.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png.8488ab72b8bb2e508209bfe3211b6e08.png)
-
Recently Browsing 0 members
- No registered users viewing this page.
-
Topics
-
-
Popular Contributors
-
Latest posts...
-
0
Trump Bets the White House — and GOP Control of Congress — on Tariffs
Trump Bets the White House — and GOP Control of Congress — on Tariffs In a dramatic and risky move, President Trump has thrown his political future — and that of the Republican Party — behind a sweeping new global tariff regime that has already sent shockwaves through the economy. Dubbed “Liberation Day” by the administration, the rollout of massive new tariffs has triggered a market meltdown, wiped out trillions in value, and rattled both allies and adversaries. The numbers are stark. Last Thursday and Friday alone, $6.4 trillion in stock market value evaporated, with many Americans watching helplessly as their retirement accounts and investment portfolios took a 10% hit. The economic pain is compounded by a sense of confusion. Many wonder why, at a moment when Trump was riding high on a string of policy wins and enjoying record approval ratings, he would take such a bold gamble. Indeed, Trump’s second term had been coasting on notable victories: a crackdown on illegal immigration, a government waste audit that vindicated long-standing claims of bureaucratic fraud, and a high-profile campaign to penalize universities accused of tolerating antisemitic behavior. His firm grip on swing states and a strong economy had given Republicans a solid majority in Congress. That momentum has now been put at risk. According to a Wall Street Journal poll conducted before the market crash, voters disapproved of Trump’s economic leadership by 8 points. His handling of inflation was underwater by 15. And as prices begin to climb due to import taxes, and growth forecasts dim, the situation could worsen. JPMorgan now predicts a sharp slowdown in U.S. GDP, warning of a 60% chance of a global recession if tariffs persist. Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell added fuel to the fire, cautioning that tariffs could trigger both higher inflation and reduced growth. Senator Ted Cruz didn’t mince words: “If the tariff war pushes the US into a recession, particularly a bad recession, 2026 in all likelihood politically would be a bloodbath. You would face a Democrat House, and you might even face a Democrat Senate.” Yet despite the backlash, Trump remains undeterred. For him, tariffs are not a detour but the destination — a cornerstone of his America First doctrine. The goal is to revive U.S. manufacturing, shrink the trade deficit, and force global competitors to open their markets to American goods. At a post-election celebration at Mar-a-Lago, Trump hosted CEOs, including SoftBank’s chief, who pledged a $100 billion investment in the U.S. The administration claims the tariffs will generate as much as $700 billion in federal revenue this year — enough, it argues, to help fund tax cuts and other domestic priorities. More importantly, Trump insists the tariffs are about fairness. “Why is that if you go to Tokyo, there’s no American cars, if you go to Berlin, there’s no American cars, but on our streets, we have every foreign car there is?” said White House adviser Stephen Miller. “They’ve blocked their markets from our cars. President Trump is saying that has to end.” Critics accuse the White House of weaponizing tariffs too aggressively and too quickly. Rather than a phased, targeted approach, Trump has opted for a full-scale blitz across virtually all sectors and countries. Some argue this leaves no room for adjustment and threatens to alienate not just adversaries like China but allies in Europe as well. Still, there are signs the strategy might be working. Trump revealed that Vietnam’s leadership, in a call with him Friday, expressed interest in cutting their tariffs to zero in exchange for a broader trade deal. That statement appeared to confirm what many suspected: the tariffs are a bargaining tool as much as a policy in themselves. The reaction from China was swift and furious. Beijing retaliated with its own 34% levy on U.S. goods and accused Washington of “bullying.” But even Trump’s critics admit China’s trade practices — including IP theft, forced tech transfers, and state subsidies — are longstanding and egregious. Europe, while less openly abusive, has its own trade barriers, including agricultural subsidies and high VAT taxes that hit American imports hard. In other words, Trump’s argument about unfair global trade has merit. But whether his methods will achieve the desired outcome — and whether the American economy and political system can withstand the initial blow — is another question entirely. With 19 months until the midterm elections, Trump is betting big. If the gamble pays off, he could solidify his legacy as a transformational economic nationalist. If not, the political and economic fallout could be immense — and swift. Based on a report by The NYP 2025-04-07 -
0
The Anglicisation of France: A Language Under Siege by Its Own People
The Anglicisation of France: A Language Under Siege by Its Own People France is witnessing a striking transformation, not at the hands of external forces, but by its own institutions and citizens. The recent renaming of the national lottery from FDJ to FDJ United has stirred controversy, renewing longstanding debates about the increasing dominance of English in French life. While critics decry this anglicisation as grotesque and idiotic, many believe the root cause lies not in foreign influence, but in a French inferiority complex towards Anglo-American culture. Paul Rondin, director of the Cité Internationale de la Langue Française, a center dedicated to celebrating the French language, doesn’t mince words. “My hypothesis is that it’s an inferiority complex. Not so much towards the English language, but towards Anglo-American culture,” he says. Rondin describes this linguistic shift as a form of cultural submission. “I think we need collective group psychotherapy,” he adds. “Why is it that all these French people, who are supposed to be so arrogant, so sure of their culture and their history, are spending their time transforming words into an anglicised name? What does that mean? I don’t have any hypotheses or answers to give you at this time, but there’s something deeply troubling going on here.” Senator Mickaël Vallet echoes the frustration but directs his ire at those within French business and branding circles. “These are people who were paid to come up with a new name, and are lazy and, in general, just idiots,” he states bluntly. “They’re people with no inventiveness whatsoever. They’re paid a lot of money not to think.” For him, FDJ United’s new name is “totally ridiculous.” The rationale behind the rebranding, according to FDJ CEO Stéphane Pallez, was to reflect the lottery group’s growing international footprint, particularly after acquisitions in Ireland and Sweden. “Today, our group is beginning a new chapter in its history, more diversified and more international,” Pallez explained. Despite French being the fifth-most spoken language globally, its influence is shrinking. In Africa, once a bastion of francophone culture, countries like Mali, Niger, and Burkina Faso have distanced themselves from the French language amidst political tensions. In Europe, hopes that French might reassert itself post-Brexit were dashed, as English retained its dominance across EU institutions, particularly among officials from the Baltic and Scandinavian regions. What truly alarms French language advocates is not just the presence of English, but the widespread use of "Globish"—a simplified form of English with a narrow vocabulary. “Globish is a code. It’s not a language,” says Vallet. “And when I speak to someone, I want to speak to them with a language, not with a code.” He argues that this creates a chasm between elites and the public, fueling far-Right populism. “The far-Right thrives on rifts between the elites and the people… when those in power no longer speak a language that can be understood by those they represent.” The Académie Française has similarly condemned what it calls the “invasive anglicisation” across French institutions, warning in a 30-page report that such trends risk “a proportional impoverishment of the French lexicon” and could increase societal divisions. Even President Emmanuel Macron isn’t exempt from criticism. Louis Maisonneuve, co-founder of the collective Dare to Speak French, points to Macron’s frequent use of English in his speeches and at major events like “Choose France” and “One Planet Summit.” Maisonneuve sees this not as a benign embrace of internationalism but as a form of cultural surrender. “It’s the French who are bowing down in front of everything that comes from the Americans. We’re rolling out the red carpet for the Anglo-American language.” Maisonneuve’s group has taken action, filing legal complaints to ensure multilingual signage includes languages beyond English, like Spanish. “It’s not a criticism of English expression. It’s a criticism of those who only use English,” he says. Linguist Bernard Cerquiglini goes further, highlighting that many English words are, in fact, derived from French. “My book is part of that reaction. I say to the French, ‘You’re stupid. You want to abandon French in favour of American English, without realising that English comes from French.’” With his book The English Language Doesn’t Exist – It’s Just Badly Pronounced French, Cerquiglini underscores the irony of France abandoning a language that has, in many ways, shaped English itself. “Anglomania has existed for a long time,” Cerquiglini notes, “but at the moment, it’s taking on an astonishing aspect. With [Donald] Trump right now, I don’t feel like being American.” Based on a report by The Telegraph 2025-04-07 -
0
The Shadow War: When Vigilantism Crosses a Dangerous Line "paedophile hunters"
The Shadow War: When Vigilantism Crosses a Dangerous Line Over the past decade, self-proclaimed "paedophile hunters" have taken to the streets and screens of the UK in a mission they claim is driven by justice. Operating independently of law enforcement, these online vigilantes pose as children on social media platforms, lure suspected predators into meetings, and livestream dramatic confrontations in an effort to expose alleged offenders. But beneath the surface of this modern crusade lies a murky, dangerous undercurrent that has destroyed innocent lives, led to criminal convictions of the hunters themselves, and in some cases, pushed uncharged men to take their own lives. These groups often rely on tips from the public or online rumours to identify supposed predators. Once a suspect engages in what the hunters deem to be inappropriate communication, a meeting is arranged—only instead of a child, it’s members of the group who appear, cameras rolling, ready to shame the individual publicly. Supporters applaud their efforts, pointing to cases where police acted on the information and courts secured convictions. But the cost of these unsanctioned actions has proven devastating. One of the most tragic consequences of this vigilantism is the suicide of individuals accused before any legal process has taken place. In February, 48-year-old father of four Adrian Smith died hours after being arrested, following a confrontation filmed and streamed by hunters who accused him of sending explicit messages to someone posing as a 14-year-old girl. Though released on bail and not charged with a crime, Smith jumped from a motorway bridge later that same day. The group who had posted the video made no apology. "We exposed a paedophile and handed him to the police," they said. "We have no control over the choices made by him." The online response was horrifying. Users cheered his death, with comments such as “One down, one million to go,” and “Fantastic.” Others suggested his suicide saved taxpayers’ money. Similar circumstances surrounded the death of David Baker in 2017, who was accused of arranging to meet a boy for sex. Confronted by hunters and then released under police investigation, Baker took a fatal overdose just days later. A coroner ruled that social media posts after his arrest directly contributed to his death. Steven Dure, who led the sting, expressed no remorse: “The only tragedy here is that justice could not be done before he took his life.” These outcomes are not isolated. Numerous individuals, later found to be innocent, have had their lives shattered. Darrell Edmondson lost his job and was ostracised by friends and family after being falsely accused by a group who mistook his identity. The group later admitted their error, but the damage was done. Similarly, Shiz Hussain was livestreamed being assaulted and publicly accused after a false tip-off rooted in personal revenge. The mental toll left him hiding in his shop's toilet for days. And the hunters themselves are far from infallible. Several have been arrested and convicted for crimes ranging from false imprisonment and assault to impersonating police officers. Sam Miller was jailed after violently confronting an innocent man, and Tim Heron, once a prominent hunter in Northern Ireland, was convicted for possessing indecent images of children. The behaviour of some groups has even resulted in charges against actual suspects being dropped due to the illegality of their methods. The line between justice and harassment has blurred dangerously. In one case, a Hull city council worker passed confidential data to hunters, sparking a mob attack on a registered sex offender’s home. The court found that the leak had “whipped up a frenzy” and placed public safety at risk. There’s also the troubling revelation that some individuals posing as hunters are predators themselves. Lee Philip Rees, for example, ran a blackmail operation while pretending to be a teenage girl, extorting money from men by threatening to expose them. He was later convicted of 31 offences, including computer misuse and blackmail. While their mission might claim moral righteousness, the reality is far more complex and, at times, deeply sinister. With tragic consequences for both the guilty and the innocent, the actions of these vigilante groups raise a sobering question: in trying to protect society from harm, how much damage are they doing themselves? Based on a report by Daily Mail 2025-04-07 -
0
National Insurance Hike Forces Nearly Half of UK Firms to Scale Back Hiring
A sweeping rise in National Insurance (NI) contributions introduced by Chancellor Rachel Reeves is prompting almost half of UK companies to pull back on recruitment, according to new research. The move, which increases the rate of employer contributions from 13.8 per cent to 15 per cent, officially comes into effect this Sunday and is already reshaping hiring plans across the country. In a survey conducted by recruitment firm Reed, 46 per cent of the 254 companies surveyed—representing over 260,000 employees—indicated they would cut recruitment due to the NI increase. The tax change, first announced in last October's Budget, is projected to bring in an additional £25 billion in employer taxes, but many firms say it could be the final straw in an already hostile economic environment. The added burden arrives as businesses are also contending with higher minimum wages, rising business rates, and the cost of complying with updated workers' rights legislation. Many companies reported they had already postponed or cancelled hiring plans even before the rise officially began. Concerns over the increase were widespread, with nearly two-thirds of firms voicing worries about the higher NI payments. On average, respondents estimated their annual profits would fall by 29 per cent due to the change. The NI hike isn’t just freezing recruitment—it’s also triggering job losses. Sixteen per cent of the surveyed businesses said they had already begun making redundancies. Meanwhile, 19 per cent have delayed or scrapped planned salary reviews, and 22 per cent reported they were slashing departmental budgets to cope with the rising costs. London appears to be bearing the brunt of the policy shift. Sixty per cent of firms in the capital reported that the NI increase was affecting their hiring decisions, compared to 38 per cent outside the city. Furthermore, 24 per cent of London businesses said they were already making redundancies, double the 12 per cent seen in other regions. The recent rise in the national minimum wage, from £11.44 to £12.21 per hour for workers aged 21 and over, is compounding the situation. Twenty-six per cent of businesses said they had paused hiring because of the higher wage floor, while 35 per cent said it had significantly hampered their ability to recruit. James Reed, chairman and CEO of the Reed Group, voiced concern about the direction of government policy. “Everyone understands there are difficult decisions to be made given the state of the public finances, but we warned when the increase in employers' National Insurance was announced it was a tax on jobs and so it has proved,” he said. “The findings of our survey clearly demonstrate the impact and suggest the jobs market will remain under pressure. The hole this tax increase has made in a million company balance sheets is regrettable. These are tough times for companies that want to hire and expand and this will feed through into weaker economic growth.” Based on a report by The Daily Mail 2025-04-07 -
0
‘Unparalleled Crimes’: George Santos Faces Seven-Year Prison Term in Federal Fraud Case
George Santos Faces Seven-Year Prison Term in Federal Fraud Case as Prosecutors Cite ‘Unparalleled Crimes’ Federal prosecutors are calling for a prison sentence of more than seven years for former U.S. Representative George Santos, citing what they describe as “unparalleled crimes” that exploited the American electoral system and left a trail of deceit, fraud, and public mistrust. In a court filing submitted Friday, the U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of New York urged the court to impose an 87-month sentence, the higher end of federal sentencing guidelines, arguing Santos’ conduct had “made a mockery” of the democratic process. “From his creation of a wholly fictitious biography to his callous theft of money from elderly and impaired donors, Santos’s unrestrained greed and voracious appetite for fame enabled him to exploit the very system by which we select our representatives,” prosecutors wrote in the filing. They described him as “unrepentant and defiant,” pointing to his long-standing denials and characterization of the prosecution as a “witch hunt” even as damning evidence emerged and calls for his resignation mounted. Santos ultimately pleaded guilty to federal fraud and identity theft charges in August 2023, admitting he deceived donors, stole the identities of nearly a dozen individuals—including family members—and falsified financial documents to secure campaign donations and federal matching funds. The once-promising Republican from New York, who served barely a year in Congress before his expulsion in December, now awaits sentencing on April 25. Despite his guilty plea, prosecutors say Santos has not shown genuine remorse. They argue his post-plea apologies “ring hollow,” noting that he has neither forfeited the financial gains nor made restitution to his victims. They also raised concerns about the potential for reoffending, citing his continued attempts to profit from his notoriety, including through the video platform Cameo and a new documentary, which they say earned him over $800,000 since his ouster from Congress. Santos’ attorneys, however, have called the sentencing recommendation “absurd and unfounded.” In their own memo submitted Friday, they urged the judge to impose the mandatory minimum two-year sentence for aggravated identity theft, claiming such a term would be consistent with those handed down in similar political scandals, including the case of former Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr. They also highlighted Santos’ lack of prior criminal history and his role in supporting his sister and her young daughter, arguing these are mitigating factors the court should weigh. “This sentence, coupled with the significant collateral consequences Mr. Santos has already suffered—including the loss of his congressional seat and public humiliation — would send a clear message that such conduct will not be tolerated,” his legal team wrote. Santos’ fall from grace has been as swift as it was stunning. Once hailed as a Republican newcomer representing parts of Queens and Long Island, he was exposed for having fabricated nearly every aspect of his resume. He falsely claimed to be a wealthy financier with degrees from elite universities and a thriving real estate portfolio. In reality, he was facing eviction and financial hardship. His lies and financial misconduct prompted a historic response from the House of Representatives, which voted to expel him—the sixth time in U.S. history a member has been removed by their peers. Santos’ criminal case has also ensnared two of his former aides. Sam Miele, a top campaign fundraiser, was sentenced last month to just over a year in prison after admitting he impersonated a senior congressional aide to solicit donations and charged credit cards without consent. Nancy Marks, the campaign’s treasurer, has pleaded guilty to filing fake financial reports, including a fictitious $500,000 personal loan from Santos, to meet fundraising targets that unlocked national party support. She is scheduled to be sentenced in May. Santos’ own sentencing was originally scheduled for February but was delayed to give him time to come up with more than $500,000 in court fines. As part of his plea deal, he agreed to pay nearly $375,000 in restitution and forfeit $205,000. At the time, his lawyers stated he had just over $1,000 in liquid assets and needed additional time to generate income from his newly launched podcast “Pants on Fire.” Whether that effort will satisfy the court remains to be seen. For now, George Santos stands as a cautionary tale about the vulnerabilities of the political system and the severe consequences of exploiting them. Based on a report by NBC News 2025-04-07 -
0
Battle for Britain's Waters: Russian surveillance sensors detected in UK Waters
Beneath the Surface: The Silent Battle for Britain's Waters Russian surveillance sensors designed to track the UK’s nuclear submarines have been uncovered in British waters, revealing a hidden front in what military officials describe as an escalating campaign of “greyzone” warfare. These covert devices, discovered by the British military, include several that washed ashore and others found by the Royal Navy. While the exact locations have not been disclosed, the sensors are believed to be the work of Moscow, deployed to monitor the Vanguard-class submarines that carry the UK’s nuclear deterrent. The revelation, which has not been made public until now, points to a serious threat to national security. One of the four Vanguard submarines is always at sea under the UK’s continuous at-sea deterrent, a defence strategy that depends on stealth. The aim of these hidden Russian devices, officials believe, is to detect and track these submarines as they vanish from their base at Faslane, Scotland, for months-long patrols in unknown locations. A three-month investigation by The Sunday Times has shed light on this underwater espionage through interviews with more than a dozen former defence ministers, senior military officials and experts. It also included rare access to the RFA Proteus, a newly commissioned deep-sea surveillance ship at the heart of Britain's response to these undersea threats. Military commanders have compared the growing technological struggle beneath the waves to the Cold War space race. With Russia decades into its investment in seabed warfare, Britain is now scrambling to catch up. On March 21, a speedboat carried journalists and senior naval officers to the RFA Proteus anchored off Scotland’s west coast. Towering above the waters near the Isle of Arran, the ship is a floating fortress outfitted with a helipad, deep-sea cranes, and a moon pool the size of eight snooker tables for launching underwater vehicles. The crew includes members of the navy’s diving and mine-hunting squadrons—experts trained to locate and neutralise threats on the ocean floor. Their mission has become more urgent amid fears that Russia is using its formidable underwater capabilities to map and sabotage Britain’s critical infrastructure. After the fall of the Berlin Wall, Russia’s conventional forces diminished, but it never stopped pouring resources into its submarine fleet. Unlike any other country, Russia maintains a fleet dedicated to seabed warfare and espionage. These submarines are not only highly advanced but also capable of deep-sea operations beyond the reach of many NATO vessels. Russia’s undersea strategy intensified even before its 2022 invasion of Ukraine. According to military sources, the Kremlin’s focus expanded to surveillance and sabotage of underwater internet cables, pipelines, and military lines—critical arteries for the West. The Nord Stream gas pipeline explosion in 2022 was widely believed to be a greyzone attack orchestrated by Moscow. Since then, at least 11 internet cables in the Baltic Sea have suffered damage—some by ships dragging their anchors across the seabed in suspiciously calculated patterns. “You really need to keep the [engine] power on to drag, so it is a deliberate act,” said one defence insider. British military sources also suspect that oligarch-owned superyachts may have been used to support Russia’s underwater reconnaissance. These luxury vessels often feature moon pools—hidden underwater openings—capable of deploying deep-sea equipment covertly. The Russian program is coordinated by the Main Directorate for Deep-Sea Research, or Gugi, and features vessels such as the Yantar, a spy ship capable of deploying mini-subs with manipulator arms that can cut or tap cables and lay explosive devices. These minisubs are supported by larger “mother” submarines, allowing them to operate globally with near-total secrecy. “There should be no doubt, there is a war raging in the Atlantic,” said a senior British military official. “This is a game of cat and mouse that has continued since the ending of the Cold War, and is now heating up again. We are seeing phenomenal amounts of Russian activity.” As British forces work to locate and counter these threats, the question now is not just how to respond—but how to stay ahead in a silent war already underway beneath the waves. Based on a report by The Times 2025-04-07
-
-
Popular in The Pub
-
Recommended Posts