“Strictly screen foreigners entering and leaving the Kingdom”, Deputy Chief of police
-
Recently Browsing 0 members
- No registered users viewing this page.
-
Topics
-
-
-
Popular Contributors
-
-
Latest posts...
-
0
USA At Risk: Elon Musk's empire on Shaky Ground
Elon Musk’s vast business empire is beginning to show signs of strain as his falling-out with former ally Donald Trump deepens, casting uncertainty over the future of Tesla, SpaceX, and other ventures under his control. While Musk remains one of the wealthiest people on the planet, his high-profile break with the the president has triggered a market reaction that threatens both investor confidence and future government support. Tesla shares slid 6.8% on Monday, continuing a sharp downward trend that began when Musk publicly criticized Republican budget plans last month. That public rupture evolved into a wider political move when Musk announced he would launch a new political movement—the America Party—with ambitions to influence the 2026 House and Senate elections. Since the beginning of June, Tesla stock has lost about 14% of its value, amounting to more than $100 billion in lost shareholder wealth. Musk himself has seen his personal fortune shrink by nearly $20 billion on paper. The deterioration of Musk’s relationship with Trump could prove costly. As the Republican Party controls all three branches of government, Musk’s businesses now face political headwinds. Investors who once expected Tesla to benefit from favorable regulatory decisions and continued federal contracts for SpaceX are being forced to reconsider. “While the opportunity is outsized, the risks are very significant as well,” wrote Ivana Delevska, founder of Spear Invest, who recently divested from Tesla amid the growing uncertainty. “While the reward potential is clearly here, the risks are significant as well.” The timing of this political drama is especially unfortunate for Tesla. The company began launching its robotaxi fleet in Austin last month, a pivotal development Musk has touted as central to Tesla’s long-term success. However, the company is also losing ground to global competitors like Chinese electric vehicle giant BYD, which is gaining traction across both China and Europe. In the most recent quarter, Tesla’s deliveries fell nearly 14%, a drop partially attributed to the ongoing backlash surrounding Musk’s political forays. SpaceX, meanwhile, is preparing for a potential uncrewed mission to Mars in 2026, an effort that requires consistent focus and stable government relations—both of which could be jeopardized by Musk’s renewed political engagement. William Blair analyst Jed Dorsheimer captured growing investor frustration in a recent research note: “We expect that investors are growing tired of the distraction at a point when the business needs Musk's attention the most and only see downside from his dip back into politics.” Despite recent losses, Musk's wealth remains staggering. According to the Bloomberg Billionaires Index, he was still worth around $361 billion as of Monday, putting him more than $100 billion ahead of the next richest person, Meta’s Mark Zuckerberg. There are also questions about how Musk’s political focus will be received internally. While Tesla’s board has largely supported Musk without reservation, the Wall Street Journal reported earlier this year that the company had quietly begun a process to potentially find a successor CEO. Musk and Tesla chair Robyn Denholm both denied the report. At his privately held companies like SpaceX and xAI, Musk maintains more direct control and closer investor relationships. These firms are also insulated from the fluctuations of public markets and the consumer scrutiny Tesla regularly faces. Still, the overall sentiment from investors is clear. “We would prefer this effort to be channeled towards the robotaxi rollout at this critical juncture,” Dorsheimer added, summing up a mood of growing impatience with Musk's political diversions at a time when his companies require his full attention. Adapted by ASEAN Now from AXIOS 2025-07-09 -
0
UK £771 Million and Counting: Macron Under Fire Over Small Boat Crossings at UK Visit
£771 Million and Counting: Macron Under Fire Over Small Boat Crossings at UK Visit French President Emmanuel Macron arrived in Britain amid intensifying scrutiny over his country’s failure to stem the tide of illegal small boat crossings in the English Channel, despite the UK handing France more than £770 million since 2010 to tackle the problem. With 2,599 migrants arriving in small boats just last week, crossings so far in 2025 are up 56 percent compared to the same period last year. In total, 172,255 migrants have reached British shores since the crisis began in 2018 — all during Macron’s presidency — with the vast majority departing from French beaches. Despite the surge, only 4 percent of those arriving have been deported. Shadow Home Secretary Chris Philp criticised the French government's efforts, saying, “We’ve paid France £771 million and they’ve stopped very few migrants on land and none at sea. This is in contrast to Belgium where embarkations have dropped 90 percent because they do intercept at sea. We should be asking France for a refund.” President Macron and Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer are expected to hold a bilateral summit on Thursday as part of Macron’s three-day state visit, which begins Tuesday. While Downing Street has not confirmed whether further funding will be pledged, a spokesperson stated that the government “will only ever provide funding that delivers for the priorities of the British public.” New measures could be announced during the summit, including allowing French gendarmes to intercept migrant boats after they’ve entered the water — a move long resisted by France. Additional proposals may include deploying floating barriers across French rivers and canals to prevent traffickers from launching so-called “taxi boats” into the Channel. A recent report from the House of Commons Library revealed that the UK has provided £657 million to France since 2018 to support border security, in addition to £114 million given between 2014 and 2018. The total exceeds £770 million over 12 years, with little transparency on how the money has been used. The report noted, “There is little publicly available information about how funding is spent and monitored. UK authorities have refused Freedom of Information requests seeking detailed information.” Previous revelations have shown that British money funded a range of purchases by French police — not just on the Channel but also on the French-Italian border. These included helicopters, quad bikes, e-scooters, drones, and even microwaves, car vacuums, and support for a horse brigade in the Somme Bay. Tony Smith, former director general of UK Border Force, was blunt in his assessment: “Throwing more money at it – when the track record is so poor – is not a good investment. There is a lot of evidence it isn’t really working despite the money we have given them. Over time, that £800 million we have spent has been a net loss.” Smith proposed a performance-based model: “If more money is to be given to the French it should be a performance-related system, so if there is a reduction in the numbers crossing they get a percentage of the money that we would have otherwise spent on asylum support.” He also questioned France’s lack of proactive intervention. “My view is there’s a lot more the French could be doing. They need to step up their game considerably. I don’t understand why they can’t find the dinghies before they set off, given they have drone and satellite surveillance. Until now the French have never been prepared to get their feet wet, so if interventions at sea now go ahead, that could make a difference.” Smith further criticised the Labour government’s decision to cancel the Conservative-initiated Rwanda asylum scheme, calling it a “grave error” just as it was about to be launched. Nigel Farage joined the chorus of criticism, describing the French approach as an “insult” and calling on the Prime Minister to consider banning French trawlers from British fishing waters unless Macron demonstrates significant progress in stopping the crossings. With British patience wearing thin and public anger mounting, Macron’s visit is expected to be dominated not by pageantry, but by pressure — and demands for answers on where hundreds of millions in UK taxpayer money has gone. Adapted by ASEAN Now from Daily Mail 2025-07-09 -
0
USA Measles Resurgence in the U.S. Reaches 33-Year High Amid Vaccine Hesitancy
Measles Resurgence in the U.S. Reaches 33-Year High Amid Vaccine Hesitancy The United States is grappling with its worst measles outbreak in over three decades, as nearly 1,300 confirmed infections have been reported across the country, marking a dangerous reversal in public health progress against a disease once considered eliminated. According to new data released by Johns Hopkins University, measles cases have now been confirmed in 38 states and the District of Columbia. The illness has claimed at least three lives and hospitalized 155 people. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) revealed that 92% of the infected were either unvaccinated or had unknown vaccination status, highlighting a growing vulnerability to a disease that is both highly contagious and preventable. Texas has emerged as the epicenter of the outbreak, accounting for more than 700 cases. Kansas and New Mexico have also reported dozens of infections. Health officials have noted that the virus is spreading most rapidly in communities with lower vaccination rates, such as some Mennonite populations in Texas who traditionally reject modern medical practices. The rising case count comes amid a broader trend of increasing vaccine skepticism in the United States and globally. This shift has been fueled in part by political figures and public personalities who have questioned vaccine safety, despite overwhelming scientific evidence to the contrary. Among them is Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who previously downplayed the severity of measles outbreaks and disseminated misinformation regarding childhood vaccines. However, as the 2025 outbreak worsened, Kennedy reversed course and publicly endorsed the measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccine. In a post on X, he acknowledged that the MMR shot is “the most effective way to prevent the spread of measles.” The CDC reports that the current outbreak has now surpassed the 2019 case count of 1,274 confirmed infections, reaching 1,277 as of Friday. This makes it the worst outbreak since 1990, when nearly 28,000 cases were recorded. At that time, low vaccination rates were also to blame. However, following concerted public health efforts and widespread immunization campaigns, measles was declared eliminated in the U.S. around the year 2000. That status is now at risk. Public health experts warn that if the virus continues to spread at the current pace for over a year, the U.S. could lose its measles elimination designation. "It’s a reminder of how fragile public health victories can be when vaccination rates decline," one CDC official noted. Despite the grim numbers, the outbreak has also led to a renewed push for immunization. In Texas, where the outbreak is most severe, more than 173,000 measles vaccine doses were administered between January 1 and March 16, an increase from 158,000 during the same period last year. The MMR vaccine remains the cornerstone of measles prevention. It is 97% effective and provides protection against three dangerous viruses: measles, mumps, and rubella. Measles, in particular, can cause severe complications such as pneumonia, encephalitis (brain swelling), and death. Other countries are also facing similar challenges. The UK recorded its highest number of confirmed measles cases since 2012 last year, totaling nearly 3,000, while 529 new cases have been reported in England in 2025 alone. In Canada, over 3,000 cases have been documented this year, with the provinces of Ontario and Alberta hardest hit. The global surge underscores the importance of maintaining high vaccination coverage. As U.S. health officials race to contain the outbreak, they are emphasizing a simple but critical message: vaccines save lives. Adapted by ASEAN Now from BBC 2025-07-09 -
0
NATO Chief Warns: China and Russia Could Launch Coordinated Global Attacks
NATO Chief Warns of Chilling Prospect: China and Russia Could Launch Coordinated Global Attacks In a stark warning to Western nations, NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte has raised the alarming possibility of simultaneous military offensives by China and Russia, warning that such coordination could spark the next global conflict and draw NATO into a full-scale war. Speaking to The New York Times, Rutte suggested that Beijing might use an invasion of Taiwan as the trigger point, while calling on Moscow to distract NATO by launching an assault in Europe. "Let's not be naïve about this," he said. "If Xi Jinping would attack Taiwan, he would first make sure that he makes a call to his very junior partner in all of this, Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin, residing in Moscow, and telling him, 'Hey, I'm going to do this, and I need you to keep them busy in Europe by attacking NATO territory.'" Rutte believes this coordinated aggression could be a likely scenario, urging NATO members to confront it with two key strategies. "One is that NATO, collectively, being so strong that the Russians will never do this," he stated. "And second, working together with the Indo-Pacific – something President [Donald] Trump is very much promoting, because we have this close interconnectedness, working together on defence industry, innovation between NATO and the Indo-Pacific." His warning comes amid growing fears in the West that Russia is eyeing NATO’s eastern flank, particularly the Baltic states of Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania, as part of a broader strategy to destabilize the alliance while supporting global autocracies. Rutte also raised concern over Russia’s rapidly escalating weapons production. “Russia is producing three times as much ammunition in three months as the whole of NATO is doing in a year,” he noted, describing the pace as “unsustainable” but alarming nonetheless. He pointed to increasing collaboration among autocratic states — Russia, North Korea, China, and Iran — as evidence that the line dividing the Indo-Pacific and the Atlantic is fading fast. Their combined efforts in what Rutte called an "unprovoked war of aggression against Ukraine" reflect growing global tensions and the need for a unified strategic front. In response to these mounting threats, NATO leaders convened for an emergency summit in The Hague this June. One major outcome was the reaffirmation of the alliance's core principle of collective defence — a commitment that had been in question, particularly by former U.S. President Donald Trump. The summit also produced a historic pledge by all member nations to raise defence spending to 5% of GDP by 2035. Sir Keir Starmer, the UK’s Prime Minister, hailed the decision as a vital turning point for European security. “This is the moment to unite, for Europe to make a fundamental shift in its posture,” Starmer said. “The commitment to 5% will make the alliance stronger, fairer and more lethal than ever. This includes military spending as well as vital investments in our security and resilience, like protecting our cyber security and our energy networks.” Starmer described the NATO summit as having sent a “decisive message to aggressors,” though notably, the joint communique stopped short of explicitly condemning Russia’s invasion of Ukraine or mentioning Ukraine’s future membership in NATO. Instead, Ukraine was referenced only in relation to defence spending: “Allies reaffirm their enduring sovereign commitments to provide support to Ukraine, whose security contributes to ours, and, to this end, will include direct contributions towards Ukraine’s defence and its defence industry when calculating Allies’ defence spending.” Despite the omission of explicit condemnation, NATO's Secretary-General welcomed the declaration. “This is a significant commitment in response to significant threats to our security,” Rutte said. “All allies are united in understanding that we need to step up to stay safe and they are acting on it.” Adapted by ASEAN Now from LBC 2025-07-09 -
0
Middle East From Disaster Prevention to Oil Trade Hub: How a UN-Purchased Tanker Became a Houthi Asset
From Disaster Prevention to Oil Trade Hub: How a UN-Purchased Tanker Became a Houthi Asset A supertanker originally purchased by the United Nations to avert an environmental catastrophe off the coast of Yemen is now being used as a floating oil storage facility by the Houthis, with Russian oil products reportedly moving through it — all while the UN continues to cover its operating costs. The Very Large Crude Carrier (VLCC) Yemen was bought by the UN for $55 million to carry out a delicate mission: transfer over a million barrels of crude oil from the decaying FSO Safer, a rusting vessel long moored off Yemen’s Red Sea coast and considered an ecological time bomb. That operation was successfully completed in August 2023. However, since then, the ship's purpose appears to have shifted dramatically. Following the oil transfer, ownership of the VLCC Yemen was handed over to the Yemen state-owned oil company Sepoc. Yet, the UN has continued paying $450,000 per month to keep the tanker crewed and operational. Despite this significant financial involvement, the organization says it has little control over the vessel's activities and no knowledge of the origin or destination of its current cargoes. According to maritime tracking data and port activity logs, the VLCC Yemen has been engaged in ship-to-ship (STS) transfers involving Russian petroleum products. These operations indicate that the Houthis, who control the Red Sea coastline including the area around Ras Isa, have effectively repurposed the ship as a storage hub. In early June 2025, the first recorded cargo appeared to have been lightered from the vessel and moved to the Ras Isa terminal, raising concerns that it is now a node in the broader Russian oil supply chain. UN officials have expressed frustration over the situation, saying they have formally objected to the apparent use of the vessel for commercial oil activity. “We have protested the transfers of cargo to and from the VLCC Yemen,” a UN spokesperson confirmed, adding that the organization has “no knowledge of the origin or destinations of the cargoes.” The incident reflects the unintended consequences of a complex operation that initially won international praise for eliminating the threat of a catastrophic Red Sea oil spill. The FSO Safer, a corroding offshore storage ship left unmaintained during years of civil war, had posed a grave danger to regional ecosystems and shipping lanes. The UN’s initiative to transfer its contents to a modern tanker was hailed as a model for preemptive environmental action. But with the VLCC Yemen now functioning outside of international oversight and linked to politically sensitive oil movements, critics warn that the mission’s legacy may be undermined. “The original purpose of this vessel was to save the Red Sea from a disastrous spill,” said one expert familiar with the project. “Now it’s being used to store and move oil under the control of a faction that’s heavily sanctioned and at the center of a major regional conflict.” Despite handing over the vessel, the UN remains financially and politically entangled with it. Until a long-term solution is reached — either through a new legal framework, transfer of operational responsibility, or removal of the ship from contested waters — the VLCC Yemen will remain a potent symbol of both the success and the limits of international intervention in conflict zones. Adapted by ASEAN Now from Lloyds List 2025-07-09 -
0
UK UK Charity Regulator Bans Trustee Over Anti-Semitic Sermon Following Hamas Attacks
UK Charity Regulator Bans Trustee Over Anti-Semitic Sermon Following Hamas Attacks A trustee at an Islamic charity in Nottingham has been banned from holding any senior charitable role for three years after delivering a sermon six days after the October 7 Hamas attacks in which he appeared to incite violence against Jews. The Charity Commission, which regulates charities in England and Wales, also issued a formal warning to the Nottingham Islam Information Point (NIIP), finding that it failed to uphold its responsibilities and allowed “divisive and inflammatory” rhetoric on its premises. Harun Abdur Rashid Holmes, a leading figure at NIIP, came under scrutiny after preaching a sermon that referenced a controversial Hadith. He stated: “The hour will not begin until the Muslims fight the Jews and the Muslims will kill them until a Jew hides behind a rock or a tree. And the rock or tree will say ‘Oh Muslim... there is a Jew behind me. Come and kill him’.” He also offered prayers for the “mujahideen” in Palestine during the sermon, a term often associated with Islamic fighters. Delivered on the charity’s property just six days after Hamas launched its unprecedented attack on southern Israel—killing more than 1,200 Jews and taking 251 hostages—Holmes’s words sparked accusations of antisemitism and incitement to violence. The regulator launched a 20-month investigation and concluded that Holmes’s sermon constituted misconduct and mismanagement, and did not further the charity’s stated aims. “The sermon was inflammatory and divisive,” said Stephen Roake, assistant director of investigations and compliance at the Charity Commission. “We acted robustly and disqualified the trustee who gave the sermon. We also issued the charity with a formal warning.” Roake emphasized that in times of international conflict, “people expect charities to bring people together, not to stoke division.” The commission also found that Holmes, a former care home assistant manager who was not a qualified imam, failed to provide necessary context to the Hadith he quoted, rendering his message inflammatory. Holmes later told the regulator that he accepted, in hindsight, that the Hadith was “sensitive” and that he did not provide adequate explanation. During the same sermon, Holmes also told attendees not to “busy yourselves with politics and voting,” which the regulator noted could be seen as encouraging people to disengage from the democratic process. The commission determined that the sermon undermined the charity’s mission, which includes relieving poverty and promoting understanding of Islam. Following the commission’s actions, NIIP issued a public apology. “Mr Holmes is not a qualified Imam and has not formally studied Islam. He was given the responsibility of the sermon at late notice and was not able to provide the necessary explanation to references used in the short timespan available. In hindsight he recognises that other references would have been more appropriate. The trustees recognise that certain portions of the sermon may have been construed in a negative light and inadvertently and unintentionally caused offence. We apologise for this.” NIIP, which last reported an annual income of £59,200 and expenditures of £47,700, was established in 1997 with the aim of relieving poverty and dispelling misconceptions about Islam. The commission said the charity has since taken “positive steps to improve their governance,” including introducing a stricter events policy. David Holdsworth, chief executive of the Charity Commission, commented more broadly on recent regulatory action: “Over the past few years, and particularly since the escalation of conflict in the Middle East in October 2023, we have seen charities misused to promote the personal views of those linked to the charity, in some cases inciting hate or condoning violence.” He noted that the commission had opened more than 300 such cases in the past 18 months, issued guidance in about 100 of them, and made over 70 referrals to the police. “There can be no hiding place for those who seek to use charities to promote hate or harm to others,” Holdsworth added. “We won’t hesitate to take firm action to stop such wrongdoing.” Mr Holmes did not respond to requests for comment. Adapted by ASEAN Now from NYP 2025-07-09
-
-
Popular in The Pub
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now