Trump the convicted felon gets off so why not Bidens son?
-
Recently Browsing 0 members
- No registered users viewing this page.
-
Topics
-
-
-
Popular Contributors
-
-
Latest posts...
-
0
Accident Man Killed in Crash While Driving to Visit His Farm in Chonburi
Picture courtesy of Khaosod. A 56-year-old man was killed in a road crash after he llost control of his pickup truck on a curve and collided with an oncoming car, flipping violently and leaving him dead at the scene. The incident took place on the Bo Thong–Wang Ri Road in Bo Thong district, Chonburi province. Police and rescue services were alerted to the scene at approximately 18:40 on 21 June and arrived with medical personnel from Bo Thong Hospital. Upon arrival, authorities found an Isuzu pickup truck, registration from Chonburi, overturned. The driver was thrown from the vehicle and pronounced dead at the scene. He had suffered a severe head injury and a broken left arm. Nearby, the other vehicle involved, a BYD sedan, registration fromNakhon Ratchasima, was found with its front end buried in roadside undergrowth after also veering off the road. The driver of the sedan sustained a broken left index finger, back pain and multiple abrasions. He was rushed to Bo Thong Hospital for treatment. Moments later, the victim’s younger sister arrived at the crash site and broke down in tears upon seeing her brother’s lifeless body. Rescue personnel provided her with emotional support. She later explained that her brother had been driving from Don Hua Lo to inspect his farm in Wang Ri subdistrict. She had been notified of the crash by a local community leader and rushed to the scene, only to discover he had already passed away. A witness, who had been driving behind the victim, reported that the pickup truck lost control while rounding a curve, struck the metal roadside barrier and veered into the opposite lane before colliding with the sedan. The force of the crash caused the pickup to overturn. Police have launched an investigation and transported the deceased to hospital for a post-mortem examination. Adapted by Asean Now from Khaosod 2025-06-23 -
0
Middle East Pentagon: ‘Bold and Brilliant’ Operation That Crippled Iran’s Nuclear Infrastructure
Pentagon: ‘Bold and Brilliant’ Operation That Crippled Iran’s Nuclear Infrastructure” The Pentagon has declared a high-stakes overnight strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities a decisive success, describing it as a “bold and brilliant” operation that inflicted massive damage without harming civilians or military personnel. US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth opened the briefing by emphasizing the mission’s primary aim: to “degrade” and “destroy” Iran’s nuclear capabilities. “This was a highly classified mission with very few people in Washington knowing the timing or nature of this plan,” Hegseth explained, calling the execution a testament to the precision and secrecy of the US military. Directing reporters to a large screen, Air Force General Dan Caine of the Joint Chiefs of Staff provided detailed insights into the timeline and logistics of the strike. According to Caine, the attack began when seven B-2 bombers undertook an 18-hour flight. At roughly 17:00 local time (22:00 BST), a US submarine launched more than two dozen Tomahawk cruise missiles targeting key nuclear infrastructure at the Isfahan site. Strikes on all three designated targets—Fordo, Natanz, and Isfahan—occurred between 18:40 and 19:05 Eastern Time. “It appears that Iran's surface-to-air missile systems did not see us,” said Caine. “We are not aware of any shots fired at our aircraft during egress.” He further revealed that the final Tomahawk strike was timed to ensure the US retained “the element of surprise.” General Caine said that the mission involved the “largest B-2 operational strike in US history,” and preliminary assessments showed “extremely severe damage and destruction” to all targeted nuclear facilities. “Final battle damage will take some time,” he noted, “but an initial battle damage assessment indicates all three sites sustained extremely severe damage.” Hegseth echoed the assessment, stating: “All of our precision munitions struck where we wanted them to strike and had the desired effect.” He confirmed that the attack specifically avoided military personnel and civilians, reiterating, “This mission was not and has not been about regime change.” With US forces on “high alert” following the operation, Hegseth issued a stern warning to Tehran. “Any retaliation would be an incredibly poor choice,” he said. Asked whether there had been a definitive moment when President Donald Trump decided to authorize the operation, Hegseth said Trump had been “fully committed to the peace process” but was repeatedly met with “stonewalling” from Iran. “There was no particular moment for Trump,” he said. “But there was a moment where he realised there was a time when action needed to be taken to minimise the threat.” Hegseth further stressed that Washington had not closed the door on diplomacy. “They know precisely what the American position is, what steps they can take to allow for peace, and I hope they do so.” During the Pentagon’s briefing, Vice-President JD Vance echoed the administration’s stance in an interview with NBC News. “The United States is not at war with Iran,” he stated. “We are at war with its nuclear ambitions.” Vance affirmed that the US believes it has “destroyed” Iran’s nuclear programme and rejected suggestions that the operation fell outside President Trump’s authority. “It’s not true,” he said, responding to criticism from Democratic House Leader Hakeem Jeffries. Caine also disclosed that a total of 75 precision-guided munitions were used in the strike, including 14 Massive Ordnance Penetrators—commonly known as “bunker busters.” Some bombers were dispatched westward into the Pacific as a decoy to divert attention and mask the real target. “The president has authorised a precision operation to neutralise the threats to our national interests posed by the Iranian nuclear programme and the collective self defence of our troops and our ally, Israel,” Hegseth concluded. “We devastated the Iranian nuclear programme, but it's worth noting the operation did not target Iranian troops or the Iranian people.” As the bombers return home, the Pentagon continues its assessment of the operation’s long-term impact, but early signs indicate the mission achieved its core objective: a crippling blow to Iran’s nuclear ambitions. Adapted by ASEAN Now from BBC 2025-06-23 -
0
UK British Citizens Being Left Behind? Councils Housing More Asylum Seekers Than the Homeless”
A growing divide in housing provision is fuelling claims that Britain prioritises asylum seekers over its own homeless citizens. An investigation has revealed that 17 councils across England are accommodating up to ten times more asylum seekers than homeless households, prompting public outrage and political criticism. The starkest disparity has been found in Pendle, a borough recently won by Reform UK in Lancashire, where 453 asylum seekers are reportedly being housed, compared to just nine homeless households in temporary accommodation. Other areas with similar discrepancies include Stockton-on-Tees, which hosts 797 asylum seekers against 26 homeless households, and Wyre, with 375 versus 14. Critics argue these numbers expose a deeply unfair system. Robert Bates of the Centre for Migration Control stated, “Those who were born here and have contributed to the economy have been abandoned, and left on the streets, in favour of undocumented young men towards whom we should have no moral or legal obligation. Thousands of British veterans and families are facing real hardship but are denied even a fraction of the generosity extended to asylum seekers.” He added, “Scattering these people across the country places further strain on communities suffering with a dysfunctional housing market, increasing rents and making it harder for young people to own a home. Anyone entering the country illegally should be detained and swiftly deported—it is only then that we can hope this madness will end.” While critics cite inequality, officials argue the comparison itself is flawed. A Government spokesperson said: “This analysis is incorrect and misleading as it compares the number of individual asylum seekers with homeless households, which can contain more than one person.” The Home Office is legally required to house asylum seekers awaiting a decision on their claim. If successful, they are granted refugee status and entitled to work, claim benefits, and seek housing through local councils—subject to a priority system based on vulnerability and need. However, officials emphasise that councils cannot control where homeless individuals choose to reside, and asylum housing is assigned based on national dispersal systems. Yet the optics remain jarring. In Coventry—home to one of the country’s highest asylum seeker populations—locals expressed their frustration. Louise, 37, said: “I'm currently homeless. The houses go to the asylum seekers rather than the actual homeless. I'm in a shared accommodation and I am technically homeless. I think the Government should be looking after their own before helping other people.” Dee, 38, added, “I think it's ridiculous that asylum seekers can come over here and get housed but my husband, who has paid taxes his whole life, is on the street. I don't think we can handle the numbers, we can't house the people who are from this city.” The cost of accommodating asylum seekers has ballooned, now reaching £4.2 million a day. About 30,000 remain in hotels, receiving meals and an allowance of £8.86 per week—or £49.18 if meals aren't provided. They also receive free NHS care, prescriptions, dental services, and school access for their children. The issue is further complicated by the fact that many newly recognised refugees also fall into homelessness. The No Accommodation Network (Naccom) reported a doubling of refugee homelessness in the past year, citing nearly 2,000 cases—the highest they’ve ever recorded. Once refugee status is granted, individuals have just 56 days to vacate asylum housing and find accommodation on their own. Alp Mehmet of Migration Watch UK highlighted the broader picture: “Over 100,000 people applied for asylum in 2024, including main applicants and their dependants. There will be just as many seeking asylum this year. Then there’s the 430,000 net migration added to the population last year. Well over half a million people needing a roof over their heads, roofs that won’t be available to British citizens. When will the Government see sense and end this madness? Get a grip, Sir Keir!” The Government says it is responding, noting increased asylum decision rates, £1 billion allocated to homelessness services, and an effort to stop using hotels for asylum seekers within four years. Yet, with public frustration mounting—as evidenced by protests and polling showing 68% believe asylum numbers are too high—the pressure on Westminster to resolve the housing crisis for all remains as urgent as ever. Adapted by ASEAN Now from Daily Mail 2025-06-23 -
0
USA Mark Zuckerberg’s Political Rebrand Reveals a Long-Held Persona, Say Insiders
Mark Zuckerberg’s Political Rebrand Reveals a Long-Held Persona, Say Insiders Mark Zuckerberg’s recent public pivot toward conservative politics and overt support for President Donald Trump has sparked widespread debate — but according to dozens of people who have worked closely with the Meta CEO, the move is far from surprising. Rather than a dramatic political about-face, insiders say it’s simply the Facebook founder dropping the act and revealing a version of himself that’s long existed just beneath the surface. “Mark was trying to keep his real feelings tight inside and put on a suit and cut his hair and be a good boy. But the whole time this was all one inch underneath,” one Meta insider told the Financial Times. “Then he said, ‘F*** it. I might as well be the person I really am.’” Since Trump’s election in November, Zuckerberg has increasingly aligned himself with the former president. According to reports, he has met with Trump at Mar-a-Lago, donated $1 million to Trump’s inaugural fund, attended the inauguration, and even co-hosted a reception. Behind the scenes, Meta has also implemented policy changes that reflect a closer alignment with the Trump administration’s worldview. Andrew Bosworth, Meta’s Chief Technology Officer, said that what the public is only now beginning to perceive has long been apparent internally. “The public is seeing him more how we have, internally, since the beginning,” Bosworth told the Financial Times. He also suggested that Zuckerberg’s earlier public persona—marked by buttoned-up appearances and deferential attitudes toward government regulators—was a performance more than a conviction. “He thought he was supposed to be doing that,” Bosworth added. Meta declined to comment for the story, and the White House has yet to respond to inquiries. Zuckerberg’s ideological evolution appears to have been gradual, largely influenced by years of criticism and regulatory pressure. Tensions peaked during the early stages of the Biden administration, when officials urged Facebook—Meta’s former name—to moderate content about COVID-19, particularly misinformation. Zuckerberg complied at the time but reportedly came to regret the decision. In contrast, his posture under the Trump administration has been notably more resistant to appeasement. The shift also coincides with a more visible embrace of what Zuckerberg himself calls “masculine energy.” Speaking on the Joe Rogan Experience, he said, “Masculine energy is good.” Even when Meta executives privately pushed back on the comment, Zuckerberg stood by it without apology. Those familiar with Zuckerberg suggest that his newfound embrace of conservative values and masculine aesthetics—evident in his interest in Brazilian jiu-jitsu, his switch to casual streetwear, and a more assertive public tone—is part of a broader rebranding effort aimed at boosting his personal appeal. “He saw that Elon Musk was popular among the tech bros,” a former Meta insider said. “There was a push to make him cool. The core of The Social Network movie is true — he just wants people to like him.” Whether the public will embrace this “authentic” version of Zuckerberg remains to be seen, but to those on the inside, it’s not a transformation. It’s a long-restrained identity finally being unmasked. Adapted by ASEAN Now from The Independent 2025-06-23 -
0
UK King's Cross Station: Police Officer tells Christians to stop preaching the gospel
"Preachers Confronted by Police at King’s Cross: ‘I Just Think It’s Wrong’" A video capturing the tense moment a British Transport Police officer told a group of Christian evangelists to stop preaching outside King’s Cross station has sparked widespread debate over freedom of religious expression in public spaces. The short clip, which has since gone viral, shows a female police officer confronting members of Mad 4 Jesus Ministries and expressing her personal disapproval of their public gospel preaching. "It’s so loud," she tells the preachers. "These people just want to do their journey, they’re not coming here to listen to you." When the preacher challenges her, asking, "If I was doing a happy, clappy song it would be ok?" she bluntly replies, "I just think it’s all wrong," before walking away. The confrontation occurred on the busy concourse between King’s Cross and St Pancras International stations—two of London’s largest transit hubs that see nearly 60 million passengers annually. According to Mon B, who leads the Mad 4 Jesus Ministries group, they had been told not to stand in front of the station barriers before being confronted by the officer. Mon B described the officer's remarks as an "unnecessary" expression of personal opinion. This incident is the latest in a string of controversies involving police officers and Christian street preachers in London. Last year, Christian singer Harmonie London was told to stop performing church songs outside a church’s grounds, leading to a formal apology from the Metropolitan Police. Harmonie, then 20, said she felt “humiliated,” “sad,” and “bullied” after the confrontation, during which volunteer officer Maya Hadzhipetkova threatened to confiscate her instruments following her rendition of Amazing Grace. The Met later admitted the officer was wrong to state that church songs could not be performed outside church property and clarified that the issue had been about unlicensed busking, not the content of her songs. Responding to the latest King's Cross video, members of the public expressed outrage. One commenter asked, “I’m sorry, is this officer paid to give out her opinions? Or is she paid to protect the public?” Another wrote, “You are not breaking the law. She should be out catching criminals not bothering you.” A third added, “Luckily you’re not paid for your opinions. You’re paid to do your job and stopping peaceful preachers is not part of it.” Mon B later shared a more positive interaction with a second officer from the same patrol, during which they reportedly prayed together. A video shows the second officer nodding and appearing to thank the group after the prayer session. Additional footage from the same location shows the group performing a Christian song titled Yeshua, originally released by Jesus Image in 2022, using a loudspeaker while commuters pass by without incident. The British Transport Police addressed the incident in a statement explaining: “Officers were on patrol at the station when they came across a group preaching on private land with a loud speaker which requires permission from Network Rail, and as such they asked them to leave. We fully appreciate anyone’s right for religious expression, and the incident in full is currently being reviewed by a senior officer.” In a separate incident earlier last year, Metropolitan Police officers threatened to arrest a preacher for allegedly making homophobic remarks during a gospel message on Uxbridge High Street. Although the officers stated they had not personally witnessed the alleged offense, they warned the preacher he could be arrested for failing to provide his name due to the public complaint. One officer said, “If I do walk away and I see offences, and the victim wants to press charges... I could have failed a potential victim.” Another added, “Provide me your name now or you will be arrested. You can spend the night in a cell and we can do it that way.” The missionaries defended their message, citing John 3:16 and asserting their right to religious expression. “We’re just passionate,” one preacher said when accused of being emotional. The officers insisted they were not attacking the group, but the exchange highlighted a growing tension between public religious activity and modern policing approaches in London. Adapted by ASEAN Now from The Standard 2025-06-23 -
0
Ukraine Putin Declares “Ukraine Is Ours” and Revives Nuclear Threats in Blunt Rebuke to Peace Hopes
Putin Declares “Ukraine Is Ours” and Revives Nuclear Threats in Blunt Rebuke to Peace Hopes Russian President Vladimir Putin has made his most aggressive declaration on Ukraine in months, abandoning recent conciliatory tones and signaling an unwillingness to compromise—even as peace talks involving Donald Trump loom in the background. Speaking at the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum, a high-profile investment gathering, Putin stunned attendees with a hardline vision for the war in Ukraine. When asked what he considered the endgame for the conflict, he answered bluntly: “I have said many times that I consider the Russian and Ukrainian people to be one nation. In this sense, all of Ukraine is ours.” The comment drew raucous applause from an audience packed with loyal politicians and business elites. But the Russian leader didn’t stop there. “There is an old rule,” he added. “‘Where a Russian soldier sets foot, that is ours’.” With those words, Putin appeared to reaffirm a maximalist vision of territorial conquest, one far more sweeping than the partial annexations or negotiated settlements that have been floated in diplomatic channels. His remarks mark a sharp departure from recent Kremlin messaging, which had grown notably softer since Donald Trump began promoting the idea of a U.S.-brokered peace deal. For months, Russian officials had adopted a more measured tone, presumably to position themselves as open to a negotiated solution. But that posture was absent in St. Petersburg. Instead, Putin returned to the aggressive rhetoric that dominated much of the early war period. Most concerning to many observers was the Russian president’s renewed invocation of nuclear threats. Asked how Moscow would respond if Ukraine used a “dirty bomb” against Russian forces, Putin’s reply was chillingly direct. “This would be a colossal mistake on the part of those whom we call neo-Nazis on the territory of today’s Ukraine,” he said. “It could be their last mistake.” He continued, “We always respond and respond in kind. Therefore, our response will be very tough.” Such nuclear threats had been a near-weekly fixture of Kremlin communication during the final stretch of Joe Biden’s presidency, but they largely receded when Trump assumed office. Putin’s decision to bring them back now is widely seen as a calculated move, one meant to signal that Russia remains unbowed—not just militarily, but ideologically. Analysts suggest this rhetorical shift is more than just bluster. It may reflect deep skepticism within the Kremlin over the utility of peace talks and a desire to reassert dominance on both the battlefield and the geopolitical stage. The timing is also telling. With Trump attempting to cast himself as a potential peace-broker, Putin’s words seem to suggest that Moscow does not intend to accept any compromise that falls short of its expansive territorial ambitions. In essence, the message to Washington and Kyiv alike is that Russia's objectives remain unchanged—and uncompromising. Whether this signals a coming escalation or is intended to shape the contours of any future negotiations remains to be seen. But for now, Vladimir Putin has made it abundantly clear: he believes all of Ukraine belongs to Russia, and he is prepared to back that claim with the threat of catastrophic force. Adapted by ASEAN Now from Sky News 2025-06-23
-
-
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