Latest developments and discussion of recent events in the Ukraine War
-
Recently Browsing 0 members
- No registered users viewing this page.
-
Topics
-
-
-
Popular Contributors
-
1
-
2
.thumb.jpeg.d2d19a66404642fd9ff62d6262fd153e.jpeg)
-
3
-
4
-
5
-
-
-
Latest posts...
-
2
Report Pattaya's Tourism at Stake: New Accommodation Bill Sparks Debate
It has and will go on just about everywhere with or without licensing. Sure glad I never bought a condo there. -
10
THAILAND LIVE Thailand Live Thursday 12 June 2025
Driver and Passenger Killed as Tanker Crashes into Power Pole in Phetchaburi Picture courtesy of Khaosod. A road crash in Phetchaburi province claimed the lives of two people early morning on 11 June, after a vegetable oil tanker driver lost control and slammed into a high-voltage power pole. The driver and a female passenger died at the scene, trapped inside the mangled vehicle. Full story:https://aseannow.com/topic/1363382-driver-and-passenger-killed-as-tanker-crashes-into-power-pole-in-phetchaburi/ -
0
Elon Musk Walks Back Harsh Criticism of Donald Trump, Says Some Posts ‘Went Too Far’
Elon Musk Walks Back Harsh Criticism of Donald Trump, Says Some Posts ‘Went Too Far’ Elon Musk has admitted that he regrets some of the pointed remarks he made about U.S. President Donald Trump on social media last week, following a public spat that saw both men trade bitter accusations. The high-profile fallout between the Tesla and SpaceX CEO and the president began after Musk criticized Trump’s sweeping tax policy, calling it a “disgusting abomination.” The online confrontation quickly escalated, with Musk taking to his social media platform, X, to suggest that Trump should be impeached. The tech billionaire then went further, claiming—without offering evidence—that the U.S. government was hiding information about Trump’s ties to the disgraced financier and convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. "I regret some of my posts about President Donald Trump last week. They went too far," Musk wrote in a follow-up post on X, expressing a rare moment of public contrition. He has since deleted several of his most inflammatory comments, including those directly referencing Epstein. In one of his most controversial statements last Thursday, Musk alleged that Trump is named in sealed government documents related to Epstein, who died by suicide in 2019 while awaiting trial on sex trafficking charges. “Time to drop the really big bomb: [Trump] is in the Epstein files,” Musk posted, adding, “That is the real reason they have not been made public.” However, he failed to specify what files he was referring to and did not present any supporting evidence for the explosive claim. Trump has previously shown reluctance in discussing the full scope of the Epstein case. In an interview with Fox News, he stated, “You don’t want to affect people’s lives if it’s phoney stuff in there, because it’s a lot of phoney stuff with that whole world.” Musk’s allegations came at a particularly tense moment in their deteriorating relationship, which began to unravel around the time Musk departed a loosely defined White House advisory role aimed at improving government efficiency. His departure was followed by scathing criticism of the administration’s flagship tax reform plan, dubbed the “Big Beautiful Bill,” which is projected to add as much as $US3 trillion ($4.6 trillion) to the national debt over the next decade. In response, President Trump threatened to revoke government contracts and subsidies for Musk’s companies, a move that sparked further retaliation. Musk responded by announcing that SpaceX would “begin decommissioning its Dragon spacecraft immediately,” though he later walked back that statement as well. While Trump has not publicly acknowledged Musk’s change in tone, he previously told NBC News that he had “no plans” to reconcile with the tech entrepreneur. The dramatic public fallout marks a significant shift in the once-cooperative relationship between the president and one of the most influential figures in American business, with Musk now apparently seeking to de-escalate the feud—at least in part. Adapted by ASEAN Now from ABC 2025-06-12 -
0
UN Urges UK to Scrap Chagos Deal and Protect Chagossian Rights
UN Urges UK to Scrap Chagos Deal and Protect Chagossian Rights A United Nations panel has urged the United Kingdom to scrap its recent agreement with Mauritius regarding the Chagos Islands, calling for a new deal that better protects the rights of the displaced Chagossian people. The panel argued that the existing arrangement “fails to guarantee” key human rights, especially the Chagossians' long-denied right to return to their ancestral homeland. The controversial agreement, signed last month, formalised the return of sovereignty over the Chagos Islands to Mauritius. However, it permits the UK to retain operational control of a major military base on Diego Garcia, the largest island in the archipelago. This base is jointly operated with the United States under a long-standing defense arrangement. UN experts expressed concern that the deal continues to prevent Chagossians from returning to Diego Garcia, stating, “the agreement appears to be at variance with the Chagossians’ right to return.” The panel recommended halting the deal and starting new negotiations that more fully account for the Chagossians' rights and historical grievances. A spokesperson from the UK Foreign Office defended the agreement, saying it had “been welcomed by international organisations including the UN secretary general.” However, they acknowledged that the UK's ongoing military presence “hindered” the ability of Chagossians to “exercise their cultural rights in accessing their ancestral lands from which they were expelled.” The financial terms of the agreement allow the UK to pay Mauritius an average of £101 million annually over 99 years in exchange for maintaining the base at Diego Garcia. Yet this financial commitment has not quelled criticism, particularly because it does not appear to address core issues of restitution and return for the Chagossian diaspora. The Chagos Islands lie in the Indian Ocean, around 5,799 miles from the UK and about 1,250 miles northeast of Mauritius. The UK purchased the territory for £3 million in 1968. Mauritius claims it was coerced into relinquishing the islands as a precondition for gaining independence from Britain. Soon after, the UK expelled the Chagossian population to make way for the Diego Garcia military installation. Many were sent to Mauritius and the Seychelles, while others eventually resettled in the UK, especially in Crawley, West Sussex. Since their forced removal, Chagossians have been barred from returning to Diego Garcia. Just before the deal was signed, two Chagossian women born on Diego Garcia and now living in the UK mounted a last-minute legal challenge, arguing that the agreement failed to enshrine their right of return. The deal also includes a £40 million trust fund for Chagossian support, but the UN panel questioned whether this would “comply with the right of the Chagossian people to effective remedy… and prompt reparation.” The experts further noted that the agreement “lacks provisions to facilitate the Chagossian people’s access to cultural sites on Diego Garcia and protect and conserve their unique cultural heritage.” “We recognise the importance of the islands to Chagossians and have worked to ensure the agreement reflects this,” the Foreign Office spokesperson stated in response to the criticisms. Shadow Foreign Secretary Dame Priti Patel also condemned the deal, stating, “The Conservatives have been warning from the start that this deal is bad for British taxpayers and bad for the Chagossian people.” She added, “It is why I have introduced a bill in Parliament that would block the [agreement] and force the government to speak to the people at the heart of their surrender plans.” The UK Parliament has until July 3rd to pass a resolution opposing ratification of the deal. Related Topics: Chagossians Appeal to UN Over Starmer’s Controversial Island Deal Adapted by ASEAN Now from BBC 2025-06-12 -
0
Attorney General Under Fire for Praising Mosque Amid Extremism Allegations
Attorney General Under Fire for Praising Mosque Amid Extremism Allegations Attorney General Sir Richard Hermer is facing mounting scrutiny after praising a mosque where a preacher once urged Muslims to "spit on Israel" and suggested violent resistance in the wake of the October 7 Hamas attacks. The comments, made by Islamic scholar Haroon Hanif during a sermon at the Abdullah Quilliam Society, triggered widespread condemnation and raised concerns about extremism. Haroon Hanif scolds Muslims for being “weak” about jihad. Numerous, Muslims can simply “march” together against Israel and “spit” at it. Then “it’s all over.” Though Hanif’s official connection to the mosque remains unclear, the Abdullah Quilliam Society was one of eight Islamic charities referred to the Charity Commission by advocacy groups concerned that they were spreading "hateful rhetoric." The open letter to the commission, signed by prominent figures such as Campaign Against Antisemitism’s Gideon Falter, ex-Muslims campaigner Maryam Namazie, free speech advocate Lord Young, and evolutionary biologist Prof Richard Dawkins, accused the charities of violating guidelines that warn against promoting extremist ideology. Megan Manson of the National Secular Society, another signatory of the letter, commented at the time: “The Israel-Hamas war has caused serious tension between different communities around the world, including in the UK. The hateful rhetoric churned out by these charities is fanning the flames of division when we most need to promote cohesion and tolerance.” The Charity Commission’s head of compliance visits and inspections, Stephen Roake, acknowledged the concerns and confirmed an ongoing assessment to determine what, if any, regulatory action should be taken. Despite this controversy, Hermer visited the Abdullah Quilliam Society in August 2024 following community unrest after the Southport killings. During his visit, the Attorney General expressed admiration for the mosque’s work in helping the local Muslim community. In a video shared on the mosque’s Instagram page, Hermer stated, “It’s been inspiring learning about the work of this mosque... It has been a huge, huge pleasure.” He also praised the mosque’s response to the recent protests, calling it “truly wonderful” and said he had left with “many ideas.” The mosque also shared photos of Hermer’s visit, thanking him for his time and support. The society, which has previously received approximately £8,000 in government grants, states that its mission is “to promote correct knowledge and understanding of Islam and its true spirit faith for the benefit of all.” Critics, however, argue that the Attorney General’s visit and remarks represent a serious lapse in judgment. Shadow Home Secretary Chris Philp condemned Hermer’s actions in strong terms, saying, “This is a complete collapse of standards at the very top of our justice system. How on earth are the British people supposed to trust Labour to protect them when their top law officer is applauding mosques allegedly linked to extremism? If Starmer had a spine, Hermer would be out by now. But instead of upholding justice, he’s upholding his old mate.” With the Charity Commission's review ongoing and political pressure intensifying, questions continue to swirl around the appropriateness of Hermer’s praise and what it signals about the government’s handling of extremism within charitable organizations. Adapted by ASEAN Now from The Telegraph 2025-06-12 -
0
Google Search Crushed for Online News: Publishers Brace for a Post-Google World with AI
The internet's foundational relationship between publishers and Google is being rapidly redefined by artificial intelligence, and for many news organizations, the shift is proving catastrophic. With Google increasingly delivering AI-generated answers to search queries, readers are bypassing the traditional links that once drove massive traffic to media websites. For publishers long reliant on organic search, this evolution spells a profound crisis. Over the past three years, traffic to some of the internet’s most recognizable news brands has plummeted. HuffPost has seen its desktop and mobile search traffic fall by more than 50%, while the Washington Post experienced a nearly equivalent drop, according to Similarweb. The damage has already prompted drastic measures: Business Insider recently laid off 21% of its staff. “This decision was made to help the company endure extreme traffic drops outside of our control,” explained CEO Barbara Peng. Similarweb’s data shows that Business Insider’s search traffic declined by 55% between April 2022 and April 2025. Nicholas Thompson, chief executive of The Atlantic, captured the industry’s existential anxiety during a companywide meeting, stating bluntly that they should now assume Google traffic "would drop toward zero." He added, “Google is shifting from being a search engine to an answer engine. We have to develop new strategies.” The disruption can be traced to Google's AI Overviews, introduced last year, which summarize search results at the top of the page—giving users what they need without clicking links. The impact was already noticeable in areas like travel guides, health advice, and product reviews. But the blow landed even harder with last month's U.S. launch of AI Mode, a direct competitor to tools like ChatGPT. AI Mode answers queries through a conversational interface and surfaces far fewer links to source content. “This is a serious threat to journalism that should not be underestimated,” warned William Lewis, publisher and CEO of the Washington Post. He added that the Post is “moving with urgency” to reach previously untapped audiences and adapt to what he called a “post-search era.” While some publications have seen mixed trends—The Wall Street Journal reported an increase in organic search traffic compared to three years ago—its share of total traffic from Google still fell from 29% to 24%. Sherry Weiss, CMO of Dow Jones, which owns the Journal, emphasized a new focus: “As the referral ecosystem continues to evolve, we’re focused on ensuring customers come to us directly out of necessity.” Google has maintained that it remains committed to supporting the broader web. The company says users who do click through after reading an AI Overview spend more time on those sites, and that trending news stories often bypass Overviews in favor of direct links. However, older content and lifestyle stories are more frequently summarized by AI, cutting deeply into traditional traffic pipelines. Publishers have faced disruption before—from the collapse of print advertising to algorithmic changes by Facebook and Twitter. But the rise of generative AI is viewed by many as the most profound shift yet. “AI was not the thing that was changing everything, but it will be going forward. It’s the last straw,” said Neil Vogel, CEO of Dotdash Meredith, which owns brands like People and Southern Living. When Dotdash merged with Meredith in 2021, Google search made up about 60% of its traffic. Now, it’s closer to one-third. Vogel said the company is offsetting the losses with growth in areas like newsletters and recipe platforms. In response to shrinking search visibility, many publishers are pivoting to deepen relationships with loyal readers. The Atlantic is investing in its app, adding more print issues, and expanding its events calendar. Politico and Business Insider are similarly focusing on audience engagement strategies. At the same time, legal and commercial battles over the use of publishers' content in AI models are intensifying. Some media companies are suing AI developers over alleged copyright violations, while others are negotiating licensing deals. The New York Times has both sued OpenAI and Microsoft and signed a licensing agreement with Amazon. News Corp, parent of The Wall Street Journal, has struck a content deal with OpenAI but is also pursuing legal action against Perplexity. Even Google’s dominance isn’t immune to the AI disruption. While the company claims total searches are growing, an Apple executive revealed in court that Google searches in Safari have declined for the first time in 20 years. As AI reshapes how people access information, both tech giants and traditional publishers are being forced to rethink their futures. Adapted by ASEAN Now from WSJ 2025-06-12
-
-
Popular in The Pub
-
Recommended Posts