show Trump isn’t Joe Biden mumbling ‘Don’t’ President Donald Trump made that crystal clear by launching a campaign against Iran-backed Houthi militants in Yemen over the weekend. In contrast to President Joe Biden’s repeated, hollow “Don’t”s, which everyone ignored, it was action. Which is why Iran should take Trump’s warning on Truth Social to heart: “Every shot fired by the Houthis will be looked upon, from this point forward, as being a shot fired from the weapons and leadership of IRAN” — and Tehran will “suffer the consequences, and those consequences will be dire!” The attacks on Houthi positions — hitting 30 sites Saturday and more every day since — signal a new response to the Houthis’ terrorist assault on global commerce, far more lethal than Team Biden’s. It’ll be an extended campaign, Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced, aiming to destroy the Houthis’ ability to strike international shipping: US attacks will be proactive and meaningful, not just symbolic pinpricks. Iran is now the driver of most Middle East turmoil; Trump’s entirely right to say we can’t let it go nuclear — and right to give it a chance at a peaceful solution. The Houthis’ fate will nicely illustrate the alternative. Based on a report by NYP 2025-03-20

@bubblegum a flame has been removed. If you can't discuss without personal attacks then perhaps better not to comment

A pure trolling post has been removed.

Court documents related to Prince Harry’s immigration to the United States have been released, but they contain heavy redactions due to concerns about potential media harassment. The files, made public following a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request by the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank, were ordered for release by Judge Carl Nichols. The Heritage Foundation initially sought access to Prince Harry’s immigration records after he disclosed past drug use in his memoir, Spare, in which he admitted to taking cocaine, marijuana, and psychedelic mushrooms. The organization questioned whether he had received special treatment when he entered the U.S. in 2020, as admitting to past drug use can sometimes be a barrier to obtaining a visa. Judge Nichols ruled in September 2024 that there was not a strong enough public interest argument to justify the full disclosure of the Duke’s immigration records. Despite the Heritage Foundation’s attempts to challenge this decision, the judge maintained that releasing more details would not serve the public interest. The newly released documents reaffirmed this stance, stating: “To release his exact status could subject him to reasonably foreseeable harm in the form of harassment as well as unwanted contact by the media and others.” The documents further explained that there was a “potential of harm in the form of harassment if his exact [REDACTED] is revealed. Thus, there is significant privacy interests involved in the records.” They also dismissed the Heritage Foundation’s claim that the records should be released to maintain public confidence in the U.S. government, stating: “Plaintiffs have not established public interest, as defined by the FOIA, in disclosure of the records. Plaintiffs allege that the records should be disclosed as public confidence in the government would suffer or to establish whether the Duke was granted preferential treatment. This speculation by plaintiffs does not point to any evidence of government misconduct.” The Heritage Foundation has argued that the Duke may have concealed his past drug use when applying for his visa, which could have rendered him ineligible. They claimed that his answers regarding drug history should be made public to determine whether immigration laws were applied fairly. In February, former U.S. President Donald Trump weighed in on the controversy, telling the New York Post: “I’ll leave him alone.” He added, “He’s got enough problems with his wife [Meghan]. She’s terrible.” The Duchess of Sussex has previously criticized Mr. Trump, calling him “divisive” and a “misogynist.” Despite continued scrutiny, the latest court decision suggests that Prince Harry’s immigration status will remain largely private, with the redacted documents failing to provide the answers sought by the Heritage Foundation. Based on a report by The Telegraph 2025-03-20

An Egyptian national who arrived in Britain on a small boat is accused of orchestrating a £12 million people-smuggling operation, transporting over 3,700 migrants from Africa to Europe. Ahmed Ebid allegedly arranged for dangerously overcrowded fishing boats to carry migrants across the Mediterranean, charging them an average of £3,700 per journey. Southwark Crown Court heard that Ebid reached the UK in October 2022 via a small boat crossing. Within days of his arrival, from a home provided to him in Isleworth, west London, he began arranging crossings from Libya to Italy. Over the next six months, he coordinated seven such journeys, underscoring the role UK-based smuggling networks play in facilitating illegal migration into Europe and eventually across the English Channel. The boats used were small, wooden fishing vessels described as “death traps,” each carrying hundreds of migrants. One of the boats reportedly held 700 people. Calls for emergency rescues were made to the Italian coastguard as these unsafe boats became stranded at sea. The National Crime Agency (NCA) placed a covert listening device in Ebid’s home, capturing conversations between him and his contacts in Libya. These recordings revealed how he managed the crossings, maintained contact with the boats, and dictated operational decisions. Prosecutor Frederick Hookway stated that Ebid’s Facebook profile referred to him as “Captain” and gang members addressed him as “boss” in their communications. In one recorded conversation, Ebid was heard warning: “The most dangerous trip to Europe is this trip, be aware.” In another, he issued strict instructions prohibiting mobile phones on the boats, saying: “Phones is not all allowed … [they] will be killed, thrown into the sea.” He also used coded language to discuss the boats, referring to them as “cars.” In one exchange, he said: “I buy a car and load it for my own benefit. There is nothing wrong with that, all my own capital.” Ebid allegedly sought the exact locations of the migrant boats before using a satellite phone to call the Italian coastguard to request rescue operations. The court heard that Ebid has admitted to conspiracy to assist unlawful immigration. He is accused of procuring boats and crews, providing technical guidance during crossings, and arranging accommodation for migrants before their journeys. However, he claims he was not a central figure in the operation, arguing that his involvement was motivated by the hope that his own family would be given passage on one of the boats. The trial is ongoing. An NCA spokesperson highlighted the dangers of such operations: “The type of boats organised crime groups use for these crossings are death traps, and sadly many people have died after incidents in the Mediterranean, demonstrating the danger.” In 2023, tens of thousands of migrants attempted to cross the Mediterranean, arriving on the islands of Lampedusa and Sicily, as well as mainland Italy. The International Organization for Migration recorded at least 3,155 deaths or disappearances of migrants making the journey that year. The surge in migration from North Africa has fueled political tensions in Italy. The issue was a central theme in the election of Giorgia Meloni as prime minister in October 2022, with her government prioritizing efforts to curb illegal migration. Based on a report by The Times 2025-03-20

The Labour government, under Angela Rayner’s direction, is making yet another attempt to establish a working definition of "Islamophobia." To lead this initiative, Rayner has enlisted former Conservative Dominic Grieve, who claims that this effort will help define the term and promote "positive change" in Britain. But this commission, like its predecessors, is doomed to fail. The reality is that Britain already has robust laws protecting all citizens from abuse and criminal acts, regardless of their religion. Vandalizing a mosque is as illegal as vandalizing any other building. Harassing or harming someone is already a punishable offense. Moreover, the broad category of “non-crime hate incidents” has allowed law enforcement to investigate individuals simply for expressing controversial opinions online. Yet, those advocating for a definition of Islamophobia are not seeking equal protection under the law—they want special protection for one particular religion. Imagine if the government undertook a similar effort to define “Catholic-ophobia.” People would rightly question why a specific faith deserved unique legal safeguards. Such a move would create an atmosphere where politicians, journalists, and ordinary citizens would hesitate to criticize the Catholic Church or its followers. If someone were to joke about Catholic priests, they might fear legal consequences. This is the type of chilling effect that an Islamophobia law would create. Since the 1989 fatwa against Salman Rushdie, British writers have known that criticizing Islam comes with unique risks. Now, the government seeks to formalize this censorship. Would acknowledging that some British Muslims supported the attack on Rushdie be considered Islamophobic? What about discussing the fact that, in 2015, a survey showed that 27 percent of British Muslims had “some sympathy” for the motives behind the Charlie Hebdo massacre? These are uncomfortable realities, but silencing discussion about them does not serve democracy. The issue extends beyond legislation. London has recently seen grand celebrations for Ramadan, with Mayor Sadiq Khan proudly stating that he never imagined the city would embrace Ramadan lights in the same way it celebrates Christmas. While some view this as progress, others may question whether such overt religious displays alter the cultural identity of the capital. Expressing such concerns could soon be labeled as Islamophobic. Similarly, football matches now pause so Muslim players can break their fast during Ramadan. If Catholic players insisted on stopping games for religious observance, would the public be expected to accept this as normal? The push for an Islamophobia definition is not about equality—it’s about granting special privileges to one group at the expense of free expression. Islam already enjoys protections through societal fear and unspoken rules. Muslims, like all citizens, are covered by existing anti-discrimination and hate crime laws. This commission will fail, as others have before, but the true danger lies in what its success would mean: a loss of free speech and the introduction of state-sanctioned religious privilege. Based on a report by The Times 2025-03-20

President Trump is right: “NO MASKS!” That was his emphatic closing statement in a recent Truth Social post where he warned that colleges and universities permitting “illegal protests” could lose federal funding. His main concern? The wave of antisemitic demonstrations that have roiled campuses for nearly 18 months. Following the latest round of pro-Hamas protests, Columbia University alumni have urged the school to adopt an official mask ban. But Trump himself has the authority to put a stop to masked rioters on campuses through an executive order—just as various states once took action against the Ku Klux Klan’s hooded marches. The federal government already has the power to require colleges and universities to take steps that protect students’ physical safety and civil rights. And the case against masking is both strong and constitutional. While the First Amendment guarantees free speech, it does not protect individuals who join violent mobs, intimidate others, and create public disorder. Yet that is exactly what masked protesters have done at universities across the country, using their anonymity to evade identification by law enforcement and school officials while spreading hatred toward Israel and Jewish students. Since October 7, 2023, these masked demonstrators have committed numerous acts of vandalism and intimidation. At Barnard College in February, they defaced buildings, while last May, masked agitators caused $3 million in damage at City College. At Columbia University, they occupied buildings and even held university personnel hostage. Jewish students have been physically blocked from attending class at UCLA and outright attacked at DePaul University and other schools. The rise of masked protests coincides with an alarming surge in antisemitism, which increased nearly fourfold in the U.S. last year. These are not just student demonstrations; they are criminal acts. But there is a historical precedent that points to a solution. Like today’s masked agitators, members of the Ku Klux Klan hid their identities behind hoods to terrorize Black citizens, Catholics, and other minorities while avoiding consequences. They sought to spread fear without accountability. State governments responded by enacting anti-masking laws, stripping the KKK of its anonymity and making it easier to prosecute members. By the mid-1950s, the Klan had largely collapsed, unable to hide behind its disguises. This legal approach was so effective that states across the political spectrum—including Alabama, California, Florida, Georgia, Michigan, Louisiana, North Carolina, and Virginia—have had anti-masking laws in place for decades. New York was the first to enact such a law in 1845, but it was repealed during the COVID pandemic. Now, a bill to reinstate it is under consideration. Over the past year, I have worked with multiple states to introduce or strengthen anti-masking laws to enhance public safety and protect students. But this must now be addressed on a national level. The president should issue an executive order directing his administration to act immediately. First, Education Secretary Linda McMahon should require all federally funded colleges and universities to adopt anti-masking policies to prevent harassment and intimidation. Clear guidelines should be set, referencing existing state laws to prevent universities from exploiting loopholes. Additionally, institutions should be required to address civil rights complaints stemming from masked protests that disrupt educational environments. Second, McMahon should issue an anti-masking regulation under the Clery Act, which mandates that schools participating in federal student loan programs disclose crime statistics. Universities are already required to submit policies encouraging the prompt and accurate reporting of crimes. But accurate reporting is impossible when masked mobs are destroying property and threatening students. The Clery Act can and should be used to prohibit masks on campus. Finally, Attorney General Pam Bondi should make federal grants under the STOP School Violence Act contingent on the adoption of anti-masking policies. The Justice Department should not be funding campus security forces if university administrators refuse to stand up against Klan-style intimidation tactics. These measures are fully within legal authority and are morally essential to curbing the rise of antisemitic violence on college campuses. The sooner President Trump enforces his call for “NO MASKS,” the better. Based on a report by NYP 2025-03-20 Related Topics: Democrats Face Backlash for Supporting Arrested Palestinian Activist Mahmoud Khalil Federal Education Department Investigates 60 Universities Over Antisemitism Allegations Trump’s Bold Stand Against Campus Antisemitism Sends a Clear Message Trump Border Czar: ICE Will ‘Absolutely’ Deport Legal Immigrants Trump Threatens to Cut Federal Funding Over Campus Protests U.S. State Dept to Use AI to Revoke Visas of Foreign Students with Alleged Ties to Hamas

Hungary Moves to Restrict LGBTQ Rights and Dual Citizenship in Proposed Constitutional Amendments Hungary’s ruling party has introduced a set of constitutional amendments that could lead to a ban on the country’s annual LGBTQ Pride March and allow the expulsion of dual citizens deemed to be a threat to national sovereignty. The proposals, submitted by the governing Fidesz party, align with Prime Minister Viktor Orban’s longstanding nationalist policies and his increasing hostility toward LGBTQ rights and independent media. Orban, who has been in power since 2010, has made repeated attacks on LGBTQ people and recently vowed to curb foreign funding for independent media and nongovernmental organizations. His remarks followed a decision by U.S. President Donald Trump to pause funding from the U.S. Agency for International Development, a move that sparked speculation that Orban would feel emboldened to take further steps against press outlets critical of his administration. “The corruption network that rules the entire Western world of politics and media must be eliminated,” Orban declared in parliament on February 24. He added that his government was prepared to “go to the wall” in order to enact these new laws. One of the proposed constitutional amendments places an emphasis on the protection of children’s physical, mental, and moral development above all other rights. This provision could serve as the basis for banning Pride Marches, as the government could argue that such events are harmful to children. The timing of the amendment suggests that the administration is specifically targeting the LGBTQ community ahead of the 2026 elections. Another controversial change concerns dual citizens, allowing the government to expel Hungarian nationals who also hold another citizenship if they are considered a threat to the country’s national sovereignty, public order, territorial integrity, or security. This measure could have serious implications for thousands of Hungarians with dual nationality. The amendments would also formally define in the constitution that Hungary recognizes only two sexes, male and female, a stance that mirrors the views expressed by Trump. Additionally, the new proposals seek to enshrine the right to cash payments, a policy favored by the Hungarian far-right due to widespread distrust in banking institutions. With the Hungarian economy only beginning to recover from an inflation crisis and a strong opposition party emerging as a significant challenge to Orban’s rule, the proposed constitutional changes appear to be part of his broader strategy to solidify control before the next election. As tensions rise, the amendments signal a deepening of Hungary’s conservative shift under Orban’s leadership. Based on a report by NBC News 2025-03-20

A violent gang armed with machetes and shotguns stormed a rival gang’s drug operation in Birmingham, making off with nearly £250,000 worth of cocaine and heroin. Their downfall came after members of the rival group were seen posing for photos with the illicit substances, inadvertently exposing their operation. CCTV footage captured the gang pulling up to a house in Sparkhill in an Audi and a BMW in May 2021. They kicked open the door before attacking Mohammed Ishaq, 32, with a machete, inflicting a deep slash wound and injuring his arm. After seizing a significant quantity of drugs, the gang fled the scene as police and paramedics arrived at Oakwood Road. Witnesses reported seeing the men hiding in nearby Sparkhill Park, where police later recovered a mixing bowl containing 8kg of heroin and 1kg of cocaine. The haul was valued at over £225,000, but police noted it would have been worth much more once mixed and prepared for street sale. The gang, desperate to retrieve the stolen drugs, drove around the park trying to recover them before officers could intervene. In an attempt to divert police attention, one of them even made a false 999 call, reporting a shooting elsewhere. A subsequent police search of the targeted house uncovered more drugs, mixing agents, scales, bowls, and plastic bags, confirming it was a major hub for drug distribution. Detectives later found that the gang controlled at least six drug lines, which facilitated the sale of Class A substances across Birmingham. Further investigation led officers to a damning piece of evidence—a photograph of one of the gang members posing with large bowls of drugs. This crucial piece of evidence helped secure convictions for nine men, who were collectively sentenced to more than 77 years in prison following a 13-week trial at Birmingham Crown Court that concluded in January. The gang’s leader, Mohammed Imran Khan, 37, of Bordesley Green, was sentenced to 14 years and two months. He had created a stamp advertising one of the drug line’s phone numbers and opening hours and was also caught driving others around in his BMW to recover the stolen stash. Mohammed Ishaq, the rival drug dealer who was attacked in his Oakwood Road property, was jailed for 10 years and two months. Police found a photograph of him posing with mixing bowls full of drugs and stacks of cash. Other gang members received lengthy sentences: Kaleem Ullah Khan, 37, of Saltley, was jailed for 13 years and three months; Sohail Hussain, 31, of Bordesley Green, received nine years and nine months; Riaz Mohammed, 39, of Bordesley Green, was sentenced to seven years and six months; and Anwar Awais, 28, of Kings Heath, received seven years and four months. Mohammed Hamza Butt, 25, of Bordesley Green, was sentenced to eight years, while Nowshad Mohammed, 29, also of Bordesley Green, was jailed for seven years and two months. Ahmed Iqbal, 19, also from Bordesley Green, is awaiting sentencing. Detective Sergeant Danny Wilson of West Midlands Police said, "This was a gang that was trading in the human misery of Class A drugs—exploiting vulnerable people and fuelling a violent trade. Our investigation was triggered by an act of extreme violence against the gang, and that exposed the property at Oakwood Road as the headquarters of the operation. They were at the higher end of the supply chain, and their illegal product was being used to supply people across the city. These lengthy sentences send a powerful message to those involved in the drugs trade that we are coming for you, and you will spend years behind bars." The case highlighted the dangerous and often violent nature of the drug trade, with the criminals’ greed and recklessness ultimately leading to their capture and imprisonment. Based on a report by Daily Mail 2025-03-20