Social Media

Please continue in the 'World News" forum here: Obama Warns U.S. Teeters on Edge of Autocracy While Urging Hope and Civic Unity //closed//

UK Judge Rules Security-Based Job Ban on Chinese, Russian Nationals Is Lawful, Not Racist A judge has ruled that employers in sectors tied to national security can legally exclude job applicants from countries like China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea, citing the risk of espionage. The decision, handed down by employment tribunal judge Richard Baty, determined that such exclusions are not discriminatory but rather legitimate precautions in sensitive industries. The case arose from a complaint by Tianlin Xu, a Chinese scientist, who claimed race discrimination after being turned down for a £220,000 lead position at Binary AI, a London-based software company working with artificial intelligence to detect flaws in government software. The firm supports efforts to block hacking attempts on critical systems used by Western governments, including those of the UK and US. Xu argued that her rejection was based on “racial stigma” and “stereotyping,” but the tribunal sided with the employer, ruling that concerns over national security could lawfully override standard employment discrimination protections in such contexts. Binary AI’s founder and director, James Patrick-Evans, had rejected Xu’s application following strong advice from British defence officials not to hire Chinese nationals. The judge concluded that Patrick-Evans reasonably believed Xu would not be granted the necessary security clearance due to her nationality, and that this understanding was based on the company’s ties to defence customers rather than personal prejudice. “It is paramount that the security and operational capability of the software that drives our everyday lives should remain intact and free from malicious hackers and state actors wanting to persuade political outcomes or obtain sensitive information,” Baty said in his ruling. He cited evidence of ongoing cyberattacks from state-backed hackers, especially from Russia and China, which he noted have been implicated in numerous attempts to breach Western systems. “The British government and the Five Eyes alliance — which includes the US, Canada, Australia and New Zealand — have been under constant attack by many of these malicious groups, mainly from state-backed hacking groups from countries such as North Korea, Russia, China and Iran,” he stated. Baty emphasized the real and evolving threat to national infrastructure, noting that hacking groups have targeted systems including “5G telecoms, NHS health networks, power plant controllers and water infrastructure systems.” He concluded that, “It is therefore imperative that the security of the software that drives these systems is verified, controlled and secured.” On the issue of legality, Baty stated that it was legitimate to preclude individuals of Chinese nationality from “working in a role, such as the lead AI role, which involved working closely on matters concerning national security.” He also noted that the decision was effectively made by defence sector customers, not directly by Binary AI or its director. The ruling underscores the increasing influence of national security concerns on employment decisions in high-tech and defence-adjacent sectors, as Western countries continue to respond to the threat of state-sponsored cyber espionage. Adapted by ASEAN Now from The Times 2025-06-20

Europe’s Vision of 2040: A Leap Into “Space Oases” In a vision of the not-so-distant future, European space chiefs have set out their plan for humanity to thrive in vast, self-sustaining settlements orbiting Earth and scattered across the Moon, Mars, and beyond. The European Space Agency (ESA) predicts that by 2040, these pioneering “space oases” will mark a new era where humanity not only explores space but lives and prospers within it. According to ESA’s newly unveiled document Technology 2040, there will be a “rapid evolution of technology that will redefine our understanding of space and humanity’s role within it.” These advances, they say, will transform space from a final frontier into a lived-in territory. “Expanding into space is not a luxury but a necessity,” the document asserts. “Space is no longer a frontier, it is a territory. It unlocks unknown resources that open new markets and enable scientific breakthroughs.” The agency foresees an age when “mammoth constructions” will be assembled in space—structures no longer confined by the dimensions of Earth-based launch vehicles. “Large space structures are no longer bound by the limitations of launch vehicle dimensions,” ESA predicts. “Either unfolded in space or manufactured and assembled directly in orbit — or on the surfaces of the Moon or Mars — these mammoth constructions can be as big as they need to be.” The settlements will be resilient and self-sustaining, designed for long-term human habitation. “Humans dwell in plentiful habitats in Earth’s orbit and also on the Moon, Mars and far beyond,” the document states. “These habitats are resilient and self-sustaining with efficient resource management, closed-loop life support systems, smart materials, in-situ manufacturing and resource utilisation. This allows inhabitants of these space oases not only to survive but thrive.” In parallel with these developments, fleets of intelligent, autonomous spacecraft will explore alien terrains and dive into planetary mysteries. ESA envisions robots that will be capable of conducting independent missions, using AI to determine whether to plunge into subsurface Martian craters or alien oceans. These “multipurpose robots leverage their intelligence to infiltrate previously off-limit environments: the depths of craters, caves or even subsurface seas.” Meanwhile, a space-based internet will span the solar system, making it theoretically possible to stream entertainment from the moons of Jupiter. “The internet has expanded far beyond Earth, with a space-based internet made possible by a European backbone,” the agency predicts. “Deployed communications and navigation systems stretch across the solar system.” The exploitation of space resources is also expected to become routine. “Comet bodies and asteroids will be mined, their materials helping to reveal our solar system’s history,” the report notes, highlighting how accessing these extraterrestrial minerals will support both science and industry. To enable these transformations, ESA is promoting innovations such as ion thrusters to propel spacecraft at greater speeds, 3D printing to construct habitats in situ, and quantum computing to manage enormous data flows from probes and satellites. This sweeping vision echoes cinematic portrayals of space life, from The Martian to Interstellar, where humans adapt to live in complex habitats off-world. But for ESA, this is more than science fiction—it’s a strategic imperative. Josef Aschbacher, ESA’s director-general, is urging the agency’s member states, including the UK, to adopt Technology 2040 as a long-term action plan. “This is not just a road map; it is a call to action,” he said. ESA’s concluding statement captures the ambition and optimism of their vision: “In this new era, humans will thrive among the stars, marked by innovation, sustainability, and a relentless pursuit of knowledge. The cosmos will no longer be a distant frontier, but a home.” Adapted by ASEAN Now from The Times 2025-06-20

Chancellor Rachel Reeves is considering significant revisions to Labour’s high-profile plan to scrap the non-domiciled tax regime, following mounting concern over a growing exodus of wealthy individuals from the UK. The policy, initially intended to signal a tougher stance on tax fairness, is now under review as evidence emerges that its economic fallout may be more severe than anticipated. At the heart of the debate is the new provision, due to take effect in April, that would impose inheritance tax on the global assets of UK residents who are considered non-domiciled—individuals who live in Britain but have their permanent home abroad. Reeves is reportedly contemplating easing this element of the policy after criticism that it could drive high-net-worth individuals to jurisdictions with more favourable tax regimes. “There will most likely be some tweaks to inheritance tax to stop the non-dom exodus,” a senior City figure told the Financial Times, as concern mounts over the unintended economic consequences. Among those reportedly considering departure is Lakshmi Mittal, the billionaire steel magnate with an estimated fortune of £14.9 billion. He has lived in the UK since 1995 and owns a global portfolio of luxury properties, including a chalet in the Swiss resort of St Moritz. The Treasury has responded to the growing backlash by signalling flexibility. “The government will continue to work with stakeholders to ensure the new regime is internationally competitive and continues to focus on attracting the best talent and investment to the UK,” it said in a statement. Business data compiled by Bloomberg points to a sharp rise in corporate departures. More than 4,400 company directors exited the UK over the past year, with the pace accelerating in April—when departures were 75 per cent higher than in the same month the year before. Sectors hit hardest include finance, insurance, and property, all traditionally popular with non-dom professionals and investors. The abolition of the non-dom regime—originally introduced centuries ago and allowing affluent foreign residents to avoid UK tax on global income in exchange for an annual fee starting at £30,000—was first announced by former Chancellor Jeremy Hunt in March 2024. In a surprise move, Hunt pre-empted Labour’s longstanding commitment to scrap the system, forcing the party to introduce its own version in the run-up to the general election. The replacement is a residence-based tax model that imposes income and capital gains taxes on global earnings for anyone who has lived in the UK for more than four years. Over time, these residents would also become liable for a 40 per cent inheritance tax on their worldwide assets—one of the highest rates globally. Although the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) initially predicted that between 12 and 25 per cent of non-doms might leave due to the changes, a recent Oxford Economics survey suggests that tax professionals now expect the figure to be far higher. Sixty per cent of advisers reported that over 40 per cent of their non-dom clients were planning to relocate within two years of the reforms. Bloomberg has identified several high-profile figures who have already moved abroad, including French heiress Anne Beaufour, German investor Max Gottschalk, Magna Capital CEO Alexander Ginzburg, JC Flowers co-president Tim Hanford, and boxing promoter Eddie Hearn. Mittal, who handed control of ArcelorMittal to his son Aditya four years ago but whose family still owns 40 per cent of the steel giant, exemplifies the type of ultra-wealthy individual now being drawn to more accommodating tax regimes abroad. As the economic implications become clearer, Reeves faces mounting pressure to adjust Labour’s policy to protect investment and prevent further departures. “This is not just a political issue anymore,” one adviser noted. “It’s about protecting the UK’s position as a global hub for talent and capital.” Adapted by ASEAN Now from The Times 2025-06-20

Title: Supreme Court Ruling on Trans Youth Healthcare Sparks National Outcry In a 6-3 decision that sent shockwaves across the country, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld Tennessee’s law banning gender-affirming healthcare for transgender minors, sparking fierce criticism from medical professionals, civil rights advocates, and the Court’s liberal justices. The ruling is widely expected to reverberate nationwide, reinforcing similar laws already passed in over two dozen states and marking a pivotal moment in the ongoing national debate over the rights of transgender individuals. The majority opinion, authored by Chief Justice John Roberts, emphasized that the case touches on “fierce scientific and policy debates about the safety, efficacy, and propriety of medical treatments in an evolving field.” Roberts wrote, “The voices in these debates raise sincere concerns; the implications for all are profound. The Equal Protection Clause does not resolve these disagreements. Nor does it afford us license to decide them as we see best.” Instead, the Court’s decision defers these crucial questions to “the people, their elected representatives, and the democratic process.” All three liberal justices dissented, with Justice Sonia Sotomayor issuing a passionate and pointed rebuke from the bench — a rare move. “The court abandons transgender children and their families to political whims,” she wrote. “This case presents an easy question. Because sex determines access to the covered medications, it clearly does. Yet the majority refuses to call a spade a spade.” Her dissent warned that the Court’s ruling does “irrevocable damage to the Equal Protection Clause and invites legislatures to engage in discrimination by hiding blatant sex classifications in plain sight.” She added that the decision “also authorizes, without second thought, untold harm to transgender children and the parents and families who love them.” During oral arguments, conservative justices appeared skeptical of constitutional protections for transgender people. Justice Samuel Alito repeatedly questioned ACLU attorney Chase Strangio — the first openly transgender lawyer to argue before the Supreme Court — on whether gender identity is an “immutable” characteristic. Strangio responded, “I think that the record shows that the discordance between a person’s birth, sex and gender identity has a strong biological basis and would satisfy an immutability test.” After the ruling, Strangio called it “a devastating loss for transgender people, our families, and everyone who cares about the Constitution.” Although the decision does not overturn broader legal protections against anti-trans discrimination, critics argue it sets a dangerous precedent. “It creates a class of people who politicians believe deserve healthcare, and a class of people who do not,” said Lucas Cameron-Vaughn, senior staff attorney at the ACLU of Tennessee. The human toll is already becoming evident. Cameron-Vaughn said Tennessee families are considering relocating — even leaving the country — to continue their children’s care, with costs mounting for travel to safer states. In 2020, gender-affirming care was available in every state; now it is outlawed in 26, leaving nearly 40 percent of trans youth — approximately 119,000 children — in legal limbo, according to the Human Rights Campaign. Critics see the ruling as part of a broader rollback of transgender rights. One week after his inauguration, former President Donald Trump signed executive orders rescinding federal protections for transgender Americans, including directives affecting healthcare and military service. His order to end recognition of trans people across federal agencies served as a blueprint for numerous state-level restrictions. Medical authorities overwhelmingly support access to gender-affirming care for youth diagnosed with gender dysphoria. Organizations like the American Academy of Pediatrics and the American Medical Association consider treatments such as puberty blockers and hormone therapy to be medically necessary. Surgeries, when considered, are typically reserved for those aged 18 or older. Lawrence Gostin, co-faculty director at the O’Neill Institute for National and Global Health Law, called the Court’s decision “jaw-dropping,” adding, “Discrimination has no place in America, and it is sad to see the nation’s highest court side with states that discriminate against our most vulnerable and marginalized citizens.” Jennifer Levi, senior director of transgender and queer rights with GLAD Law, echoed that sentiment. “The Supreme Court failed to do its job. When the political system breaks down and legislatures bow to popular hostility, the judiciary must be the Constitution’s backbone. Instead, it chose to look away, abandoning both vulnerable children and the parents who love them. No parent should be forced to watch their child suffer while proven medical care sits beyond their reach because of politics.” Adapted by ASEAN Now from The Independent 2025-06-20

Obama Warns U.S. Teeters on Edge of Autocracy While Urging Hope and Civic Unity Former President Barack Obama has voiced grave concerns about the direction of American democracy, warning that the country is “dangerously close to normalizing behavior” characteristic of authoritarian regimes. Speaking at the Bushnell Performing Arts Center in Hartford, Connecticut, Obama, 63, acknowledged the growing disillusionment among Americans as protests flare across the country in response to federal immigration crackdowns. “If you follow regularly what is said by those who are in charge of the federal government right now, there is a weak commitment to what we understood – and not just my generation, at least since World War II – our understanding of how a liberal democracy is supposed to work,” Obama said, according to Connecticut Public Radio. “There has to be a response and pushback from civil society, from various institutions and individuals outside of government, but there also have to be people in government in both parties who say, ‘No, you can't do that,’” he added. In one of his starkest warnings yet, Obama stated, “What we're seeing right now… is not consistent with American democracy. It is consistent with autocracies.” He specifically cited Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán’s regime as an example, saying, “It is consistent with Hungary under Orbán. It’s consistent with places that hold elections but do not otherwise observe what we think of as a fair system in which everybody’s voice matters and people have a seat at the table and nobody's above the law. We're not there yet completely, but I think that we are dangerously close to normalizing behavior like that.” Obama also pointed to the widening gap between fact and fiction in American politics, especially within one of the major parties. “In 2020, one person won the election, and it wasn’t the guy complaining about it,” he said in reference to President Donald Trump’s repeated and disproven claims of election fraud. “And that's just a fact, just like my inauguration had more people... I don’t care, but facts are important.” He criticized those who knowingly perpetuate falsehoods, saying, “In one of our major political parties, you have a whole bunch of people who know that's not true but will pretend like it is. And that is dangerous.” Obama referenced Trump’s first press secretary, Sean Spicer, who notoriously insisted that Trump’s inauguration crowd was the largest in history, despite clear photographic evidence to the contrary. Despite the serious tone of his remarks, Obama maintained his trademark optimism, especially when addressing younger generations. When asked what message he had for young people, he replied, “I’m still optimistic – I’m still the ‘hope’ guy.” He urged the audience to be passionate but pragmatic. “You have to be impatient with injustice and cruelty, and there’s a healthy outrage we should be exhibiting in terms of what’s currently happening both here and around the world. But if you want to deliver on change, then it’s a game of addition, not subtraction. You have to find ways to make common ground with people who don’t agree with you on everything but agree with you on some things.” He closed his appearance on a hopeful note about the power of human connection. “When people actually meet and get to know each other... what Lincoln called those ‘better angels’ come out,” he said. “People start recognizing themselves in each other and they start trusting each other, and that's not just the basis for democracy, but that's the basis for our long-term salvation.” Obama also took to social media earlier in the week to remind Americans of his Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program, as the Trump administration’s immigration raids escalate. “Thirteen years ago, my administration acted to protect young people who were American in every single way but one: on paper,” he wrote on X. “DACA was an example of how we can be a nation of immigrants and a nation of laws. And it’s an example worth remembering today, when families with similar backgrounds who just want to live, work, and support their communities, are being demonized and treated as enemies.” “We can fix our broken immigration system while still recognizing our common humanity and treating each other with dignity and respect. In fact, it’s the only way we ever will,” he added. Yet critics often point to Obama’s own record on immigration enforcement, noting that in 2013 alone, his administration deported 438,421 people — a figure unmatched by any other president since. Adapted by ASEAN Now from The Independent 2025-06-20

North Korean Officials Vanish from State Media After Failed Warship Launch, Sparking Execution Fears Two high-ranking North Korean officials appear to have been erased from official state photographs just months after the country’s humiliating failure to launch a naval destroyer — leading to speculation they may have been executed by order of supreme leader Kim Jong Un, according to a report by NK News. The individuals in question, Admiral Kim Myong Sil and senior shipyard official Hong Kil Ho, were initially pictured standing close to Kim in state media images taken at the Chongjin Shipyard. However, in more recently released versions of those photos, the two men are missing — their absence marked by a suspiciously empty space, suggesting deliberate editing. Analysts say the revision was likely orchestrated by Kim himself, who reportedly blames them for the botched launch. The failed attempt to introduce a new 5,000-ton naval destroyer to North Korea’s fleet took place on May 21. According to the Korean Central News Agency, the vessel became destabilized while being lowered into the Sea of Japan. It slid awkwardly into the water, damaging the hull and leaving the ship’s bow jammed against the shipway. The launch was widely seen as a major embarrassment for Pyongyang, particularly given the regime’s regular boasting about military self-reliance and technological advancement. In the wake of the mishap, several officials from the shipyard were reportedly arrested. Hong Kil Ho, who oversaw operations at Chongjin Shipyard, was believed to be among at least four officials who faced direct consequences. Despite his long-standing position in the military hierarchy — having served as a top navy commander since Kim Jong Un’s ascent to power in 2011 — Admiral Kim Myong Sil also appears to have suffered the regime’s wrath. Michael Madden, an expert on North Korean leadership and founder of NK Leadership Watch, noted the potential outcomes for such disgraced officials. “If Kim Myong Sik fell on his sword, he may have avoided a public execution and saved his family and close associates from imprisonment,” Madden told The Sun. “On the other hand, if KJU is in a message-sending mood, then they may gather other top officials in the military and defense industry to watch.” The striking absence of Sil and Ho from official imagery has drawn comparisons to the notorious photo manipulation tactics employed by Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin, who frequently erased political rivals from public photographs to reinforce his own absolute power — one of the most infamous examples being the removal of NKVD chief Nikolai Yezhov. Despite the failed launch in May, North Korea appears to have succeeded in getting the massive warship operational. The vessel was reportedly launched again on Saturday, with state media hailing the event as “convincing proof of the rapid transformation of [the North Korean] Navy.” Nevertheless, the fates of Kim Myong Sil and Hong Kil Ho remain unclear. Their erasure from public view may signal more than just political demotion — in North Korea, it can often be a precursor to imprisonment, forced labor, or even execution. Adapted by ASEAN Now from NYP 2025-06-20

Starmer Faces Revolt as Disability Benefit Cuts Spark Outrage Across Political Spectrum Sir Keir Starmer is facing the most significant internal revolt of his leadership following the release of sweeping welfare reform proposals that critics have called “horrendous,” “harmful,” and “a disaster.” The controversial legislation aims to slash disability benefits, a move that has triggered widespread condemnation from MPs, charities, and campaigners who warn it will drive disabled people into deeper poverty. The reforms, presented under the Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment Bill, propose tightening eligibility for Personal Independence Payment (PIP)—the primary disability benefit—as well as reducing the sickness-related element of Universal Credit and delaying access for claimants until the age of 22. An estimated 800,000 people could lose access to PIP, and according to the Department for Work and Pensions’ own figures, an additional 250,000 individuals—including 50,000 children—could be pushed into relative poverty. In a bid to soften the impact, the government plans to include a 13-week transition period for existing claimants. This temporary support is meant to apply to those affected by changes to the daily living component of PIP, including those who would lose access to Carer’s Allowance or the carer’s element of Universal Credit. But that gesture has done little to quell outrage. Labour MP Brian Leishman said he would vote against what he called “horrendous reforms,” adding, “I think a 13-week transition period is an insult to disabled people. The government should speak to disability organisations to actually hear about the lived experiences of what it is like for sick and disabled people.” His stance was echoed by fellow Labour MP Nadia Whittome, who warned, “It is clear that this Bill is not making positive reforms to welfare but cutting the income disabled people need to survive. Many people will lose thousands of pounds a year and be plunged into poverty.” Liberal Democrat leader Sir Ed Davey also condemned the bill, calling it a “double whammy” against vulnerable families. “It will hit disabled people who can’t work with these cuts, and the loved ones who care for them will also lose out,” he said. “The Conservatives left an enormous welfare bill and we need to get it down, but the government’s plans risk backfiring by making it harder for disabled people and their carers to work.” At Prime Minister’s Questions on Wednesday, Angela Rayner, speaking on behalf of Starmer, declined to confirm whether Labour MPs who vote against the bill will face disciplinary action. When asked by SNP MP Pete Wishart if the whip would be removed from rebels, she shifted the focus, stating, “We’re absolutely committed to ending child poverty. We’ve already introduced free school meals. We’re already supporting families. We’ve given a living wage rise to over millions of workers that need it. We’re getting on the job.” Charities have also voiced alarm. James Watson-O’Neill, CEO of disability charity Sense, warned, “Many disabled people already find themselves in debt because current benefits don’t stretch far enough. Cutting support further at a time when the cost of living remains high is not only unjust — it is cruel.” Mental health charity Mind called the proposals “harmful in the extreme.” Minesh Patel, policy director, said, “Struggling with your mental health is not a choice, but it is a political choice to attempt to fix the public finances by cutting the incomes of disabled people. We urge MPs to oppose these measures and call on the UK government to recognise the devastating impact these cuts will have on disabled people and to rethink their plans.” Yet Work and Pensions Secretary Liz Kendall defended the reforms as necessary to safeguard the future of the welfare system. “Unless we reform it, more people will be denied opportunities, and it may not be there for those who need it,” she said. “This legislation represents a new social contract and marks the moment we take the road of compassion, opportunity and dignity.” But the Trussell Trust warned the legislation “does almost nothing to ease the concerns of hundreds of the thousands of disabled people who fear that their social security support will be ripped from them.” Helen Barnard, the charity’s policy director, added, “It is easy to see why so many MPs have voiced concerns about the damage this bill will do. What has been published today offers little for MPs deeply concerned about the impact of these cuts on their constituents.” Adapted by ASEAN Now from The Independent 2025-06-20

Nippon Steel Seals U.S. Steel Takeover After Striking Unprecedented Deal with Trump Nippon Steel has officially completed its $14.9 billion acquisition of U.S. Steel, finalizing a controversial deal that grants the U.S. government extraordinary oversight in exchange for presidential approval. The Japanese firm’s takeover of the iconic 124-year-old American company, which has long symbolized the country’s industrial strength, marks a significant milestone in the global steel industry, positioning Nippon as a dominant player in the U.S. market. Originally announced in 2023, the acquisition was initially seen as a financial lifeline for the beleaguered U.S. steelmaker. However, the plan soon became a political flashpoint, encountering fierce resistance from both sides of the political spectrum during the 2024 U.S. presidential campaign. Trump, however, endorsed the deal last week after receiving extensive concessions from Nippon. In an executive order signed on Friday, he gave formal approval, declaring that his concerns had been satisfied. As part of the agreement, Nippon committed to purchasing all outstanding shares of U.S. Steel at $55 each and absorbing the company’s debt—bringing the total value of the transaction to $14.9 billion. In addition, the Japanese firm pledged to invest $11 billion into U.S. Steel by 2028, including the construction of a new facility expected to be completed after that year. Perhaps most notably, Nippon agreed to grant the U.S. government a “golden share,” an unusual provision that gives federal authorities veto power over key corporate decisions. This includes the ability to block the transfer of jobs or production outside the country, as well as prevent closures or idling of domestic factories. In a joint statement, Nippon and U.S. Steel confirmed, “This partnership ensures that U.S. Steel will retain its iconic name and headquarters in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, and that it will continue to be mined, melted, and made in America for generations to come.” The companies also said the deal would “protect and create more than 100,000 jobs.” To further solidify its American credentials, Nippon has agreed to keep the company’s headquarters in Pittsburgh and appoint U.S. citizens to critical leadership roles, including chief executive and a majority of the board. Trump, who has long framed steel production as central to his economic policy, recently raised tariffs on steel imports to 50% to further protect American producers. He said his shift in position came after meetings with local leaders who warned that U.S. Steel would likely slash jobs if the Japanese investment fell through. Despite presidential approval, the acquisition has not escaped criticism. The United Steelworkers union, which staunchly opposed the deal, accused former President Joe Biden of politicizing the national security review when he blocked the acquisition during the final weeks of his term. The companies responded with a lawsuit challenging Biden’s intervention. David McCall, president of the United Steelworkers, criticized the final agreement, saying it “granted the president a startling degree of personal control” over the corporation. He warned that while public attention may now fade, the union would continue to monitor Nippon’s adherence to its promises. “However, our union will remain. We will continue watching, holding Nippon to its commitments,” McCall said. Adapted by ASEAN Now from BBC 2025-06-20

In a closely watched White House press briefing, Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt conveyed a direct message from President Donald Trump regarding America’s potential involvement in the escalating conflict between Israel and Iran. Addressing growing speculation over the U.S. military’s role in the region, Leavitt confirmed that the president has not yet made a final decision. “Based on the fact that there's a substantial chance of negotiations that may or may not take place with Iran in the near future, I will make my decision whether or not to go within the next two weeks,” Trump said in the statement delivered by Leavitt. The president’s remarks come amid heightened tensions in the Middle East and increasing pressure at home and abroad to clarify the United States’ position. While details of the possible negotiations with Tehran remain undisclosed, Trump’s statement suggests that the administration sees diplomatic engagement as a potential avenue to defuse the crisis—at least for now. His comments leave open the possibility of direct American involvement but tie any such action to the likelihood and progress of talks with Iranian officials. This conditional approach signals that Trump is attempting to strike a balance between projecting strength and allowing space for diplomacy, as regional violence threatens to spiral further out of control. With speculation intensifying in Washington and allied capitals, the two-week timeline now sets a ticking clock on a decision that could reshape the geopolitical landscape of the region. Adapted by ASEAN Now from BBC 2025-06-20

@PatThaiM Trolling topic closed, this is the third post/topic you have posted on the same subject. //closed//

White House Blasts Jim Acosta Over Joke About Trump’s Late Ex-Wife Former CNN correspondent Jim Acosta is facing intense backlash after making controversial remarks about President Donald Trump’s late ex-wife, Ivana Trump, during a podcast appearance. In a recent episode of “The Contrarian” podcast hosted by Jennifer Rubin, Acosta made light of Ivana’s burial site and accused Trump of hypocrisy on immigration, drawing swift condemnation from the White House. Acosta criticized Trump’s record on immigration enforcement, especially his past support for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) raids. He questioned why ICE has not targeted Trump’s properties, suggesting undocumented immigrants could be employed there. “Where are the ICE raids at the Trump properties? Could somebody call ICE on the Trump golf course in Virginia? You’re telling me there’s nobody in there that is undocumented or has some kind of squirreliness going on with their paperwork?” Acosta asked during the show. He went further, referencing Trump’s relationships with immigrant women, including Ivana, who died in 2022. “How many immigrants has he married? He’s got one buried at his golf course in New Jersey! Isn’t she buried by the first hole or the second tee or something like that?” he quipped, prompting laughter from Rubin and fellow guest April Ryan. Ivana Trump, mother to Donald Jr., Ivanka, and Eric Trump, is buried at Trump National Golf Club in Bedminster, New Jersey. The White House responded strongly. Press secretary Karoline Leavitt told Fox News Digital, “Jim Acosta is a disgraceful human being.” Acosta, known for his contentious relationship with the Trump administration while at CNN, left the network in January. Throughout Trump’s first term, Acosta became one of his most outspoken critics, often blending editorial commentary with news reporting. Since going independent, his tone has remained combative, particularly on issues like immigration and civil rights. His latest remarks come as immigration enforcement efforts have ignited political turmoil in Los Angeles. ICE raids across the sanctuary city have sparked widespread protests, leading to hundreds of arrests. The Los Angeles Police Department reports 575 individuals have been arrested since the first weekend of demonstrations. Violent clashes between protesters and law enforcement have resulted in significant property damage, including vehicles set ablaze and fireworks launched at police. As of Monday, ten law enforcement officers have sustained injuries, according to the LAPD. In such a charged atmosphere, Acosta’s comments have added fuel to the fire. While supporters argue he is using satire to expose double standards, critics see his remarks as deeply disrespectful, especially toward Ivana Trump, who passed away less than three years ago. As the political climate remains volatile and immigration continues to dominate headlines, the fallout from Acosta’s remarks underscores the deeply personal and partisan nature of the current national debate. Adapted by ASEAN Now from NYP 2025-06-15

Kneecap Band Member Faces Terror Charge Over Flag Display as Supporters Rally Outside Court A member of the Belfast-based rap group Kneecap appeared in court on Wednesday to face a terror-related charge stemming from an incident during one of the band’s concerts in November 2024. Liam O’Hanna, who performs under the name Mo Chara, is accused of displaying a Hezbollah flag at the O2 Forum in Kentish Town, north London, in a manner that allegedly indicated support for the proscribed organisation. As O’Hanna, 27, arrived at Westminster Magistrates’ Court, a group of supporters gathered outside, many wearing balaclavas and waving a combination of Palestinian and Kneecap flags. The scene grew tense when a pro-Israel protester approached the group draped in an Israeli flag, leading to a chorus of boos, angry shouts of “free Palestine,” and swearing from the crowd. Police quickly intervened to remove the counter-protester. The charge against O’Hanna specifically alleges that he displayed the Hezbollah flag in a public setting “in such a way or in such circumstances as to arouse reasonable suspicion that he is a supporter of a proscribed organisation,” which in this case refers to Hezbollah, banned in its entirety in the United Kingdom. The group has denounced the prosecution, calling it politically motivated and a form of harassment. In a statement posted Tuesday night on X, formerly Twitter, Kneecap referred to the case as a “witch hunt.” The post featured a video of a London billboard with the message: “more blacks, more dogs, more Irish, Mo Chara,” appearing to draw parallels between historic discrimination and their current legal troubles. According to the Metropolitan Police, O’Hanna was charged following an investigation that began after a video from the concert surfaced online. The footage reportedly showed the controversial moment when the flag was allegedly displayed. Prior to this, the police had already confirmed that Kneecap was under investigation after clips from the same performance circulated online appearing to show members of the band shouting “up Hamas, up Hezbollah” and calling for the deaths of Members of Parliament. In response to the allegations, Kneecap has stated unequivocally that they “never supported” Hamas or Hezbollah. Both groups are designated as terrorist organisations by the UK government, and public expressions of support for them can be prosecuted under counter-terrorism laws. The case has sparked debate around artistic expression, political dissent, and the limits of free speech in the UK. While supporters of the band view the charges as an overreach and a form of political suppression, authorities maintain that the investigation was initiated in accordance with the law after concerns were raised over potentially inflammatory and illegal conduct during a public event. O’Hanna has not yet entered a plea, and the case is expected to return to court in the coming weeks. Adapted by ASEAN Now from The Telegraph 2025-06-19

Gary Glitter Denied Parole Again, Will Remain Behind Bars Disgraced former pop star Gary Glitter, whose real name is Paul Gadd, has been denied release from prison after the Parole Board rejected his latest bid for freedom. Now 81, Glitter remains incarcerated for a string of historic child sex offences, with the board citing continued concerns about the risk he poses to the public. Glitter was originally sentenced to 16 years in 2015 for sexually assaulting three schoolgirls between 1975 and 1980. He was automatically released halfway through his sentence in February 2023, as per the terms of his determinate sentence. However, less than six weeks later, he was recalled to prison for breaching his licence conditions after allegedly attempting to view child abuse material online. According to reports, this included efforts to access the dark web and download images of children. A spokesperson for the Parole Board confirmed that the most recent review of Glitter’s case, conducted via a “paper review” rather than a hearing, concluded that he should not be released. “Parole Board decisions are solely focused on what risk a prisoner could represent to the public if released and whether that risk is manageable in the community,” the statement said. “A panel will carefully examine a huge range of evidence, including details of the original crime, and any evidence of behaviour change, as well as explore the harm done and impact the crime has had on the victims. Parole reviews are undertaken thoroughly and with extreme care. Protecting the public is our number one priority.” The singer’s full sentence is due to expire in February 2031, but he will remain eligible for periodic parole reviews, with the next date to be determined by the Ministry of Justice. Earlier this year, Glitter was also declared bankrupt after failing to pay over £500,000 in damages to a woman who successfully sued him for abusing her when she was just 12 years old. She is one of many survivors of his long and disturbing history of abuse, which spans multiple countries and decades. Richard Scorer, the lawyer who represented the woman in that civil case and who heads the abuse law and public inquiries department at Slater and Gordon, welcomed the Parole Board’s latest decision. “The Parole Board has made the right decision,” he told Sky News. “My client is relieved at this ruling but apprehensive about having to go through the merry-go-round of Gadd coming up for parole again, and the fear of him being let out on licence. This is unfair on victims and it would be better if they were assured that he would serve the rest of his sentence.” Glitter’s criminal record extends beyond the UK. In 1999, he was jailed for four months after pleading guilty to possession of approximately 4,000 indecent images of children. He was deported from Cambodia in 2002 and later convicted in Vietnam in 2006 for sexually abusing two girls aged 10 and 11, serving two and a half years in prison. Though no longer a figure in the public eye, Glitter’s continued imprisonment remains a matter of deep public interest due to the nature of his crimes and repeated attempts to reoffend. The Parole Board’s refusal to release him reaffirms its stance that public safety remains paramount. Adapted by ASEAN Now from Sky News 2025-06-19

Streeting Slams NHS 'Culture of Cover-Up' and Vows Transparency in Health Reform The NHS has been gripped by a damaging “culture of cover-up” that must end, according to Health Secretary Wes Streeting, who has pledged to make patient safety a central focus in the government’s upcoming 10-year health plan. Acknowledging persistent failures in the system, Streeting promised there would be “no more turning a blind eye to failure.” Streeting’s admission came during a Commons exchange in which Labour MP Perran Moon highlighted the harrowing experience of one of his constituents. “A couple of weeks ago at my constituency surgery, through the tears, my constituent Amy explained how, following a hip operation in 2008, she suffered progressive nerve damage due to repeated failures in diagnosis, referral and treatment,” Moon told MPs. Despite raising concerns over many years, Amy’s suffering was dismissed. “She was told her pain was common,” Moon said. It was not until 2015 that a nerve test confirmed lasting damage, and further tests in 2023 revealed a significant deterioration. “After 17 years, she’s only now been offered surgery,” he said. “All Amy wants to know is what steps are being taken to ensure that no other patient is left permanently disabled due to such long and systemic failures.” Streeting responded with an apology and a stark acknowledgment of wider systemic issues: “Can I first of all, on behalf of the NHS, apologise to his constituent. That is a totally intolerable situation, but sadly not rare or exceptional. There’s too much of that happening, and a culture of cover-up and covering reputations rather than being honest with patients about failures.” He stressed that cultural change is a key priority for the government’s health strategy. “We are changing the culture – safety is at the heart of the 10-year plan – and I’d be delighted to talk to him further about his constituent’s case,” Streeting said. The new long-term plan, due to be unveiled within weeks, will outline three major shifts in the way NHS services are delivered: a move from hospitals to community care, from analogue systems to digital infrastructure, and from reactive treatment to preventative care. These changes follow a record £29 billion funding boost for the NHS in the most recent spending review. Streeting has made clear that transparency and accountability will be central to his reforms. He intends to introduce NHS league tables to expose underperformance, stating that patients are entitled to “far more transparency” when it comes to failures in care. His broader ambition is to evolve the NHS into a “neighbourhood health service,” reallocating more resources from hospitals to GP surgeries and community-based care. In a further effort to drive improvements, the government announced last month that it will offer bonuses of up to £30,000 to health leaders who deliver “exceptional results.” This incentive scheme is part of a broader initiative to overhaul NHS performance and ensure patients are no longer left behind by systemic inefficiencies. Streeting’s comments signal a decisive break from past practices of denial and silence around medical failures. With the forthcoming 10-year plan, the government hopes to reset the relationship between the health service and the public, placing honesty, safety, and community care at the forefront. Adapted by ASEAN Now from The Telegraph 2025-06-19

Meghan Markle: “I Just Want People to Tell the Truth” Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, has once again offered a candid glimpse into her life after stepping back from royal duties, saying she would rewrite her public narrative by simply asking people to “tell the truth.” In a wide-ranging interview on the Aspire podcast with British fashion entrepreneur Emma Grede, Meghan took what many interpreted as a thinly veiled swipe at the Royal family, insisting that “a lie can’t last forever” and reflecting on the years in which she says she was denied the chance to speak for herself. “If I could rewrite anything,” she said when asked about how she might reshape her image, “yes, I would ask people to tell the truth.” Recalling advice she received from her friend, tennis legend Serena Williams, Meghan added: “My dear friend Serena, she told me years ago: ‘A lie can’t live forever.’ Eight years is a long time, but not forever.” Meghan, now 43, also addressed how she navigated life as a working royal, saying, “I didn’t feel as though I had as much of an opportunity to speak,” and adding that she turned to fashion as a subtle form of communication. “When I didn’t feel as though I had as much of an opportunity to speak, what can you say with what you’re wearing? You can say a lot,” she explained. “In moments where I found I wasn’t as empowered with my voice, I still wanted to be able to be heard in other ways.” Her remarks echo those made during her bombshell 2021 interview with Oprah Winfrey, in which she claimed “the Firm” had played a role in “perpetuating falsehoods” about her and Prince Harry. During that conversation, Meghan also alleged that Catherine, Princess of Wales, had made her cry in the days before her wedding and that it was crucial people “understand the truth.” In the podcast interview, Grede responded emotionally to Meghan’s frustrations. “You’re very measured about it. I would just get so angry if I felt like everyone was lying about me all the time…” Meghan replied, “Peaks and valleys… It’s true, of course, I’ve gone through those chapters and do a lot of work, you do a lot of self-work and go, what’s the why? It’s happening for a reason.” The Duchess also spoke about her current endeavors, particularly her new lifestyle brand, As Ever. Initially launched with jars of jam, Meghan said the brand is “going global” and expanding into hospitality, hostessing, and possibly fashion and beauty in the future. “I’m not saying there aren’t moments when I don’t feel scared, but my faith is greater than my fear. I believe in myself, I believe in my team and the potential for success,” she said. “I don’t see the possibility of failure, not when you can learn from everything you’ve done.” She described her proudest achievement as investing in herself. “It takes courage to bet on yourself,” she said. The Duchess reflected on a joyful moment shortly before the birth of her daughter, Princess Lilibet, when she and Harry were filmed twerking in a hospital delivery suite. She described the video as a reminder of her “authentic, fun life” and expressed gratitude for being able to share such moments “on her own terms.” She also addressed the purpose of her personal Instagram account, which she has used increasingly to share family photos and glimpses of her private life. “For me it was a great way to get my voice back. It’s my space and my channel for joy… that’s the intention of my handle,” she said, distancing the platform from her business ventures. Even when she didn’t have “skin in the game,” Meghan said she tried to support emerging talent, particularly female-founded and local designers during royal tours. “Being able to support female-founded designers, small local brands ... any territories we would go to on certain tours, I always tried to tap into local designers.” Through all the criticism and controversy, Meghan continues to assert one simple wish: for people to tell the truth. Adapted by ASEAN Now from The Telegraph 2025-06-19

Qatari Man Convicted of Rape at London Hospital After Claiming No Prior Contact With Women A Qatari national who raped a woman in a London hospital toilet had never interacted with women outside his family, a court has heard. Nasser al-Gherainiq, a 27-year-old camel herder from a conservative tribe in Qatar, was convicted of two counts of rape at Southwark Crown Court. The attack occurred at Royal Brompton Hospital in Chelsea on August 25, 2023, while al-Gherainiq was in the UK to receive treatment for a rare heart condition. Al-Gherainiq, who denied the charges of rape but admitted to sexual assault and causing a person to engage in sexual activity without consent, dragged his victim into a lavatory cubicle and assaulted her. The court heard that he told the woman he needed to use the toilet before forcing her into the stall. The victim, who has remained anonymous, gave a statement that described the psychological toll of the assault. “I was so scared. I felt frozen with fear. I couldn’t go anywhere. Although the incident lasted a few minutes, it felt like ages to me. I was very shocked to hear it was only five minutes,” she said. The trauma of the experience led her to withdraw from daily life. “A few days after the incident I had huge anxiety and fear. I could not leave the house. It has been a lonely and isolating year for me. I am not the outgoing woman I used to be. I am withdrawn and highly anxious and overly cautious, especially when I’m on my own in an unfamiliar environment. My life has never been the same. My family still do not know what happened to me. I am so close to my family.” In his defence, al-Gherainiq’s barrister, Jane Bickerstaff KC, argued that the accused came from a highly sheltered environment and had minimal exposure to modern life. “Until July 2023 he had never left Qatar. He would have had minimal experience engaging with women outside a family context. The only woman he would have had any meaningful contact with is his mother,” she said. Bickerstaff also added, “Limited visits to Doha and a preference for a desert environment curtailed his exposure to urban and modern societal norms. This defendant would have had no experience whatsoever of interacting with a woman. We submit that he was equivalent to an immature and inexperienced adolescent. He completely failed to understand her true feelings.” The court heard that following the completion of his sentence, al-Gherainiq will not remain in the UK. “He will immediately go back to Qatar,” Bickerstaff stated. “There is no reason for him to apply to remain here.” Judge and jury were told that al-Gherainiq’s background as a camel herder from an isolated and conservative tribal setting may have contributed to his inability to comprehend boundaries or proper social behaviour, particularly with women. Despite these claims, the jury found him guilty of rape. Al-Gherainiq has been remanded in custody and is due to be sentenced at a later date. Adapted by ASEAN Now from The Times 2025-06-19

Iranian Opposition Gains Momentum Amid Crisis, but Unity Remains Elusive A handwritten banner recently unfurled on a bridge in Tehran carried a stark message from the shadows: “Those who experienced the Iran-Iraq war demand no war again.” Behind this act of defiance were dissidents who, like so many before them, had taken grave risks in a country where criticism of the Islamic regime can lead to prison or worse. But as the political ground trembles beneath the feet of Iran’s leadership, even the most cautious critics now sense a turning point. One of the protest’s organizers explained their motivation plainly: “We believe Iran is very close to opening a new regional war, which will cost Iran and all Iranians … Enough is enough. If you don’t take risks, you can’t expect rewards.” The moment feared by these mostly young, student-led dissidents — reminiscent of the revolutionary fervor that helped Ayatollah Khomeini overthrow the Shah in 1979 — has now arrived. As Israel steps up its military campaign and the U.S. issues evacuation warnings, the question arises: how strong is Iran’s opposition, and can it truly threaten the Islamic Republic? Some believe the time for discreet protest is over. A recent manifesto circulating among dissident networks made a bold call to arms: “Take to the streets and the squares because the future of us all is at stake. Destroy and disable street cameras. Light a fire in the streets and fight the regime’s mercenaries. Break the windows and doors of government and security facilities and block them and take them under your control.” Yet so far, these appeals have not sparked a mass uprising. For now, the majority in Tehran are focused on survival. The Israeli defence minister has bluntly warned the capital “will burn,” prompting a wave of fear and flight. Opponents of the regime, who polls suggest represent a majority of Iranians, have also voiced outrage at Israel’s deadly campaign, which has devastated civilian neighborhoods. Toomaj Salehi, the dissident rapper jailed for supporting 2022’s women-led protests, lashed out in an Instagram post: “If your intention is to kill the people of Iran, at least have the honesty not to hide the burden of that responsibility.” He questioned how nine million people were supposed to evacuate the city. Israel insists its conflict is not with the Iranian people and has encouraged them to rise against the regime. Despite incendiary language from some Israeli officials, political spokespeople have emphasized that their war is with Iran’s clerical leadership, not its citizens. Still, domestic criticism of Iran’s own leadership has grown louder. A public letter signed by several dissidents, including two Nobel laureates, called for Iran to accept a ceasefire and halt uranium enrichment — key demands from both Israel and the U.S. Mostafa Tajzadeh, a former government minister turned imprisoned reformist, issued his own appeal from behind bars: “I believe that for a peaceful transition to democracy, there must be an insistence on a constituent assembly to change the constitution, and compel the government to establish it.” He condemned the Israeli airstrikes, saying they lacked “political and moral justification,” but made it clear that change must also come from within. Iran’s opposition remains fragmented, a loose coalition ranging from religious moderates to liberals, communists, and the controversial Mujahidin e-Khalq — a group responsible for a string of deadly attacks during the revolution. Abroad, Reza Pahlavi, the exiled son of the last Shah, has lent his voice to the Israeli campaign. Though widely unpopular inside Iran, he retains a vocal following among expatriates. “He’s the prince of nowhere,” remarked Sanam Vakil of Chatham House. “The opposition can be described as a mix of activists and technocrats and moderates that would like to see the Islamic Republic move away from ideology and enmity, and transition to an empowered presidential and parliamentary system.” Some of that transition may already be under way. Iranians have become increasingly disengaged from regime politics, with voter turnout at historic lows and public cynicism deepening. But it remains to be seen whether this dissatisfaction can coalesce into coordinated resistance. “If there were no war,” Vakil added, “I think there would have to be a modest acceptance that, with these key people still there, the Islamic Republic’s transformation wasn’t going to be quick, perhaps generational. What Israel is doing is pouring an accelerant on the process, and we are losing control in terms of understanding the direction.” Adapted by ASEAN Now from The Times 2025-06-19

Russia Faces Strategic Setback Amid Rising Tensions Between Iran and Israel As Israel's Operation Rising Lion intensifies, Moscow has expressed growing alarm over the escalating conflict in the Middle East. Russian officials have called the situation both "alarming" and "dangerous." Yet, despite their concern, Russia’s initial response to the outbreak of violence was tinged with optimism. State media in Russia were quick to highlight potential advantages the conflict might bring to Moscow. Among the most prominent was the expected rise in global oil prices, which could significantly boost Russia’s energy revenues at a time when its economy remains under pressure from international sanctions. Another supposed benefit was the redirection of global focus. One major newspaper, Moskovsky Komsomolets, ran a headline proclaiming, “Kyiv has been forgotten,” referencing how the attention of the international community might shift away from Russia’s ongoing war in Ukraine. There was also the hope that Russia might position itself as a mediator in the Middle East, enhancing its geopolitical standing by offering to broker peace. Such a role could serve to reframe Moscow’s image from aggressor in Ukraine to potential peacemaker in a volatile region. This, however, remains largely hypothetical. As the fighting drags on, the Russian narrative is beginning to shift, revealing deeper concerns about the broader implications of Israel’s military campaign. “The escalation of the conflict carries serious risks and potential costs for Moscow,” wrote political analyst Andrei Kortunov in the business daily Kommersant. “The fact remains that Russia was unable to prevent a mass strike by Israel on a country with which five months ago [Russia] signed a comprehensive strategic partnership.” Kortunov's words underscore Moscow's impotence in the face of a rapidly changing strategic environment. Despite its strong rhetoric condemning Israel, Russia has shown no signs of being willing—or able—to provide Iran with direct military assistance. This reveals the limits of the so-called strategic pact that Presidents Vladimir Putin and Masoud Pezeshkian signed earlier this year. The agreement was not a military alliance, and therefore did not compel Russia to come to Iran’s defense in a time of conflict. Nonetheless, Russia had touted the agreement as a milestone. In an interview with Ria Novosti, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov emphasized that the deal gave “special attention to the strengthening of co-ordination in the interests of peace and security on the regional and global levels, and the desire of Moscow and Tehran for closer co-operation on security and defence.” These promises now appear hollow in the face of real conflict. In fact, this is not the first time Moscow has seen a strategic ally in the region come under threat. Just six months ago, Russia lost its long-time partner in Syria when Bashar al-Assad was ousted from power. Assad later accepted asylum in Russia, but the loss was a significant blow to Moscow’s regional influence. Now, with Iran facing increased pressure from Israel and the specter of regime change looming, the Kremlin faces the possibility of another geopolitical defeat. As Moskovsky Komsomolets remarked on Tuesday, “In global politics right now, massive changes are taking place in real time which will affect life in our country, either directly or indirectly.” While Russia may still benefit economically in the short term, the broader consequences of this conflict threaten to erode its strategic foothold in the Middle East, exposing the fragility of Moscow’s alliances and the limits of its influence. Adapted by ASEAN Now from BBC 2025-06-19

Above posts have been edited as they were well over fair use policy @TallGuyJohninBKK 27. You will not post any copyrighted material except as fair use laws apply (as in the case of news articles). Only post a link, the headline and three sentences from the article. Content in the public domain is limited to the same restrictions.

Please continue in the topic already running here. //closed//

A couple of posts already removed. Ensure you abide by the forum rules. 5. You will not use ASEAN NOW to post any material which is knowingly or can be reasonably construed as false, inaccurate, invasive of a person's privacy, or otherwise in violation of any law. 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. A post with a veiled threat to inflict mass causalities on a US aircraft carrier removed. Carry on like that and the topic will be closed. Yet another scaremongering unsubstantiated post removed. //Closed//

A series of off topic posts, unattributed image and derogatory name calling have been removed. Discuss the topic please not deportation in the US. Posts with derogatory nicknames, intentional misspellings or personal remarks will be removed. Spell names correctly for all sides of the debate. Some Trump supporters rebelling over his support of Israel's Iran strikes

An off topic and unsubstantiated post about GHF has been removed. This alleged incident has nothing to do with GHF, it was an aid convoy by The World Food Programme (WFP) An inflammatory troll post removed @Cameroni Paywall link with a duplicate report from Reuters removed

Please discuss the topic, it is not about how Israel got nuclear weapons or its Iron Dome which is working as designed. Trump Demands Iran’s "Unconditional Surrender" as Tensions Escalate Across Middle East