.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png.8488ab72b8bb2e508209bfe3211b6e08.png)
Girl i met on thaifriendly is giving me handouts
-
Recently Browsing 0 members
- No registered users viewing this page.
-
Topics
-
-
Popular Contributors
-
Latest posts...
-
7
Tour Bus Crashes Off Road in Surat Thani – Multiple Injuries, Including Foreign Tourists
When a family member of an official dies. -
210
Wall Street plummets ,trillions lost
I wrote a nasty letter to my rep about this mess. -
0
Tony Blair Cautions Starmer Against Retaliation Over Trump Tariffs
Tony Blair Cautions Starmer Against Retaliation Over Trump Tariffs Former Prime Minister Tony Blair has advised Labour leader and current Prime Minister Keir Starmer not to retaliate against newly imposed U.S. tariffs, warning that a tit-for-tat response would not be in Britain’s best interest. Speaking to students at King's College London, Blair commended Starmer for maintaining a calm and measured approach after President Donald Trump announced a 10 percent tariff on all British exports to the United States. “I don’t think it is in the U.K.’s best interest to retaliate,” Blair said, as first reported by The Independent. He applauded what he described as Starmer’s “cool heads” strategy, suggesting that avoiding escalation would better serve the long-term health of U.K.-U.S. relations. The British government has confirmed it is working to secure an economic agreement with Washington that could lead to the removal of the tariffs. Treasury Minister James Murray acknowledged on Sky News that discussions with businesses were ongoing to identify areas where the tariffs would cause the least damage to British firms. “We want to involve businesses in that decision, and we need to be clear that we keep all options on the table,” Murray said. “We reserve the right to retaliate, but we want a deal, and our full focus is on that.” In remarks made Thursday, President Trump claimed that Starmer had responded positively to the U.K.'s exemption from a harsher 20 percent tariff, which was instead applied to goods from the European Union. “We have a very good dialogue,” Trump said. “I think he was very happy about how we treated them with tariffs.” Blair, who led Britain from 1997 to 2007 and maintained a close relationship with Republican President George W. Bush, also expressed unease over Trump’s apparent wavering support for NATO. Reflecting on the 1990s conflict in Kosovo, Blair recalled the pivotal role of American military power and emphasized the importance of transatlantic cooperation. “It became clear to me that we could never have done it without the Americans,” he said. “I thought, ‘This is crazy — what happens if the Americans decide they don’t want to be part of it?’” According to Blair, efforts to encourage greater European defense contributions were quickly entangled in political debates around Euroskepticism, hindering long-term progress. Blair’s comments appear aimed at preserving the so-called "special relationship" between London and Washington—a diplomatic priority throughout his premiership—and come at a moment of economic tension and political recalibration. As Starmer navigates a delicate balancing act between defending British economic interests and maintaining transatlantic goodwill, Blair’s message is clear: confrontation may feel justified, but diplomacy is likely the wiser path. Based on a report by Politico 2025-04-05 -
0
Watch: Fencer Disqualified After Protesting Match Against Transgender Opponent
Fencer Disqualified After Protesting Match Against Transgender Opponent Stephanie Turner, a fencer representing the Fencing Academy of Philadelphia, was disqualified from competition after she refused to face transgender athlete Redmond Sullivan during a Division 1A Women’s Foil event at the Cherry Blossom tournament held at the University of Maryland. Turner took a knee in protest before the match, resulting in her receiving a black card — a sanction typically reserved for severe breaches of conduct or unsportsmanlike behavior. Having completed four matches that day, Turner found herself set to face Sullivan in the next round. Turner later explained her decision to protest rather than compete, stating, “I saw that I was going to be in a pool with Redmond, and from there I said, ‘OK, let’s do it. I’m going to take the knee.’” She added, “I knew what I had to do because USA Fencing had not been listening to women’s objections. I took a knee immediately at that point.” Turner recounted that Sullivan was unaware of her intentions and initially believed something was wrong. “Redmond was under the impression that I was going to start fencing. So when I took the knee, I looked at the ref and I said: ‘I’m sorry, I cannot do this. I am a woman, and this is a man, and this is a women’s tournament. And I will not fence this individual.’” She continued, “Redmond didn’t hear me, and he comes up to me, and he thinks that I may be hurt, or he doesn’t understand what’s happening. He asks: ‘Are you OK?’ And I said: ‘I’m sorry. I have much love and respect for you, but I will not fence you.’” Sullivan, who had previously competed in the men’s division, had transitioned and joined Wagner College’s women’s fencing team. Following the incident, USA Fencing publicly supported Sullivan, reaffirming its commitment to its transgender athlete policy introduced in 2023. In a statement, USA Fencing said, “USA Fencing enacted our current transgender and non-binary athlete policy in 2023. The policy was designed to expand access to the sport of fencing and create inclusive, safe spaces. The policy is based on the principle that everyone should have the ability to participate in sports and was based upon the research available of the day.” The organization acknowledged the ongoing debate, stating, “We understand that the conversation on equity and inclusion pertaining to transgender participation in sport is evolving. USA Fencing will always err on the side of inclusion, and we’re committed to amending the policy as more relevant evidence-based research emerges, or as policy changes take effect in the wider Olympic and Paralympic movement.” USA Fencing clarified that Turner’s disqualification was not based on her personal views but on the violation of competition rules. “In the case of Stephanie Turner, her disqualification was not related to any personal statement but was merely the direct result of her decision to decline to fence an eligible opponent, which the FIE [International Fencing Federation] rules clearly prohibit.” The statement concluded, “USA Fencing is obligated to follow the letter of those rules and ensure that participants respect the standards set at the international level. We remain committed to inclusivity within our sport while also upholding every requirement dictated by our governing body.” The incident drew sharp criticism from tennis legend Martina Navratilova, who took to social media to denounce USA Fencing’s actions. “This is what happens when female athletes protest! Anyone here still thinks this is fair??? I am fuming... and shame on @USAFencing, shame on you for doing this. How dare you throw women under the gender bulls--- bus!!!” Based on a report by The Telegraph 2025-04-05 -
0
ICC Prosecutor Karim Khan Faces Retaliation Allegations Amid Misconduct Probe
ICC Prosecutor Karim Khan Faces Retaliation Allegations Amid Misconduct Probe International Criminal Court (ICC) Chief Prosecutor Karim Khan is under increased scrutiny as United Nations investigators expand their inquiry into allegations of sexual misconduct to include accusations of retaliation against whistleblowers within his office. According to five sources briefed on the investigation, the UN’s Office of Internal Oversight Services (OIOS) is examining whether Khan demoted or otherwise punished staff who either reported the original allegations or expressed concern over how the situation was handled. Three sources with direct knowledge of the probe revealed that at least four staff members were demoted by Khan following their involvement in the internal reporting of misconduct or criticism of his response. All five sources requested anonymity, citing fears of reprisals. The original allegations emerged last October, involving accusations of sexual misconduct against a female lawyer who reported directly to Khan. While the investigation into the alleged misconduct continues, the new focus on potential retaliatory behavior significantly raises the stakes for the prosecutor, who is at the center of some of the most politically sensitive legal cases in the world today. Khan’s legal team, Carter-Ruck, firmly rejected the accusations in a written statement. “We refer you to what our client has said previously in this regard, including his firm denials. You will appreciate that our client cannot be expected to provide a running commentary on these matters,” the law firm said. “He has not engaged in sexual misconduct of any kind and nor, to be clear, has he engaged in any ‘retaliatory behavior’ as alleged.” Despite the ongoing investigation, Khan has vowed to remain in his role and continue his work. He has previously described the timing of the original complaint as coinciding with a disinformation campaign aimed at undermining the ICC. Under his leadership, the court has launched or advanced high-profile investigations into global figures including Russian President Vladimir Putin and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. The ICC has issued an arrest warrant for Putin over the alleged deportation of Ukrainian children during the war in Ukraine. A separate warrant for Netanyahu accuses him of war crimes in Gaza. Both Russia and Israel deny the charges and reject the legitimacy of the ICC’s jurisdiction, as neither country is a member of the court. The ICC’s investigation into Israel has provoked international backlash, particularly from the United States, which has imposed sanctions on Khan. The court’s president has warned that such actions threaten the very independence and functionality of the ICC. Meanwhile, Hungary announced its withdrawal from the court just as it welcomed Netanyahu for a state visit, signaling broader geopolitical consequences tied to Khan’s prosecutions. Although the UN investigation has not yet resulted in Khan being formally questioned, the ongoing inquiry by the OIOS is expected to delve deeper into both the misconduct and retaliation claims. The ICC and OIOS declined to comment on the matter, and the court’s governing body stated it would not release further information until the investigation concludes. Based on a report by Reuters 2025-04-05 Related topic: UN to Lead Investigation into Sexual Misconduct Allegations Against ICC Prosecutor -
0
UK Foreign Secretary David Lammy Spent Over £1 Million on Private Jets in 3 months
Labour Under Fire as Foreign Secretary David Lammy Spends Over £1 Million on Private Jets in Three Months David Lammy, the Foreign Secretary, has come under scrutiny after revelations that he spent more than £1 million on private jet travel in a single quarter, despite Labour’s earlier promises to crack down on the use of expensive ministerial flights. The significant expenditure, totalling £1.2 million between October and December 2024, places the spotlight on the party’s commitment to frugality and transparency while raising questions about potential hypocrisy. According to a report by the Guido Fawkes political blog, the bulk of Lammy’s travel expenses—around £1.1 million—were for private jet usage. This equates to more than £14,000 per day over the three-month period, a figure that has prompted criticism given Labour’s prior stance on the use of such aircraft by government officials. Although there is no indication that Mr. Lammy’s use of private jets deviates from the practices of previous foreign secretaries, the revelation comes at a politically sensitive moment. Labour ministers, including some of Lammy’s most senior colleagues, have previously condemned the Conservative Party for similar spending. Rachel Reeves, now serving as Chancellor, stated in October 2023 that a Labour government would “crack down on Tory ministers’ private jet habit.” At the time, she pledged that her party would “enforce the ministerial code on the use of private planes and save millions of pounds for taxpayers in the process.” Similarly, Angela Rayner, now Deputy Prime Minister, criticised former foreign secretary Liz Truss for relying on private jets, claiming such travel habits revealed “exactly quite how little respect this Conservative government has for taxpayers’ money.” The current situation has left Labour open to accusations of double standards. The Conservative Party faced similar scrutiny when former Prime Minister Rishi Sunak used private jets and helicopters during his general election campaign. At the time, Labour lambasted Sunak as being “out of touch” with the public. Following the recent revelations, Andrew Murrison, a former Conservative minister, described the actions of “newly-minted ministers” like Lammy as “jaw-dropping” and accused them of hypocrisy for “hopping on and off” private jets shortly after taking office. Mr. Lammy was reportedly under fire for his use of a private plane to travel to New Delhi within weeks of his appointment. In response to mounting criticism, Lucy Powell, Leader of the Commons, remarked: “I’m glad he raises that point because we’re actually having a debate this afternoon on trust in politicians and politics, as this Government brings forward its manifesto commitment to take action on the sleaze and scandal and cronyism we saw in the last Parliament.” A spokesperson for the Foreign Office defended Lammy’s travel expenses, stating, “At a time of significant global upheaval, it is vital that the Foreign Secretary can travel abroad – often at very short notice – to defend and champion the UK’s interests. Ministerial travel plans are decided with consideration of the best use of a minister’s time and overhead costs, in line with established practice by successive governments. These costs are consistent with his predecessors in the previous government. This Foreign Secretary remains committed to ensuring the most cost-effective way of travel, delivering best value for money for the taxpayer.” The controversy underscores the challenges facing Labour as it navigates the responsibilities of government while holding on to promises made in opposition. Based on a report by The Telegraph 2025-04-05
-
-
Popular in The Pub
-
-
Recommended Posts