-
Recently Browsing 0 members
- No registered users viewing this page.
-
Topics
-
-
Popular Contributors
-
1
-
2
-
3
-
4
-
5
.thumb.jpeg.d2d19a66404642fd9ff62d6262fd153e.jpeg)
-
-
Latest posts...
-
4
Trump says he’s negotiated 200 trade deals — but won’t say with whom
It’s just the usual nonsense for his rubes (base) create a problem then pretend to fix it.will they ever realize it and get tired of being gas lit? -
0
Kyiv Mayor Klitschko Hints at Possible Land Concessions for Peace
Klitschko Hints at Possible Land Concessions for Peace, Stirs Debate in Ukraine Kyiv’s mayor, Vitali Klitschko, has ignited a wave of controversy after suggesting Ukraine may have to consider territorial concessions to Russia as part of a future peace settlement. In a candid interview with the BBC, the former heavyweight boxing champion acknowledged that giving up land—even temporarily—might be one of the potential paths toward ending the war, though he emphasized that such a scenario would be painful and far from ideal. "One of the scenarios is… to give up territory. It's not fair. But for the peace, temporary peace, maybe it can be a solution, temporary," Klitschko said. However, he was quick to underline the steadfastness of the Ukrainian people, declaring, “the Ukrainian people would never accept occupation” by Russia. Klitschko’s remarks came in the wake of one of the deadliest Russian attacks on the Ukrainian capital in recent months. A coordinated missile-and-drone strike killed 12 people and injured more than 80, underscoring the devastating human cost of the conflict and the urgency felt by some to seek an end to the war. Russia launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022 and currently occupies around 20% of Ukrainian territory. Klitschko’s statement marks one of the most high-profile acknowledgments by a Ukrainian official that territorial concessions might need to be considered, even if only as a temporary measure. Still, his suggestion is bound to prove divisive, especially given the strong national resolve against yielding any ground to Moscow. Speaking to BBC Radio 4’s Today programme from his office in central Kyiv, Klitschko described the capital as “the heart” of the country and reaffirmed his role as its steward during wartime. Despite the gravity of the situation, he noted that he has not been consulted by President Volodymyr Zelensky on any potential peace settlement. “President Zelensky does [it] himself. It's not my function,” he said. Klitschko and Zelensky have had a tense political relationship, with the mayor previously accusing the president and his team of undermining his authority. While discussing the strained dynamics between leaders, Klitschko alluded to a highly publicized confrontation between Zelensky and former U.S. President Donald Trump earlier this year. “Key issues between top politicians would be better discussed without video cameras,” Klitschko said, suggesting a more discreet approach to diplomacy. Tensions between Ukraine and Trump have resurfaced as the former U.S. president pushes for Ukraine to accept territorial losses, including the Crimean Peninsula, which Russia annexed in 2014. Trump recently criticized Zelensky for refusing to entertain any negotiations that would concede Crimea to Russia, arguing that the territory “was lost years ago” and is “not even a point of discussion.” Zelensky, however, has stood firm, pointing to a 2018 “Crimea declaration” made by Trump’s then-Secretary of State, Mike Pompeo, in which the United States explicitly rejected Russia’s attempted annexation. The Ukrainian president’s stance reflects the broader sentiment within Ukraine and among its European allies, many of whom have expressed growing concern over what they perceive as Trump’s increasingly conciliatory posture toward Russian President Vladimir Putin. As the war drags on and geopolitical tensions mount, Klitschko’s comments may reflect a pragmatic, albeit controversial, recognition that hard choices could lie ahead. Whether Ukraine's leadership and people will ultimately entertain the idea of territorial compromise remains to be seen, but for now, the suggestion alone is likely to spark intense debate both within Ukraine and beyond. Related Topic: Why Zelensky Won’t Bargain Away Crimea — No Matter the Pressure Adpated by ASEAN Now from BBC 2025-04-26 -
0
"Rosie Duffield Says Labour Return Impossible Under Starmer After Gender Ruling ‘Vindicates’
"Rosie Duffield Says Labour Return Impossible Under Starmer After Gender Ruling ‘Vindicates’ Her Views" Rosie Duffield, the former Labour MP for Canterbury, has expressed a sense of vindication following a Supreme Court ruling that confirmed the legal definitions of "woman" and "sex" as biological in the context of the 2010 Equality Act. In an interview with ITV News Deputy Political Editor Anushka Asthana, Duffield stated plainly that there is “no way back” to Labour for her as long as Sir Keir Starmer remains at the helm. Duffield, who resigned from Labour in September last year citing her strained relationship with the leadership and her gender-critical stance, said she was effectively “hounded out” of the party. She described being the target of a “whispering campaign” from those who opposed her views on trans rights, with some allegedly trying to have the Whip removed from her on a daily basis. “They vehemently disagreed with my stance on women's rights and the issue that we've been talking about all week, that was the main thing,” she said. “I don't think many of those people were interested in having a conversation. They just wanted to sort of do their thing behind the scenes and, you know, they're part of socialist societies like LGBT Labour, and they'd made their mind up that that was their stance and that I was external to that.” The Supreme Court's ruling clarified that biological sex, not gender identity, governs access to single-sex spaces such as bathrooms and refuges. “Women like me have been vindicated because we've always said that that is the law,” Duffield said. “But, you know, I don't necessarily feel excited or jubilant about it. That's just the law. And I guess when other groups like Stonewall and those that are paid a lot to advise government departments and charities and workplaces have said differently, and we've always said that's not the law, then, yeah we have been vindicated.” Despite this, Duffield dismissed the idea of rejoining Labour under the current leadership. “Not under Keir Starmer's leadership. I can't imagine being able to do that,” she said. “Although I don't personally need an apology, there are hundreds of people who've been banned, barred, blocked, expelled from the party for saying exactly the same thing that the party are now saying. I never had any personal support from him and I think he's made it very clear that he's not particularly interested in me rejoining anyway. I mean, I don't think that's a thing at the moment.” She was also asked to respond to concerns from the trans community, particularly those voiced by trans cyclist Emily Bridges, who told ITV News the ruling made her feel as though she has a “target on her back.” Duffield acknowledged this sentiment was “really unfair,” but stood by her view that trans women should not compete in women’s sports categories. “When Emily wasn't competing against women, she didn't have as much success. And I think that's where women have always felt that biological men, or born men, coming into women's sports categories disadvantage biological women hugely,” she said. She also added that she would continue to respect Bridges' pronouns. During Prime Minister’s Questions, Duffield’s name was raised by Kemi Badenoch, who called on the PM to apologise to her following the court ruling. Duffield agreed with Badenoch’s description that she was “hounded out” and said she appreciated the way the Leader of the Opposition had approached the issue, in contrast to what she described as the PM’s “robotic” delivery and lack of “deep empathy.” Starmer avoided offering an apology and instead emphasized the need for respectful discourse. “My approach will be to support the ruling, to protect single-sex spaces and treat everybody with dignity and respect, and I believe there’s a consensus in this House and the country for that approach,” he told MPs. The prime minister’s official spokesman later added, “The PM has welcomed the court judgment as a welcome step forward in providing clarity in this area. He does want this debate to be conducted with care and compassion, for everyone to be treated with dignity and respect,” and condemned death threats against the women who brought the case, calling them “completely unacceptable.” Duffield’s resignation letter last year cited multiple reasons for her departure, including what she described as a “freebies” scandal, nepotism, and what she called the prime minister’s “cruel and unnecessary” policies. But the issue of gender identity and her exclusion from conversations within the party were clearly at the heart of her disillusionment. She concluded she was only “a little” surprised that Starmer had changed his stance again, adding, “But he's changed his mind a few times so not really no.” Related Topics: London Marathon Upholds Trans Inclusivity Despite Supreme Court Ruling Starmer U-turns on Gender Identity Following Supreme Court Ruling UK Supreme Court Rules ‘Woman’ Means Biological Female, in Landmark Decision Supreme Court Ruling Sparks Protests Wave of Threats and Backlash Amid Gender Rights Debate Adpated by ASEAN Now from ITV 2025-04-26 -
0
Rising Violence in UK Prisons Sparks Urgent Security Review after terrorist attacked guards
A surge in violence within the high-security prison where the brother of the Manchester Arena bomber attacked guards has triggered a sweeping response from the UK government, with Justice Secretary Shabana Mahmood announcing new protective measures for prison staff, including the trial use of Tasers. HMP Frankland in Durham, the facility where terrorist Hashem Abedi launched a brutal attack on three prison officers using homemade knives and hot oil, has now recorded its highest rate of violence in nearly a decade. According to new Ministry of Justice figures, the monthly rate of assaults at the prison has climbed to 183.8 per 1,000 inmates—up from 169.5 last year and the highest since at least 2016. This spike comes amid a broader crisis within the prison system in England and Wales. A total of 10,605 assaults on staff were recorded across the prison estate in the past year, marking a 15 per cent rise from 2023 and setting a new record high. The violence has prompted union officials representing prison officers to meet with the Justice Secretary to demand enhanced security for frontline staff. In response, Ms Mahmood announced several immediate measures, including a trial deployment of Tasers to officers working in high-security prisons. She also ordered a snap review into the use of stab vests and announced that access to kitchens would be suspended for offenders housed in separation units, where the most dangerous inmates are typically held. Hashem Abedi, who is serving a life sentence for his role in the 2017 Manchester Arena bombing that killed 22 people, has since been transferred to HMP Belmarsh in south London following his attack on Frankland staff. The newly released MoJ data paints a disturbing picture of life inside Frankland. In the most recent reporting period, there were 59 assaults on staff, including four classified as serious. That followed 60 similar incidents the year before—double the levels recorded in 2019. Additionally, 107 prisoner-on-prisoner assaults were documented, the highest number on record, up from 83 last year. Eleven of those were deemed serious. Last year, Frankland’s Independent Monitoring Board warned that both staff and inmate safety was being compromised by an outdated CCTV system riddled with blind spots. The board also highlighted escalating tensions on the prison wings, citing increased discoveries of makeshift weapons and contraband drugs as key contributors. Many of the weapons, it noted, had been crafted from common items such as wood, pieces of furniture, and pens. While Frankland has drawn particular scrutiny, it is far from alone in experiencing rising violence. HMP Brinsford in Featherstone near Wolverhampton had the highest recorded monthly assault rate, with 928 incidents per 1,000 prisoners—nearly one per inmate. This was closely followed by HMP Styal in Wilmslow (864) and HMP Bedford (841). HMP Wandsworth topped the list for individual assaults on staff, with 386 incidents so far this year, including 27 serious attacks. A Ministry of Justice spokesperson acknowledged the gravity of the situation, stating, “These statistics once again lay bare the extent of the crisis facing our prisons – with levels of violence, assaults on staff and self-harm far too high.” They added, “We will do whatever we can to protect our hard-working staff. The Lord Chancellor has announced a review into protective body armour and a trial of Tasers in jails to better respond to serious incidents.” However, they also emphasized the need for systemic change, saying, “It is clear fundamental change is needed, which is why we’re also reforming our jails so they create better citizens, not better criminals.” Adpated by ASEAN Now from The Telegraph 2025-04-26 -
0
ICC Appeals Judges Reopen Jurisdiction Debate in Israeli Arrest Warrant Case
ICC Appeals Judges Reopen Jurisdiction Debate in Israeli Arrest Warrant Case In a significant development at The Hague, the Appeals Chamber of the International Criminal Court (ICC) on Thursday ordered a lower court panel to reconsider Israel’s legal objections to the court’s jurisdiction in the case involving arrest warrants against two top Israeli officials. This decision represents a temporary procedural win for Israel and reopens a critical debate over the court’s authority to prosecute alleged crimes committed during the ongoing Gaza conflict. The appeal stems from a controversial move last year when ICC Prosecutor Karim Khan requested arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defence Minister Yoav Gallant. The warrants were based on allegations of war crimes and crimes against humanity in relation to the Israeli military’s actions in Gaza. Both Israeli and Palestinian leaders have rejected the allegations outright, questioning the legitimacy and impartiality of the prosecutor's actions. The Appeals Chamber ruled that the Pre-Trial Chamber had failed to adequately consider Israel’s jurisdictional objections before allowing the case to proceed. “The Appeals Chamber therefore reversed the decision and remanded the matter to the Pre-Trial Chamber for a new ruling on the substance of Israel's challenge to the jurisdiction of the Court,” the judges said in their statement. Israel has maintained that the ICC lacks jurisdiction over its nationals, arguing that Palestine is not a sovereign state and therefore not qualified to delegate jurisdiction to the court. Israel, which is not a member of the ICC, has long contended that the court does not have the authority to investigate its internal military and political affairs. The Appeals Chamber appeared to agree that Israel’s legal challenge deserved a more thorough review. It said the lower chamber had not sufficiently addressed Israel's claim that it has the right to dispute the court's jurisdiction before any action on arrest warrants is taken. This aspect, according to the ruling, must now be fully considered by the Pre-Trial Chamber. In response to the ruling, the office of the ICC Prosecutor issued a brief statement, noting that it was reviewing the decision but offering no additional commentary at this time. The court's ruling does not annul the arrest warrants but puts a pause on their progression while the jurisdictional challenge is revisited. The outcome of this renewed judicial scrutiny could have far-reaching implications for the ICC’s authority in politically charged conflicts, particularly when the states involved dispute the court’s legitimacy. As the legal battle continues, both Israeli and Palestinian representatives remain deeply critical of the ICC's involvement. Each side has accused the court and its prosecutor of political bias and overreach. With this new ruling, the ICC must now walk a delicate line between asserting its mandate to prosecute grave crimes and addressing complex questions of legal jurisdiction and state sovereignty. Related Topics: ICC Issues Arrest Warrants for Benjamin Netanyahu and Yoav Gallant Over Alleged War Crimes ICC Prosecutor Karim Khan Faces Retaliation Allegations Amid Misconduct Probe Trump Signs Executive Order Sanctioning ICC calls it 'illegitimate' Boris Johnson Accuses Starmer of Aligning with Hamas Over ICC Netanyahu Arrest Warrant Adpated by ASEAN Now from Reuters 2025-04-26 -
0
Transgender Inmate Sues Trump, Claims His Rhetoric Incited Prison Rapes
Transgender Inmate Sues Trump, Claims His Rhetoric Incited Prison Assaults A transgender inmate in Indiana has filed a lawsuit against former President Donald Trump, alleging that his rhetoric incited a wave of sexual violence against her while incarcerated. Autumn Cordellionè, who was born Jonathan C. Richardson and is serving a 55-year sentence for the 2001 killing of her 11-month-old stepdaughter, claims that Trump's "transphobic and extremist" statements have emboldened other prisoners and staff to target her. In a handwritten legal complaint, Cordellionè alleged that she was raped and assaulted multiple times at the Westville Correctional Facility (WCA), an all-male prison where she was transferred after initially being held in protective custody at New Castle Correctional Facility. According to her account, the abuse began after she began transitioning in 2020 by taking hormones and testosterone blockers following a diagnosis of gender dysphoria. Cordellionè stated that she was subjected to brutal treatment both by fellow inmates and prison staff. In one particularly harrowing claim, she recounted an inmate telling her, “Trump’s president now, and we won’t even get in trouble for f****** you trannies up. We’re patriots and even if you tell on us, Trump will pardon us and probably give us a medal.” She also alleges that two other attackers made similar remarks during assaults. Her lawsuit seeks $3.5 million in damages from Trump personally. Cordellionè claims that when she attempted to report the abuse, she was met with hostility from prison officials. One staff member allegedly told her, “I’ve seen your case on the news, and I personally don’t think us tax payers should have to pay for your surgery. God doesn’t approve of transgenders and gays, so what do you expect to happen when you dress like a woman and have t*** in a male facility.” The prison official was reportedly referencing a previous legal case Cordellionè filed to challenge a state law prohibiting taxpayer-funded gender-affirming surgery for inmates. As part of that case, she argued that the denial of surgery worsened her gender dysphoria and mental health, including self-harm and suicide attempts. A federal court ultimately ordered the Indiana Department of Corrections to provide sex reassignment surgery for her “at the earliest opportunity.” Cordellionè’s criminal past continues to weigh heavily on the public perception of her legal battles. In September 2001, she was convicted of murdering her infant stepdaughter while the child’s mother was away. Initially, she claimed to have discovered the baby with vomit in her mouth, but later admitted she had tried to calm the child and ultimately strangled her. At one point, Cordellionè allegedly told a corrections officer, “Well all I know is I killed the little f**king b*tch.” She was sentenced to 55 years in prison in 2002. Her latest lawsuit also references other alleged incidents of discrimination. She previously filed a complaint against the prison chaplain, claiming she was not allowed to wear a hijab despite identifying as a Muslim woman. Responding to the recent claims, a White House spokesperson commented, “President Trump has vowed to defend biological women from gender ideology extremism and restore biological truth to the Federal government.” Cordellionè’s case is likely to reignite debates around transgender rights in prison systems, particularly in relation to housing assignments, medical care, and the influence of political discourse on institutional treatment. Whether her claims will gain traction in court remains to be seen, but the legal action adds another layer to the ongoing and controversial discussion surrounding gender identity, incarceration, and justice in America. Adpated by ASEAN Now from Daily Mail 2025-04-26
-
-
Popular in The Pub
-
-
Recommended Posts