.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
Japanese tourists to flock to Thailand despite economic woes
-
Recently Browsing 0 members
- No registered users viewing this page.
Announcements
-
Topics
-
-
Latest posts...
-
3
Did Ann Coulter Really Do That?!?
All it says on the linked article is that she said "“Talk about weird …” Without more that is meaningless. I seem to remember a certain demographic attacked Trump's young son. Apparently it depends on one's politics as to what is acceptable. In any event, killing unborn children is a pretty awful thing to do and the Dems seem to want that for every female in the US. Methinks this is just another political left faux labelling of an opponent -
0
Netanyahu’s Resurgence: How Israel's Leader Turned the Tide Amid Crisis and Controversy
Against all odds, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has managed to stage a political comeback that few would have predicted in the aftermath of the October 7 Hamas attack, the deadliest tragedy in Israel's history. Despite the initial backlash against his handling of the crisis, Netanyahu is now leading in the polls as Israel’s preferred leader, an extraordinary shift that has baffled both critics and analysts alike. Known as a master of political survival, Netanyahu has repeatedly defied predictions of his political demise, winning elections five times even when it seemed his career was on the brink. Analysts initially speculated that the October 7 massacre, which claimed the lives of 1,200 Israelis, might finally mark the end of his reign. Yet, Netanyahu’s strategy of waiting out the storm appears to be paying off, with polls showing a significant resurgence in his and his party’s popularity. In August, a Maariv poll indicated that Netanyahu’s Likud party had regained its position as the largest party in the Knesset, securing 22 seats, while the National Unity party, led by his main rival Benny Gantz, dropped to 20 seats. More strikingly, 48 percent of voters expressed a preference for Netanyahu as prime minister, compared to 42 percent for Gantz. This shift in public opinion is remarkable, considering the months of protests, international criticism, and even dissent from within Israel’s own military and political elite that have marred Netanyahu’s tenure since the October attack. For many Israelis, Netanyahu’s resilience in the face of intense pressure—both from within the country and from key allies like the United States—has reinforced his image as a leader who can stand firm during crises. Pinhas Amar, a 67-year-old from Hadera, voiced his support for Netanyahu, citing his “resistance to pressure” and the way he handled the hostage situation, despite accusations that Netanyahu had not done enough to secure their release. Amar sees Netanyahu as “running a marathon,” a leader who is in it for the long haul. Shulamit Perez, from Or Akiva, echoes this sentiment, describing Netanyahu as the “smartest” and most “responsible” politician in Israel. Like many of Netanyahu’s supporters, she believes that the left-wing opposition has been unfairly targeting him for years, using October 7 as their latest pretext. Perez does not believe Netanyahu was adequately warned by Israel’s security agencies about the Hamas threat, further exonerating him in her eyes. Aviv Bushinsky, a former adviser and chief of staff to Netanyahu, attributes the prime minister’s renewed popularity to his unwavering message on the necessity of completely eliminating Hamas. According to Bushinsky, Netanyahu’s focus on national security and his resistance to international pressure, including from the US, resonates deeply with the Israeli public. “Israelis want to see leadership and strength. And Netanyahu has shown both,” Bushinsky explains. This strategy of positioning himself as a defender of Israel against both external and internal adversaries is a familiar one for Netanyahu. Throughout his career, he has often portrayed himself as the only leader capable of standing up to Israel’s enemies, even at the risk of straining relationships with allies. While his critics argue that this approach jeopardizes Israel’s long-term security, particularly its relationship with the US, Netanyahu’s core supporters continue to reward him for it at the polls. Benny Gantz’s failure to provide a clear and compelling alternative has also played into Netanyahu’s hands. According to Bushinsky, Gantz’s decision to leave the government without offering a “precise and clear” reason was a pivotal moment that led to his decline in public support. Meanwhile, Miki Zohar, Israel’s culture minister and one of Netanyahu’s closest confidants, believes that many Israelis are beginning to appreciate the prime minister’s long-term strategy concerning threats like Iran, Hezbollah, and Hamas. Zohar argues that Netanyahu’s patience and consistency in his messaging have been key to his political survival. Political strategist Nadav Shtrauchler, who has worked closely with Netanyahu, describes the prime minister’s current position as the “second chapter” of his post-October 7 survival strategy. Shtrauchler predicts that Netanyahu will use the upcoming months, particularly the period leading up to the US election and the return of the Knesset from recess, to solidify his position. This could involve making a significant military move on Israel’s northern border or securing a ceasefire with Hamas, actions that could further bolster his standing among voters. However, despite his recent gains, Shtrauchler cautions that Netanyahu is unlikely to regain the level of support he once enjoyed, noting that the prime minister’s party will “never go back” to holding 32 seats in the Knesset. The current coalition faces numerous challenges, including the contentious issue of drafting ultra-Orthodox youth into the army, a topic that has previously toppled Netanyahu’s governments. Shtrauchler anticipates that Israelis should prepare for elections in 2025, as the coalition’s stability remains precarious. Yet, even as Netanyahu appears to be regaining his footing, his leadership continues to provoke fierce opposition, particularly from the families of hostages still held by Hamas. Sharone Lifschitz, whose 83-year-old father, Oded Lifschitz, remains captive in Gaza, has been vocal in her criticism of Netanyahu, accusing him of delaying a ceasefire deal that could have secured the hostages’ release. Lifschitz blames Netanyahu for using the hostages as “human shields” to further his political agenda, a sentiment that reflects the deep divisions within Israeli society over his leadership. Ultimately, Netanyahu’s ability to navigate the aftermath of the October 7 attack and maintain his grip on power underscores his enduring political acumen. He has managed to survive the most significant crisis in Israel’s history by doing what he does best: stalling for time, playing the political game to his advantage, and maintaining a consistent message on security. However, his continued success will depend on whether he can address the hostages' issue and other critical challenges facing his government. Failure to do so could prove unforgivable to many voters, potentially undoing the gains he has so carefully rebuilt. Credit: Daily Telegraph 2024-08-26 Get the ASEAN NOW daily NEWSLETTER - Click HERE to subscribe -
0
Starmer: Conditions in Britain will Deteriorate Before They Improve
Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer will deliver a stark warning this week, asserting that conditions in Britain will deteriorate before they improve. In his address, Starmer will claim that there is "rot deep in the heart" of the nation, a situation that demands significant and potentially painful reforms. This message will be interpreted by many as a precursor to imminent tax increases and spending cuts, with Starmer positioning himself as the leader who inherited not only an "economic black hole" but also a "societal black hole." Speaking from Germany, where he will meet with Chancellor Olaf Scholz, Starmer will address the working people of Britain with a candid message: he must make "unpopular decisions" to steer the country towards recovery. "I will be honest about the choices we face and how tough this will be," he will state. "Frankly – things will get worse before they get better." Starmer's rhetoric underscores the gravity of the situation. "When there is rot deep in the heart of a structure, you can’t just cover it up. You can’t tinker with it or rely on quick fixes. You have to overhaul the entire thing. Tackle it at the root. Even if it’s harder work and takes more time," he will explain. The Prime Minister's remarks reflect his belief that without addressing these fundamental issues, the nation risks seeing the same problems reemerge, potentially in a more severe form. "The rot returns. In all the same places. And it spreads. Worse than before. You know that – and I know that. That’s why this project has always been about fixing the foundations of this country." Throughout his campaign, Starmer has repeatedly promised not to increase taxes on "working people," assuring voters that a Labour government would not raise VAT, income tax, or National Insurance. However, his reluctance to rule out other tax hikes has led to speculation that increases in capital gains tax, inheritance tax, and business taxes may be on the horizon. Last month, Chancellor Rachel Reeves conceded that tax hikes would be necessary in the upcoming Budget on October 30, a point that Starmer will emphasize in his speech. In his first comments on the financial situation since Reeves claimed that the Conservatives had left a £22 billion gap in public finances, Starmer will go further, warning that the crisis is not just economic but also societal. "If we don’t take tough action across the board, we won’t be able to fix the foundations of the country like we need," he will argue. The Prime Minister is prepared to make difficult decisions, even if they prove unpopular. "I won’t shy away from making unpopular decisions now if it’s the right thing for the country in the long term. That’s what a Government of service means," he will declare. The Prime Minister's speech follows a statement by Darren Jones, Chief Secretary to the Treasury, suggesting that an increase in employers' National Insurance contributions might be on the table. Jones recently softened the Chancellor's earlier commitment to not increase National Insurance, indicating that the promise to freeze "employee National Insurance" would still be honored. In his upcoming remarks, Starmer is expected to defend his government's decision to grant inflation-busting pay raises to public sector workers, a move that has drawn criticism from some quarters. Earlier this month, Reeves announced a 5.5 percent pay increase for millions of workers, including teachers and nurses, with prison service workers and senior NHS managers receiving a 5 percent boost. Despite this, the government has faced backlash, especially after some train drivers, who were offered a 14 percent pay rise over three years, announced a new strike over a separate dispute shortly after. Starmer will argue that these pay rises are necessary to maintain the functioning of essential services. "I defy anyone to tell me that you can grow an economy when people can’t get to work – because the transport system is broken. Or can’t return to work – because they’re stuck on an NHS waiting list," he will say. He will highlight his government's achievements, claiming, "We’ve done more in seven weeks than the last government did in seven years. And these are just the first steps towards the change people voted for. The change I’m determined to deliver." However, Starmer's government has also faced criticism for its decision to cut the universal winter fuel allowance, a move that has particularly angered pensioners. The Prime Minister's stance on this issue has been challenged by Richard Fuller, the Tory Party chairman, who accused Starmer of prioritizing union interests over vulnerable pensioners. "Just two months in and Keir Starmer has taken winter fuel payments off 10 million pensioners and showered billions of taxpayers’ money on his union paymasters," Fuller said. He further criticized the Labour government for "squandering money" and fabricating a financial crisis to justify tax increases, leaving pensioners "literally in the cold." Starmer's speech will also address the summer riots that swept across the country, forcing him to cancel his holiday. He will argue that the violence was fueled by "populism" and the exploitation of "cracks in our society." Drawing a parallel with the 2011 London riots, during which he served as Director of Public Prosecutions, Starmer will contend that the nation is now in a worse state than it was back then. He will express regret over the decision to release prisoners early, a move announced last month, but will argue that it was necessary to free up prison space to manage the riots effectively. Reflecting on the situation, Starmer will lament, "When I think back to that time, I see just how far we’ve fallen. Because responding to those riots was hard, but dealing with the riots this summer was much harder." He will describe the lack of sufficient prison space as "about as fundamental a failure as you can get." The Prime Minister will accuse the rioters of exploiting a broken system, saying, "Those people throwing rocks, torching cars, making threats – they didn’t just know the system was broken. They were betting on it. They were gaming it. They saw the cracks in our society after 14 years of populism and failure – and they exploited them. That’s what we have inherited." As Starmer prepares to deliver this sobering address, the challenges facing his government are becoming increasingly clear. With tough decisions on the horizon, the Prime Minister is set to argue that only by addressing the deep-rooted issues at the heart of Britain can the country begin to rebuild and move forward. His message to the nation will be one of honesty and resolve: the road ahead will be difficult, but it is the only path to lasting recovery. Credit: Daily Telegraph 2024-08-26 Get the ASEAN NOW daily NEWSLETTER - Click HERE to subscribe -
0
Telegram CEO Pavel Durov Arrested in France Over App’s Content Moderation
Pavel Durov, the founder and CEO of the popular messaging app Telegram, has been arrested by French authorities at Le Bourget Airport, located just north of Paris. The 39-year-old tech entrepreneur was detained by French police after his private jet landed at the airport, following a flight from Azerbaijan. The arrest has sparked international attention, particularly due to the high-profile nature of the case and Durov's significant influence in the tech world. French media outlets reported that Durov’s arrest was conducted under a warrant related to alleged offenses connected to his messaging platform, Telegram. According to officials, Durov was apprehended due to ongoing concerns regarding the app's lack of content moderation, which has allegedly allowed it to be used for illicit activities, including money laundering, drug trafficking, and the distribution of pedophilic content. These allegations have put Telegram under intense scrutiny from various governments and regulatory bodies around the world. The arrest was carried out by officers from France’s anti-fraud office, which operates under the jurisdiction of French customs. The operation took place on Saturday evening, immediately after Durov arrived at Le Bourget Airport. French television channel BFMTV provided further details, indicating that the warrant had been issued in France specifically due to the platform's failure to adequately police illegal activities occurring on Telegram. In response to the arrest, Russia's embassy in France has begun taking "immediate steps" to clarify the situation and secure more information about Durov's detention. This was reported by Russia's TASS state news agency, which emphasized the embassy's concern and proactive approach to addressing the matter. Telegram, which was founded by Durov in 2013, has grown to become one of the most popular messaging apps globally, particularly in Russia, Ukraine, and other former Soviet Union states. The platform, known for its strong encryption and privacy features, has often been at the center of controversy due to its perceived leniency towards content that other platforms might moderate or ban. The app's history with the Russian government has been particularly turbulent. In 2018, Telegram was banned in Russia after Durov refused to comply with demands from the Russian authorities to hand over user data. The ban, however, was reversed in 2021, allowing Telegram to continue operating in the country. Despite this, Durov has remained a vocal critic of government censorship and has consistently positioned Telegram as a bastion of free speech, even as it has faced criticism for the way it handles harmful or illegal content. Durov's rise to prominence began even before Telegram, with the founding of VKontakte (VK), a social media platform that became hugely popular in Russia. However, Durov left Russia in 2014 after refusing to comply with government orders to shut down opposition groups on VK. Following this, he sold his stake in VK and shifted his focus entirely to Telegram, which has since risen to rank among the major social media platforms, alongside giants like Facebook, YouTube, WhatsApp, Instagram, TikTok, and WeChat. The arrest of Pavel Durov at Le Bourget Airport marks a significant moment in the ongoing debate over the responsibilities of social media platforms in moderating content and preventing illegal activities. It also highlights the complex relationship between tech entrepreneurs like Durov and the governments that seek to regulate their platforms. As the situation unfolds, the tech world will be watching closely to see how this high-stakes legal battle plays out, and what it might mean for the future of Telegram and similar platforms that prioritize user privacy and freedom of expression. Credit: CNN 2024-08-26 Get the ASEAN NOW daily NEWSLETTER - Click HERE to subscribe -
0
Kennedy Family Condemns RFK Jr.'s Trump Endorsement as a Betrayal of Core Values
The Kennedy family, long-standing pillars of the Democratic Party, faced a profound rupture on Friday as Robert F. Kennedy Jr., once a prominent independent presidential candidate, publicly endorsed former President Donald Trump. This decision, which Kennedy announced while suspending his campaign, was met with sharp criticism from his siblings, who called it a "betrayal of the values that our father and our family hold most dear." Kerry Kennedy, one of RFK Jr.'s siblings and the president of the Robert F. Kennedy Human Rights organization, issued a strong rebuke alongside four of her siblings—Courtney Kennedy, Chris Kennedy, Rory Kennedy, and former Maryland Lt. Gov. Kathleen Kennedy Townsend. In their joint statement, they expressed deep dismay at their brother's decision to align himself with Trump. "We want an America filled with hope and bound together by a shared vision of a brighter future," Kerry Kennedy wrote. "We believe in Harris and Walz. Our brother Bobby’s decision to endorse Trump today is a betrayal of the values that our father and our family hold most dear." The statement concluded with a somber reflection on the situation: "It is a sad ending to a sad story." The timing of RFK Jr.'s announcement was not unexpected. For much of the week, speculation had been mounting that he would endorse Trump. On Wednesday, Kennedy had signaled that he would be making a significant announcement about the future of his candidacy. True to his word, he used Friday's address to make his endorsement official while also declaring the suspension of his independent campaign. Kennedy revealed that he would be removing his name from the ballot in key swing states such as Pennsylvania and Arizona, though it would remain on the ballot in states firmly aligned with either the Democratic or Republican parties. During his address, Kennedy spent much of his time criticizing the Democratic Party and the media, accusing them of denying him a fair chance in the presidential race. "In my heart, I no longer believe that I have a realistic path to electoral victory in the face of this relentless, systematic censorship and media control," he stated at the press conference. "So I cannot in good conscience ask my staff and volunteers to keep working their long hours, or ask my donor to keep giving when I cannot honestly tell them that I have a real path to the White House." Kennedy's decision to withdraw from swing states like Arizona and Pennsylvania came swiftly after his Wednesday announcement. Sources close to Kennedy have indicated that he is in negotiations with the Trump campaign for a potential role in a second Trump administration. This move further fueled the ire of his siblings, who have been critical of RFK Jr.'s political ambitions from the outset. The Kennedy family has been synonymous with the Democratic Party since John F. Kennedy's presidency, and RFK Jr.'s independent bid was a departure from this legacy. The family had previously dismissed his candidacy, expressing concern over his divergence from their shared values. Last year, when RFK Jr. launched his presidential campaign, several family members publicly denounced his candidacy, particularly in light of his controversial anti-vaccination stance during the COVID-19 pandemic. "Bobby might share the same name as our father, but he does not share the same values, vision, or judgment. Today’s announcement is deeply saddening for us. We denounce his candidacy and believe it to be perilous for our country," some of Kennedy’s siblings wrote at the time. The fallout from RFK Jr.'s latest decision was swift, with other members of the Kennedy family also expressing their disappointment. Jack Schlossberg, the grandson of former President John F. Kennedy, took to social media to voice his dismay. "Never been less surprised in my life. Been saying it for over a year — RFK Jr. is for sale, works for Trump. Bedfellows and loving it," Schlossberg wrote on the platform X, formerly known as Twitter. He went on to praise Vice President Kamala Harris, stating, "Kamala Harris is for the people — the easiest decision of all time just got easier." The Kennedy family's reaction to RFK Jr.'s endorsement of Trump underscores the deep divisions that have emerged within the family as a result of his political choices. For a family that has long championed progressive values and Democratic ideals, RFK Jr.'s decision to side with Trump represents a stark and painful divergence from the path laid out by their forebears. As the Kennedy siblings lamented in their statement, it is indeed a sad ending to what has become a deeply troubled chapter in the family's storied history. Credit: Hill 2024-08-26 Get the ASEAN NOW daily NEWSLETTER - Click HERE to subscribe -
0
Kamala Harris Sees Significant Polling Surge During Democratic National Convention
Vice President Kamala Harris has seen a notable increase in her polling numbers against former President Donald Trump among registered voters, according to fresh polling data released during the Democratic National Convention (DNC). The survey, conducted by the Angus Reid Institute between August 19 and August 23, coincides with the Democratic Party's formal nomination of Harris as its presidential candidate. The national poll illustrates a widening generational and demographic divide in voter preferences. Harris enjoys a strong lead among younger voters, particularly those aged 18 to 34, with 59 percent supporting Harris compared to 30 percent for Trump. This lead is even more pronounced among Black voters, where Harris has 67 percent support compared to Trump’s 16 percent, and among Hispanic voters, where she leads 57 percent to 33 percent. However, Trump continues to resonate with older and white voters, holding the preference of 49 percent of voters over 54 years old, compared to 40 percent for Harris. Among white voters, Trump leads Harris 51 percent to 39 percent. The Harris campaign's adept use of social media has been credited with generating what analysts have described as an "extended honeymoon period" for the candidate. Memes and viral content have helped to energize younger voters, though this strategy presents the challenge of converting online enthusiasm into actual votes in November. When reached for comment, both the Harris and Trump campaigns were contacted via email by Newsweek on Saturday afternoon. While youth voter turnout in 2020 reached a record high, it still only slightly exceeded 50 percent, considerably lower than the participation rates among older demographics. The Angus Reid survey also sheds light on the challenges Harris might face as she strives to become the first woman elected to the presidency. A striking 74 percent of respondents believe that it is more difficult for a woman to be elected to high political office, even though 59 percent of those surveyed said there is "no difference" between genders in terms of competently performing the job once in office. The poll also explored voters' emotional responses to the candidates. Notably, 71 percent of Harris supporters expressed that her potential victory makes them feel "hopeful," while 63 percent of Trump supporters expressed the same sentiment about a possible second term for the former president. The prospect of the opposing candidate winning, however, elicited worry and fear from both camps, with Trump supporters showing slightly higher levels of concern (57 percent worry, 38 percent fear) compared to Harris supporters (47 percent worry, 45 percent fear). When asked to describe the candidates, voters most frequently characterized Harris as "dishonest" (36 percent), "strong" (36 percent), "corrupt" (32 percent), "inspiring" (31 percent), and "strategic" (29 percent). Trump, on the other hand, was predominantly described as "arrogant" (62 percent), a "bully" (48 percent), "corrupt" (45 percent), "dishonest" (45 percent), and "strong" (38 percent). The Angus Reid survey identified the cost of living as the most pressing issue facing the United States, with 58 percent of voters citing it as their primary concern. This was followed by broader economic concerns (28 percent), border security (27 percent), healthcare (25 percent), and reproductive rights (23 percent). In addition to the Angus Reid survey, a national poll from Fairleigh Dickinson University (FDU) and Braun Research shows Harris leading Trump by a 7-point margin. The poll, which surveyed 801 registered voters between August 17 and 20, found that 50 percent of voters support Harris, while 43 percent support Trump. The poll has a margin of error of plus or minus 3.5 percentage points. The poll also revealed a deep partisan divide: 95 percent of Democrats, 38 percent of independents, and 2 percent of Republicans back Harris, while 33 percent of independents, 95 percent of Republicans, and 3 percent of Democrats support Trump. In contrast to the FDU poll, a Rasmussen Reports poll released Thursday found Trump leading Harris by 3 percentage points, 49 percent to 46 percent. This survey, which included 1,893 likely voters, was conducted on August 15 and between August 18 and 21, and has a margin of error of plus or minus 3 percentage points. Most national aggregate polls currently place Harris in the lead, with RealClearPolitics showing her ahead by 1.5 percentage points, 48.4 percent to Trump's 46.9 percent, and The New York Times aggregate showing Harris with a 2-percentage point advantage, 49 percent to 47 percent. Other aggregates, such as FiveThirtyEight, show larger margins, with Harris leading by 3.6 percentage points, 47.2 percent to 43.6 percent. Nate Silver's Silver Bulletin also reports Harris leading, with 48 percent compared to Trump's 43.7 percent. The race has been further complicated by the recent withdrawal of independent candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who had been drawing about 5 percent in national polls. Kennedy officially dropped out on Friday and endorsed Trump, adding another layer of complexity to the already intense competition. As the campaign moves into its post-convention phase, both candidates face significant challenges. For Harris, the task will be to maintain her momentum and convert her current polling advantage into Electoral College votes. Trump, on the other hand, must work to broaden his appeal beyond his base and address the concerns of swing voters who may be apprehensive about a second Trump term. With just over two months remaining until Election Day, the race remains highly competitive as both campaigns zero in on the crucial swing states. While Harris appears to have benefited from a convention bounce, the true test will come in the weeks ahead as voters engage more deeply with the candidates and their platforms. As is often the case in American presidential politics, this race is likely to be closely contested right up until November. Credit: Newsweek 2024-08-26 Get the ASEAN NOW daily NEWSLETTER - Click HERE to subscribe -
0
Elon Musk's SpaceX to Return Nasa's Stranded Astronauts Next Year
Two NASA astronauts, initially slated for a routine return to Earth, are now set to journey home aboard a SpaceX Crew Dragon spacecraft early next year. This decision comes after a series of malfunctions plagued the Boeing Starliner, the spacecraft that was supposed to bring them back. Commander Barry “Butch” Wilmore and pilot Sunita “Suni” Williams, both seasoned former military test pilots, found themselves in an unexpected predicament after becoming the first crew to ride the Starliner to the International Space Station (ISS) on June 5. Their mission, originally planned as an eight-day test, has now turned into an extended stay due to the technical challenges Starliner faced during its journey. The issues with Starliner began almost immediately after launch. Within the first 24 hours of the flight, the propulsion system of the spacecraft experienced several glitches that led to months of delays. The situation worsened as five of the 28 thrusters failed, and the spacecraft also suffered from helium leaks, a critical issue since helium is used to pressurize the thrusters. These malfunctions raised significant concerns about the spacecraft's safety and reliability, prompting NASA to reconsider its original plan. In a highly unusual move for NASA, the two astronauts are now scheduled to return to Earth in February 2025 aboard a SpaceX Crew Dragon. This spacecraft is set to launch next month as part of a routine astronaut rotation mission, and NASA has deemed it a safer option for bringing Wilmore and Williams back home. The decision to switch to SpaceX, Boeing's main competitor in spaceflight, is one of NASA’s most significant and consequential in recent years. The implications for Boeing are profound. The company had pinned its hopes on the Starliner mission as a way to redeem the program after years of development issues and over $1.6 billion in budget overruns since 2016. Boeing, already dealing with quality issues in the production of its commercial airplanes, now faces additional challenges in its space division. The Crew Dragon spacecraft that will bring the astronauts home will have two of its four seats reserved for Wilmore and Williams. The Starliner, on the other hand, will attempt to undock from the ISS without a crew and return to Earth as originally intended. This uncrewed return will be a crucial test for the spacecraft, which has struggled to prove its reliability. Boeing's efforts to develop the Starliner have been fraught with difficulties. The capsule, designed to compete with SpaceX's Crew Dragon, has had a troubled history. In 2019, an uncrewed test flight to the ISS ended in failure, although a 2022 reattempt was more successful, albeit not without its own issues, including further thruster problems. The June mission, which carried its first crew, was supposed to pave the way for NASA to certify Starliner for regular flights. However, the recent setbacks have thrown the capsule's certification process into disarray. Since Starliner docked with the ISS in June, Boeing has been working tirelessly to determine the causes of the thruster failures and helium leaks. The company has conducted extensive tests and simulations on Earth in an attempt to convince NASA that Starliner is still a viable option for human spaceflight. Despite these efforts, the results have raised more questions than answers, and NASA's confidence in the spacecraft's ability to safely return its crew to Earth has been shaken. NASA's decision to opt for the SpaceX Crew Dragon instead of the Starliner is a significant blow to Boeing. It also adds to the growing list of crises facing Kelly Ortberg, Boeing's newly appointed CEO, who took on the role earlier this month. Ortberg's primary goal is to rebuild Boeing’s reputation, which has been severely tarnished by recent events, including a dramatic incident in January when a door panel blew off a 737 MAX passenger jet in midair. The path forward for Starliner remains uncertain. While the spacecraft will still attempt an uncrewed return to Earth, the future of its certification for crewed missions is now in doubt. Boeing will need to address the engineering challenges that have plagued the program and restore confidence in its ability to safely carry astronauts. Meanwhile, NASA's decision to rely on SpaceX for the safe return of its astronauts highlights the growing importance of the Crew Dragon spacecraft in the agency's human spaceflight program. As the two astronauts prepare for their return to Earth, their journey underscores the inherent risks and challenges of space exploration. The lessons learned from the Starliner mission will undoubtedly shape the future of NASA's partnerships with private companies and the ongoing efforts to push the boundaries of human spaceflight. Credit: Daily Telegraph 2024-08-26 Get the ASEAN NOW daily NEWSLETTER - Click HERE to subscribe -
0
Islamic State Claims Responsibility for Devastating Knife Attack at German Festival
The Islamic State has claimed responsibility for a brutal knife attack that occurred at a festival in Solingen, Germany, leaving three people dead and eight others injured. The attack, which unfolded amidst the celebrations of the "Festival of Diversity," has plunged the city into mourning and raised alarms about the persistent threat of extremist violence in Europe. Multiple knives were discovered near the scene, suggesting a premeditated and meticulously planned attack. Police Chief Markus Röhrl confirmed that the investigation is ongoing, with authorities working tirelessly to uncover the full extent of the plot and any potential accomplices. The Solingen community has been left reeling from the tragedy. Mayor Tim Kurzbach expressed the collective grief and shock felt by the city's residents in a heartfelt message on Facebook. "This evening, we in Solingen are all in shock. We all wanted to celebrate our city’s anniversary together and now have dead and wounded to lament," he wrote. "It breaks my heart that an attack on our city happened." In response to the attack, organizers of the "Festival of Diversity" canceled the remaining events out of respect for the victims and their families. This horrifying incident in Solingen occurred less than a day before another attack in southern France, where an individual set two cars on fire outside a synagogue, an act that has been widely condemned as antisemitic. The proximity of these two events has heightened concerns about the spread of extremist ideologies and the growing threat they pose to public safety across Europe. As investigations continue, the people of Solingen and the wider world are left to grapple with the devastating impact of this senseless act of violence. The attack serves as a stark reminder of the ongoing challenges in combating extremism and the importance of vigilance in the face of such threats. UPDATE: A 26-year-old man has given himself up and confessed to a mass knife attack at a street festival in Germany, police said on Sunday. "The man we’ve really been looking for the whole day has just been taken into custody," Herbert Reul, the interior minister of North Rhine-Westphalia state, told ARD public TV late on Saturday. Germany's Bild and Spiegel news websites reported that the suspect surrendered himself in dirty blood-stained clothes. Police described him as Syrian, and German media reported that he arrived in Germany in December 2022, after leaving the war-torn country. Bild reported that special task force (SEK) officers stormed a refugee centre the suspect was associated with, detaining another person there. Credit: NYP | Sky News | BBC 2024-08-26 Get the ASEAN NOW daily NEWSLETTER - Click HERE to subscribe -
0
Greta Thunberg Joins Activists in Blockade of Norway's Largest Gas Plant
A group of climate activists, led by the prominent Swedish environmentalist Greta Thunberg, took part in a daring protest on Saturday at the Karsto gas and oil processing plant in southwest Norway. The demonstration, organized by members of Extinction Rebellion, aimed to disrupt the operations of the plant, which is one of Europe's largest facilities of its kind. Extinction Rebellion Norway made an announcement on social media, revealing that the protest involved eight kayaks and three motorboats entering a restricted security zone around the Karsto processing plant. The intention was to "prevent the normal operation of tankers" and raise awareness about the environmental impact of continued fossil fuel extraction. On land, other activists, including Thunberg, stood resolutely at the facility's gates, attempting to block access and send a strong message against the ongoing reliance on fossil fuels. Thunberg, known for her uncompromising stance on climate change, was quoted in Extinction Rebellion's post, emphasizing the urgency of their actions. "We cannot stand idly by as the fossil fuel industry robs people of their lives and destabilizes our life support systems," she declared, reinforcing her commitment to the fight against the fossil fuel industry and its effects on the planet. The Karsto plant, operated by Norway's state-controlled energy company Equinor, plays a crucial role in the European energy market. According to Equinor, the facility processes oil and gas from around 30 different fields, making it a significant hub for the region's energy supply. Despite the activists' efforts to disrupt operations, a spokeswoman for Equinor confirmed that the plant continued to function normally during the protest. "A group of activists have gathered outside parts of the facility, but at this stage, the plant is operating as normal," she stated. This protest is part of a broader movement aimed at holding governments and corporations accountable for their role in the climate crisis. Thunberg, who has inspired millions worldwide through her activism, continues to be a leading voice in this struggle. Her participation in such direct actions highlights the increasing frustration among climate activists with the slow pace of change and the continued investment in fossil fuel infrastructure. As the global climate crisis intensifies, protests like the one at Karsto serve as a reminder of the growing resistance to fossil fuel dependency. Activists are calling for an urgent transition to renewable energy sources, warning that the continued exploitation of oil and gas reserves poses an existential threat to humanity and the planet. The actions of Thunberg and her fellow protesters at the Karsto plant underscore the deepening divide between the fossil fuel industry's interests and the demands of the climate justice movement. As more people join the call for a sustainable future, the pressure on governments and corporations to act decisively on climate change will only continue to grow. Credit: Barrons 2024-08-26 Get the ASEAN NOW daily NEWSLETTER - Click HERE to subscribe -
0
Starbucks CEO Brian Niccol Granted Private Jet for Commute Amidst Sustainability Concerns
Starbucks has extended a lucrative offer to its new CEO, Brian Niccol, by providing him with a corporate jet to commute from his southern California residence to the company’s Seattle headquarters. The decision, revealed in Niccol’s offer letter, allows the new leader to maintain a “small remote office” at his Newport Beach home, eliminating the need for a permanent move to Seattle, approximately 1,000 miles away. This arrangement underscores Starbucks' commitment to accommodating its top executive, despite potential concerns about environmental impacts. Niccol’s appointment has been met with confidence from the company, with a Starbucks spokesperson stating, "Brian Niccol has proven himself to be one of the most effective leaders in our industry, generating significant financial returns over many years." The spokesperson added, "We’re confident in his experience and ability to serve as the leader of our global business and brand, delivering long-term, enduring value for our partners, customers, and shareholders." These remarks reflect the company’s belief in Niccol’s ability to drive continued success at Starbucks, a global brand with significant market influence. The details of Niccol's compensation package further highlight the company’s investment in its new CEO. According to the contract, Niccol is eligible to use Starbucks' company plane for both business-related and personal travel, with an annual cap of $250,000 based on the aggregate incremental cost to the company. This provision suggests that while Niccol will primarily operate from the company’s Seattle headquarters, his frequent flights between the West Coast locations will be a regular part of his routine. Niccol's role will indeed require substantial travel, as Starbucks operates 39,000 locations worldwide. A company representative noted, “Brian’s primary office and a majority of his time will be spent in our Seattle Support Center or visiting partners and customers in our stores, roasteries, roasting facilities, and offices around the world.” This statement indicates that Niccol will be actively involved in overseeing the company’s vast operations, necessitating his presence across various locations globally. However, the arrangement has raised eyebrows, particularly in light of Starbucks' commitment to sustainability. The company has publicly set ambitious goals to reduce its environmental impact, including a transition to entirely reusable, recyclable, or compostable packaging by 2030 and a 50% reduction in waste. The provision of a private jet for Niccol’s commute seems at odds with these green initiatives, especially considering the environmental toll of jet travel. Jet travel, whether commercial or personal, contributes significantly to global carbon emissions. According to the International Energy Agency, it accounts for around 800 million tons of carbon dioxide annually, which is more than 2% of total global energy-related emissions. Private jets, while representing a small fraction of overall air traffic, are particularly inefficient, burning 10 times more fuel per passenger mile traveled compared to commercial planes. These figures, highlighted in a report by the Institute for Policy Studies, underscore the environmental concerns associated with private jet use. On Friday, these concerns were echoed by Greenpeace, an environmental activist group, which called for a complete ban on private jets. This appeal aligns with growing global awareness and activism aimed at reducing carbon footprints, particularly among corporate entities. The juxtaposition of Starbucks' sustainability goals with Niccol's private jet usage could lead to increased scrutiny from environmental groups and the public. Financially, Niccol stands to earn a substantial sum as the new CEO of Starbucks. His compensation package includes a base salary of $1.6 million, a $10 million signing bonus, and the potential to earn millions more depending on the company’s annual performance. This lucrative package reflects the company’s determination to secure Niccol’s leadership following his successful tenure at Chipotle Mexican Grill, where he was credited with revitalizing the brand. Niccol’s appointment comes after the departure of Laxman Narasimhan, who served as Starbucks' CEO for less than two years. The decision to lure Niccol from Chipotle, a company known for its rapid growth and strong market presence under his leadership, suggests that Starbucks is seeking to inject new energy and strategy into its operations. As Niccol settles into his new role, the balance between his leadership and the company’s environmental commitments will likely be a focal point of discussion. Starbucks, a brand that has built much of its identity on sustainability and social responsibility, may find itself navigating the complexities of reconciling its green image with the practicalities of corporate leadership in a global business landscape. Credit: NYP 2024-08-26 Get the ASEAN NOW daily NEWSLETTER - Click HERE to subscribe -
0
Afghanistan’s New Taliban Laws: A Veil of Silence and Invisibility for Women
The Taliban's repressive regime in Afghanistan has taken yet another draconian step toward erasing the presence and identity of women in public life. In a newly issued set of laws, spanning 114 pages and 35 articles, the militant group has imposed severe restrictions on women’s freedoms, including a ban on their voices and bare faces in public. This document, seen by The Associated Press, reflects the Taliban's unyielding commitment to a version of Islamic law that strips away the basic rights and dignities of women. These laws were officially enacted on Wednesday, with the approval of the Taliban's supreme leader, Hibatullah Akhundzada. The Taliban, which regained control of Afghanistan following the U.S. withdrawal in 2021, has systematically dismantled the rights of women and girls that had been arduously gained over the past two decades. The new regulations mark a significant escalation in this process, pushing Afghan women further into the shadows of society. "Inshallah, we assure you that this Islamic law will be of great help in the promotion of virtue and the elimination of vice," stated ministry spokesperson Maulvi Abdul Ghafar Farooq on Thursday, according to the AP. This statement encapsulates the Taliban's justification for their oppressive measures, cloaking their actions in the rhetoric of religious piety. The laws cover a broad spectrum of public and private life, with specific instructions on everything from celebrations and music to transportation and personal grooming. One of the most disturbing aspects of these regulations is detailed in Article 13, which mandates that women must cover their faces in public and refrain from wearing short or tight clothing. This article extends the Taliban’s already harsh dress codes, further restricting women’s autonomy over their own bodies. Article 13 also goes further by banning women from looking at men to whom they are not related by marriage or blood. This prohibition is a stark indicator of the Taliban's desire to control not just women's appearance, but their very interactions with the world around them. Moreover, women are now forbidden from singing or reading aloud, effectively silencing their voices in both literal and metaphorical terms. The imposition of these laws comes on the heels of a United Nations report in July, which accused the Taliban's Ministry for the Promotion of Virtue and Prevention of Vice of widespread intimidation and human rights violations. The report highlighted the ministry’s role in enforcing gender apartheid and other forms of oppression. However, the ministry has rejected these claims, continuing to assert that their actions are in line with Islamic principles. The Taliban's latest legal directives represent not just a violation of women’s rights, but a profound erosion of the social fabric of Afghanistan. Women, who once had the opportunity to participate in education, work, and public life, are now being systematically erased from public visibility. These laws not only isolate women physically by confining them to their homes and cloaking them in public but also silence their voices, cutting them off from the broader discourse of society. The international community has expressed concern over the Taliban's treatment of women, but these latest developments underscore the regime's disregard for global criticism. The Taliban's actions appear to be driven by an ideological commitment to a rigid interpretation of Islamic law, which they claim is necessary for the promotion of virtue and the elimination of vice. Yet, in practice, these laws serve to entrench the Taliban's power by enforcing strict gender segregation and limiting the role of women to one of subservience and invisibility. The situation in Afghanistan remains dire, particularly for women and girls who are facing an increasingly oppressive environment. The Taliban's laws are a stark reminder of the challenges that lie ahead for those advocating for human rights and gender equality in the country. As these new regulations take effect, the voices and faces of Afghan women are being forced into silence and obscurity, marking a tragic step backward for a nation that had once shown signs of progress. Credit: Hill 2024-08-26 Get the ASEAN NOW daily NEWSLETTER - Click HERE to subscribe -
0
ICC Prosecutor Asserts Court's Authority for Arrest Warrants on Israeli & Hamas Leaders
The International Criminal Court's (ICC) chief prosecutor, Karim Khan, reaffirmed the court's jurisdiction over the ongoing Israel-Hamas conflict and urged judges to promptly rule on his request for arrest warrants targeting Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and other key figures. The call came in a 49-page legal brief submitted by Khan, who stressed that "it is settled law that the Court has jurisdiction in this situation." Khan’s appeal to the ICC pretrial judges is a direct response to his earlier filings in May, in which he requested arrest warrants for Netanyahu, Israel's Defense Minister Yoav Gallant, and three senior Hamas leaders—Yehya Sinwar, Mohammed Deif, and Ismail Haniyeh. Since that filing, both Haniyeh and Deif have been killed in the ongoing conflict. Khan’s May request was based on accusations of war crimes and crimes against humanity committed by both Israeli and Hamas leaders in the Gaza Strip and Israel. Sinwar, who orchestrated the October 7 attacks on Israel, has since been named Hamas' new leader in Gaza. The prosecutor’s move comes amidst a complex backdrop of legal arguments submitted by various countries, academics, victims' groups, and human rights organizations, either contesting or supporting the ICC’s authority to issue these arrest warrants. A central focus of these arguments has been whether the ICC's jurisdiction is nullified by a clause in the 1993 Oslo Accords, which stipulated that the Palestinians would not have criminal jurisdiction over Israeli nationals. Khan dismissed this argument, labeling it as "without merit" and asserting that it conflicts with a proper interpretation of the Rome Statute, the founding treaty of the ICC. He further contended that the argument "misunderstands basic concepts of jurisdiction under international law, including under the law of occupation," and how these principles apply to the court's mandate. The potential issuance of arrest warrants against Netanyahu and Gallant could have significant implications, particularly for their international travel, as Israel is not a member of the ICC. While the immediate risk of prosecution is minimal, the threat of arrest could hinder their movements abroad. Netanyahu has vehemently denied the accusations, calling Khan's actions a "disgrace" and an attack not just on himself but on the entire Israeli military and the state of Israel. Despite this, he vowed to continue Israel’s military operations against Hamas. Hamas, in turn, condemned Khan's efforts, arguing that the prosecutor was equating "the victim with the executioner." The Israel-Hamas war, which erupted on October 7 following a surprise assault by Hamas militants that resulted in the deaths of around 1,200 people, mostly civilians, has been devastating. The militants also abducted approximately 250 individuals, of whom around 110 remain in Gaza, with a third believed to be dead. Israel's retaliatory strikes have led to the deaths of more than 40,000 Palestinians, according to Gaza's Hamas Health Ministry, although the distinction between militants and civilians in this toll remains unclear. As the legal debate over the ICC's jurisdiction continues, the timeline for the judges' ruling on Khan's request remains uncertain. The decision will be closely watched, as it could set a precedent for the court's authority in complex and highly charged international conflicts. Credit: ABC News 2024-08-26 Get the ASEAN NOW daily NEWSLETTER - Click HERE to subscribe -
0
Oklahoma Schools Resist State Mandate to Incorporate Bibles into Classrooms
In the rapidly expanding suburb of Bixby, Oklahoma, where a state-of-the-art high school and a $12 million football complex upgrade are on the horizon, a new conflict is brewing. Despite the district’s progress in infrastructure, a directive from the state’s education chief mandating that every classroom include a Bible has sparked resistance as students return to school. This resistance is not isolated; other large school districts across Oklahoma have also shown reluctance to comply with the new order, which has placed the state at the forefront of a growing movement to increase religion’s presence in public schools across the United States. The directive, issued over the summer, requires all public schools in Oklahoma to integrate Bible lessons into the curriculum for students in grades five through twelve. However, as students returned to school this week, it became apparent that the Bixby school district, among others, was not adhering to the mandate. Superintendent Rob Miller of Bixby, a former Marine Corps artilleryman with a decorated past in marathon running, has been vocal in his opposition. While acknowledging that it’s common for students to bring Bibles to school or pray during moments of silence, Miller questioned the purpose of placing a Bible in every classroom, particularly in subjects where it seems irrelevant. “If there is no curricular standard that ties with that particular classroom, what would be the purpose of a Bible if not for pure indoctrination?” Miller asked. He added, “As a Christian myself, I am a little offended by diminishing the word of God to a mere classroom prop.” Bixby’s high school library does offer copies of the Bible for checkout, alongside a book titled “The History of the Bible,” which provides maps and historical details about the regions mentioned in scripture. However, Miller emphasized that the presence of a Bible in classrooms like seventh grade math or high school chemistry is unnecessary and inappropriate. Despite the clear resistance, the state’s education department, represented by spokesperson Dan Isett, has made it clear that the mandate is non-negotiable. Isett stated that the state superintendent has “a wide range of tools to deal with rogue districts” that refuse to comply. Yet, the enforcement of this mandate remains uncertain, with many Oklahoma school districts disregarding it. These districts have sought guidance from law firms and the Oklahoma Education Association, the state’s largest teachers union, which have advised that the superintendent lacks the authority to impose such a requirement unilaterally. They argue that the directive is unenforceable. The controversy has put state Superintendent Ryan Walters, a first-term Republican who has made waves with his staunch opposition to what he calls “woke ideology,” in the spotlight. At a recent board meeting, Walters criticized the districts that have resisted his directive, accusing them of hypocrisy. He drew a parallel between their refusal to comply with the Bible mandate and their alleged willingness to expose students to “pornography” under the guise of inclusivity, referencing his failed attempt to remove certain books with sexual content from a local school’s library. “It’s outrageous. We will not allow it,” Walters declared. “Just because they don’t like it, just because they’re offended by it, just because they don’t want to do it doesn’t mean that they won’t do it. They will be held accountable.” The debate over the Bible mandate is just the latest chapter in a broader effort by conservative-led states to reshape the role of religion in public schools. Similar initiatives have been seen in states like Louisiana, where schools are required to post the Ten Commandments in classrooms, and Texas, where Republicans are advancing efforts to incorporate the Bible into the curriculum. In Oklahoma, these actions come on the heels of a recent Supreme Court decision blocking an attempt to establish the nation’s first publicly funded religious charter school, further fueling the tension between church and state. Walters, a former public school teacher elected in 2022, has made it his mission to ban books from school libraries and remove what he describes as “radical leftists” from classrooms. However, his aggressive approach has caused friction even within his own party. State Rep. Mark McBride, a Republican who chairs the subcommittee responsible for funding public schools, recently called for an investigation into Walters, citing failures to comply with legislative directives on funding and transparency issues regarding the department’s expenditures. McBride’s call for an investigation has garnered the support of more than two dozen GOP House members, leading to a request from House Speaker Charles McCall for an independent inquiry into the education department. Walters, however, dismissed the investigation as a “political attack” from House leaders, insinuating that the real motive behind the inquiry might be related to the upcoming 2026 governor’s election, for which both McCall and Walters are considered potential candidates. The ongoing political drama adds another layer of complexity to the situation, as schools and educators navigate the challenges of balancing educational standards, religious freedoms, and political pressures. In Bixby, opinions on the Bible mandate are divided. Grant Sullivan, a local business owner and pastor, expressed skepticism about the policy’s effectiveness. Sullivan, who delivers sermons at a small church in nearby Morris, questioned whether the mandate is truly beneficial for students and educators alike. As the school year progresses, the clash between state directives and local autonomy is likely to intensify. The outcome of this standoff will not only shape the educational landscape in Oklahoma but could also influence similar debates in other states, as the role of religion in public schools remains a contentious issue in American society. Credit: The Independent 2024-08-26 Get the ASEAN NOW daily NEWSLETTER - Click HERE to subscribe -
0
UK Imams Point Fingers at Zionists Amidst Growing Tensions from Riots
In the wake of recent clashes between far-Right rioters and Muslim counter-protesters, several religious leaders across the country have begun to point the finger at Zionists as the underlying force behind the unrest. The Telegraph has uncovered that multiple Imams have used their Friday prayer sermons to discuss what they believe are the true motives of those involved in the riots, a trend that has been described by campaign groups as both “alarming” and “divisive.” Imam Ashraf Dabous of Lewisham Islamic Centre in south London delivered a sermon earlier this month where he claimed that the individuals participating in the riots were being “misled” and “manipulated” by Zionists. “It is quite well known now, publicly, due to information that has been released online, that they are Zionists and they are supporters of the state of Israel,” Imam Dabous stated during his address. He further elaborated that recent actions were an attempt to “win some ground back for the Zionist agenda,” asserting that Zionists aim to portray Muslims as “savages, killers, and barbaric,” a depiction he argued is a projection of the actions of the Zionist state itself. Similarly, at the Darussalam Education Centre in Blackburn, worshippers were informed that the leaders behind the riots were “Zionist people.” The importance of “exposing them” as such was emphasized, although it is understood that the centre is currently investigating the matter. Meanwhile, in Leicester, Sheikh Ali Abbas Malik addressed the congregation at Masjid al Husayn, a Muslim community center, where he spoke of the “frustration” among the “white working class” who feel “overlooked by everyone.” He then claimed that “Zionists such as Tommy Robinson,” allegedly supported by the “Zionist regime,” are perpetuating these ideas among the white working class. Tommy Robinson, whose real name is Stephen Yaxley Lennon, is the founder of the anti-immigrant English Defence League and has been a polarizing figure in the UK. Despite his recent departure from the UK following an arrest under terrorism laws, Robinson remained vocal online during the riots, posting over 100 times on X (formerly Twitter) as the unrest spread across the country. At Kingston Muslim Association, Shaykh Mostahfiz Gani addressed worshippers on August 9th, asserting that “there is a link between Tommy Robinson and the IDF (Israel Defense Forces). There is a link between Zionists and the Right-wing fascists.” The rhetoric continued at Greenwich Islamic Centre, where Haitham al-Haddad, a preacher known for his controversial views, told his congregation that some of the rioters have a “Zionist” agenda and are attempting to “divert the attention” of the Government away from “condemning what the Zionist state Israel is doing.” These sermons have not gone unnoticed, particularly because all of the mentioned mosques are registered charities, which means they fall under the governance of the Charity Commission. Dr. Paul Stott, head of security and extremism at the think-tank Policy Exchange, remarked that the trend of attributing the riots to Zionists can be seen across the political spectrum, from the far-Left to the far-Right. He criticized this narrative, stating, “This is an argument that doesn’t give much agency to those involved in the riots and committed criminal offenses. Instead, it shifts the blame and creates this image of Israel as puppeteers. It puts forward a view of Israel and the Jews as all-powerful and manipulative. Trying to put blame on Israel in one way is pretty desperate, in another it reeks of anti-Semitism.” A spokesman for Campaign Against Antisemitism, a charity, echoed these concerns, saying, “This pattern of blaming the riots on ‘Zionists’ is as alarming as it is prevalent. According to our representative polling, an overwhelming majority of 80 percent of British Jews consider themselves to be Zionist, and only six percent do not. They know what these preachers mean when they say ‘Zionists.’ Religious leaders should be trying to ease communal tensions right now, yet those who invoke these tropes are doing exactly the opposite.” The spokesman urged the Charity Commission to investigate any charities that provide a platform for such rhetoric, emphasizing that these cases “cannot be left unchallenged.” In response, a Charity Commission spokesman acknowledged the concerns and stated, “We are aware of potential concerns at several charities relating to claims about the recent public disorder. We are assessing information to determine if there is a role for the Commission.” Despite the mounting scrutiny, the individual charities involved have declined to comment on the sermons. As the debate over the true causes of the recent riots continues to unfold, the focus on Zionists as the alleged instigators has sparked a broader discussion about the impact of such rhetoric on communal relations in the UK. While the motives behind the riots remain a contentious issue, the divisive nature of the sermons has raised significant concerns about the role of religious leaders in shaping public perception and their responsibility in fostering unity rather than division. Meta, the owner of Facebook and Instagram, announced that it is changing its rules to restrict the use of the word “Zionists,” saying the term had often become a proxy for hate speech against Jews. The term “Zionism” is often associated with the political movement begun in the 19th century, prior to the founding of Israel, to create a nation-state for the Jewish people. Meta said that “there is nothing approaching a global consensus on what people mean when they use the term ‘Zionist’” and that it had become “a proxy term for Jewish people and Israelis in relation to certain types of hateful attacks.” The company said it will remove posts attacking “Zionists” when that content uses antisemitic stereotypes or threatens harm through intimidation or violence directed against Jews or Israelis. Meta said it would continue to allow the term in posts about the Zionist political movement, which the company said remains a subject open for debate on its platforms. Credit: Daily Telegraph 2024-08-26 Get the ASEAN NOW daily NEWSLETTER - Click HERE to subscribe -
6
THAILAND LIVE Thailand Live Monday 26 August 2024
Authorities Find No Signs of Illegal Activities During Surprise Inspections at Phan Thong By Aim Tanakorn Chonburi authorities conducted surprise inspections at nightlife venues in the Phan Thong district and found no signs of illegal activities. Full story: https://aseannow.com/topic/1336452-authorities-find-no-signs-of-illegal-activities-during-surprise-inspections-at-phan-thong/
-
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