Ƶ

Trump calls Musk’s formation of new party ‘ridiculous’ and confusing

Update U.S. President Donald Trump and Elon Musk attend a press conference in the Oval Office of the White House in Washington, D.C., U.S., May 30, 2025. (REUTERS)
U.S. President Donald Trump and Elon Musk attend a press conference in the Oval Office of the White House in Washington, D.C., U.S., May 30, 2025. (REUTERS)
Short Url
Updated 07 July 2025

Trump calls Musk’s formation of new party ‘ridiculous’ and confusing

Trump calls Musk’s formation of new party ‘ridiculous’ and confusing
  • Musk said his “America Party” is needed to fight the Republican/Democrat Uniparty, which he blamed for the country's worsening debt crisis
  • Trump's response: Musk unhappy with new US tax-cut and spending measure, which takes away green-energy credits for Tesla’s electric vehicles

WASHINGTON: President Donald Trump called Elon Musk’s plans to form a new political party “ridiculous,” saying Musk could have fun with his new project but that the United States functions best under a two-party system.
A day after Musk escalated his feud with Trump and announced the formation of a new US political party, the Republican president was asked about it before boarding Air Force One in Morristown, New Jersey, as he returned to Washington upon visiting his nearby golf club.
“I think it’s ridiculous to start a third party. We have a tremendous success with the Republican Party. The Democrats have lost their way, but it’s always been a two-party system, and I think starting a third party just adds to confusion,” Trump told reporters. “It really seems to have been developed for two parties. Third parties have never worked, so he can have fun with it, but I think it’s ridiculous.”
Musk announced on Saturday that he is establishing the “America Party” in response to Trump’s tax-cut and spending bill, which Musk said would bankrupt the country.
"What the heck was the point of @DOGE if he’s just going to increase the debt by $5 trillion??" Musk posted on his X platform.

In response, investment firm Azoria Partners, which had planned to launch a fund tied to Musk’s electric automaker Tesla , said it was delaying the venture because the party’s creation posed “a conflict with his full-time responsibilities as CEO.”
Musk, who served as a top adviser to Trump on downsizing and reshaping the federal government during the first few months of his presidency, said his new party would in next year’s midterm elections look to unseat Republican lawmakers in Congress who backed the sweeping measure known as the “big, beautiful bill.”

Speaking on the CNN program “State of the Union” on Sunday, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said the boards of directors at Musk’s companies — Tesla and rocket firm SpaceX — probably would prefer him to stay out of politics.
“I imagine that those boards of directors did not like this announcement yesterday (Saturday) and will be encouraging him to focus on his business activities, not his political activities,” Bessent said.
Musk spent millions of dollars underwriting Trump’s 2024 re-election effort and, for a time, regularly showed up at the president’s side in the White House Oval Office and elsewhere. Their disagreement over the spending bill led to a falling out that Musk briefly tried unsuccessfully to repair.
The bill, which cuts taxes and ramps up spending on defense and border security, passed last week on party-line votes in both chambers of Congress. Critics have said it will damage the US economy by significantly adding to the federal budget deficit.
Trump has said Musk is unhappy because the measure, which Trump signed into law on Friday, takes away green-energy credits for Tesla’s electric vehicles. The president has threatened to pull billions of dollars Tesla and SpaceX receive in government contracts and subsidies in response to Musk’s criticism.

INVESTOR REBUKE
Musk’s announcement of a new party immediately brought a rebuke from Azoria Partners, which said on Saturday it will postpone the listing of its Azoria Tesla Convexity exchange-traded fund. Azoria was set to launch the Tesla ETF this week.
Azoria CEO James Fishback posted on X several critical comments about the new party and reiterated his support for Trump.
“I encourage the Board to meet immediately and ask Elon to clarify his political ambitions and evaluate whether they are compatible with his full-time obligations to Tesla as CEO,” Fishback said.
On Sunday, Fishback added on X, “Elon left us with no other choice.”
The Democratic Party appeared to welcome the rift between Trump and Musk.
“Trump’s MAGA party is splitting at the seams in the wake of his nightmare budget bill,” said Abhi Rahman, a spokesperson for the Democratic National Committee. “Republicans are waking up and facing the reality that they just signed their own pink slips, and are desperate for someone else to blame.”


Pakistan, Afghanistan talks begin in Qatar: Taliban

Pakistan, Afghanistan talks begin in Qatar: Taliban
Updated 17 sec ago

Pakistan, Afghanistan talks begin in Qatar: Taliban

Pakistan, Afghanistan talks begin in Qatar: Taliban
  • Both Akhund and Pakistan Prime Minister Muhammad Shehbaz Sharif have spoken with Anwar, who appears to be acting as a mediator in the crisis and “emphasized the need to resolve the issue through diplomatic means,” according to the Taliban readout

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan: Pakistani and Afghan officials began talks in Qatar on Saturday to defuse tensions, a senior Taliban official said, after at least 10 people were killed in Pakistani airstrikes following a brief truce.
Kabul had accused Islamabad of violating a 48-hour ceasefire, which briefly put a stop to nearly a week of cross-border clashes that killed dozens of troops and civilians on both sides.
Security sources in Islamabad said the latest strikes in the Afghan border areas targeted a militant group linked to the Pakistani Taliban, in retaliation for an attack on Pakistani paramilitary troops.
Afghanistan’s Prime Minister Hassan Akhund said “the discussions are indeed underway,” Taliban spokesman Zabihullah Mujahid said on X, in a readout of Akhund’s talks with Malaysian Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim.
Both Akhund and Pakistan Prime Minister Muhammad Shehbaz Sharif have spoken with Anwar, who appears to be acting as a mediator in the crisis and “emphasized the need to resolve the issue through diplomatic means,” according to the Taliban readout.
Pakistan’s foreign ministry said the talks in Doha aimed to “end cross-border terrorism against Pakistan emanating from Afghanistan and restore peace and stability along the Pak-Afghan border.”
Islamabad’s delegation includes Defense Minister Khawaja Asif and intelligence chief General Asim Malik, state TV reported.
The Afghan delegation was being headed by defense chief Mohammad Yaqoob, the Taliban defense ministry said on X.
Qatar has not commented on its role as host, though Pakistan’s foreign ministry thanked Doha for its “mediation efforts.”

- ‘Still afraid’ -

Security issues are at the heart of the tensions, with Pakistan accusing Afghanistan of sheltering militant groups led by the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) — a claim Kabul denies.
The cross-border violence flared on October 11, days after explosions rocked Kabul during an unprecedented visit by the Taliban’s foreign minister Amir Muttaqi to India, Pakistan’s rival.
The Taliban then launched a deadly offensive along parts of its southern border with Pakistan, prompting Islamabad to vow a strong response.
Ahead of the talks, a senior Taliban official told AFP that Pakistan had bombed three locations in Paktika province late Friday, and warned that Kabul would retaliate.
A hospital official in Paktika told AFP that 10 civilians, including two children, were killed and 12 others wounded. Three cricket players were among the dead.
Zabihullah, the Taliban spokesman, wrote on X that their forces had been ordered to hold fire “to maintain the dignity and integrity of its negotiating team.”
Saadullah Torjan, a minister in Spin Boldak in Afghanistan’s south, said: “For now, the situation is returning to normal.”
“But there is still a state of war and people are afraid.”
Iran, a neighbor to both countries, offered to help defuse tensions.
In a call between the Iranian and Afghan foreign ministers, Tehran warned that the tensions “threaten to undermine the stability of the entire region,” according to state news agency IRNA.
 

 


Protest hits Rome over Libya migrant deal after boat wreck

Protest hits Rome over Libya migrant deal after boat wreck
Updated 18 October 2025

Protest hits Rome over Libya migrant deal after boat wreck

Protest hits Rome over Libya migrant deal after boat wreck
  • In return, Libya is expected to help stem the departure of migrants to Italy or return those already at sea back to Libya
  • Fratini has been helping migrants sue Italy after they were seized in the Mediterranean by Libya and pushed back to detention centers there.

ROME: Migrants and rights activists protested in Rome Saturday against Italy’s migrant deal with Libya, a day after some 20 people were feared dead in the latest boat wreck in the Mediterranean.
Under a controversial 2017 deal renewed under Prime Minister Georgia Meloni’s hard-right government, Italy funds and trains the Libyan coast guard.
In return, Libya is expected to help stem the departure of migrants to Italy or return those already at sea back to Libya. That agreement is up for renewal next month.
During the protest, dozens of migrants from Sub-Saharan Africa recounted what they endured in Libya, and a minute of silence was held for those who died trying to cross the Mediterranean.
Hundreds of people attended the event, including activist Sarita Fratini.
“In the central Mediterranean, there is a line called the line of death,” Fratini told AFP.
“In the Libyan area, you get captured. In the north, you die because there is no one there.”
Fratini has been helping migrants sue Italy after they were seized in the Mediterranean by Libya and pushed back to detention centers there.
Rights activists and former detainees have denounced such centers for abuse, torture and other crimes.

- ‘Total anguish’ -

Irene Dea, 46, from Ivory Coast, told AFP she had tried to reach Europe three times by boat, with 12 people dying in the Mediterranean on her first attempt.
After Libyan forces pushed back her boat, she spent six months at the notorious Az-Zawiyah detention center west of Tripoli.
“I saw women being raped with my own eyes” there, she said. “You don’t eat... it was total anguish.”
NGOs have reported increasing episodes in recent months of Libya’s coast guard shooting at boats carrying migrants in the Mediterranean.
Last week, the Alarm Phone charity, which runs a hotline for migrants stranded in the Mediterranean, reported a fatal shooting at a boat it said was carrying 113 migrants southeast of Malta.
Italy’s coast guard also said migrants it subsequently rescued said they had been shot at.
If boats are not returned to Libya, migrants still have to survive the journey across the Mediterranean.
That crossing has cost the lives of more than 1,000 people so far this year, according to the International Organization for Migration.

- Rescue operation criticized -

On Friday, Italy’s coast guard said it was searching for the survivors of a wrecked vessel carrying about 30 people in the search and a rescue area of Malta, some 50 miles southeast of Lampedusa.
It said the coast guard had rescued seven people and another four were picked up by a nearby merchant ship.
One body was recovered, with Italian and Maltese patrol vessels and Italian planes taking part in the search.
The Italian coordinator for UNICEF, Nicola Dell’Arciprete, told AGI news agency that a pregnant woman had died and “several children are reported missing.”
He said four children traveling alone were among the survivors, who told authorities the small fiberglass boat had left Al Khums, Libya, before capsizing after two days at sea.
Sea-Watch International, which operates migrant rescue boats, criticized the rescue operation.
“Italy and Malta knew about the boat since yesterday afternoon, thanks to Alarm Phone, but did not send help until it was too late,” it said in a social media post Saturday.
Alarm Phone also said it had signalled the boat carrying about 35 people to the authorities, but “they failed to act.
“The boat capsized, we fear about 20 deaths. We cannot express our anger at yet another group consciously being left to die,” wrote Alarm Phone on social media.


Portuguese parliament approves bill banning face coverings in public

Portuguese parliament approves bill banning face coverings in public
Updated 18 October 2025

Portuguese parliament approves bill banning face coverings in public

Portuguese parliament approves bill banning face coverings in public
  • Measure proposed by far-right Chega party and would prohibit coverings such as burqas and niqabs being worn in most public places

MADRID: Portugal’s parliament on Friday approved a bill banning face veils worn for “gender or religious” reasons in public, in a move seen as targeting the face coverings worn by some Muslim women.

The measure was proposed by the far-right Chega party and would prohibit coverings such as burqas — a full-body garment that covers a woman from head to foot — and niqabs — the full-face Islamic veil with space around the eyes — from being worn in most public places. Face veils would still be allowed in airplanes, diplomatic premises and places of worship.

The bill stipulates fines for those wearing face veils in public ranging between 200 euros and 4,000 euros ($234 and $4,669).

President Marcelo Rebelo de Sousa still has to approve the bill. He could veto it or send it to the Constitutional Court for review.

If signed into law, Portugal would join a number of European countries such as Austria, France, Belgium and the Netherlands who have full or partial bans on face and head coverings.

Not many women in Portugal wear such coverings, but the issue of Islamic veils has generated controversy similar to other European countries.

Chega cited France and other European Union countries’ rationales for banning face coverings commonly worn by Muslim women. The far-right Portuguese party received support for the bill from center-right parties.

In its bill, Chega said that hiding the face subjects individuals — especially women — “to situations of exclusion and inferiority” and was incompatible with principles such as “liberty, equality and human dignity.”

Lawmakers from left-leaning parties disagreed.

“This initiative is used solely to target foreigners, those who have a different faith,” said center-left Socialist Party lawmaker Pedro Delgado Alves whose party voted against the bill.

He said that while no woman should be forced to wear a veil, the far-right party’s approach was wrong.


UK Foreign Office staff promoted peer’s Israel trip despite downgrading of ties

UK Foreign Office staff promoted peer’s Israel trip despite downgrading of ties
Updated 18 October 2025

UK Foreign Office staff promoted peer’s Israel trip despite downgrading of ties

UK Foreign Office staff promoted peer’s Israel trip despite downgrading of ties
  • Former foreign secretary David Lammy had suspended trade talks days before visit by Ian Austin
  • Foreign Office pushed for the trip to go ahead in apparent contradiction of policy

LONDON: The UK Foreign Office recommended that David Lammy, the country’s foreign secretary at the time, endorse a trade mission to Israel in late May despite his earlier criticism of Tel Aviv’s conduct in Gaza.

Lammy had also suspended trade talks with Israel, yet Foreign Office staffers insisted that ministers should support the visit by Ian Austin, a pro-Israel peer, .

Austin’s trip went ahead despite lacking support from ministers or advisers as a result of bureaucratic dysfunction. Officials had earlier requested ministerial advice over the visit.

The Foreign Office said that Austin would not meet any Israeli government representatives while in the country, yet images show the peer meeting top trade officials on two occasions.

At a reception at the British Embassy attended by Austin, Israeli Minister Yoav Kisch also delivered a speech.

Lammy had suspended talks with Israel on a free trade agreement on May 20.

Despite this, a Foreign Office staffer, in a submission on the visit, said: “(British Embassy) Tel Aviv report that the business community in Israel are agitated by yesterday’s announcement. If we were to turn off this visit now, cancelling several visits and meetings, it would send a bad signal.”

Through the visit, Austin would be able “to explain to Israeli civil society and business … that nothing has changed in our existing trading relationship,” the briefing said, adding: “We recommend the visit goes ahead. Do you agree?”

A source told The Guardian that Lammy did not receive the submission.

On the Israel visit, Austin met officials from Rafael, the arms company that develops parts of the Iron Dome system and Spike missiles, which have been used in drone strikes that killed British aid workers in Gaza.

The British Embassy publicized details of Austin’s visit at the time.

It led to criticism of inconsistencies in foreign policy as it followed Lammy’s sharp rebuke of the Israeli government days earlier.

The apparent discrepancy will raise questions about the UK government’s relationship with Israel and its defense industry.


One scandal too many forces UK monarchy to sideline Prince Andrew

One scandal too many forces UK monarchy to sideline Prince Andrew
Updated 18 October 2025

One scandal too many forces UK monarchy to sideline Prince Andrew

One scandal too many forces UK monarchy to sideline Prince Andrew
  • This week’s revelations demonstrated that Andrew had committed the unforgivable sin of misleading the British public, said Prescott
  • Following Friday’s announcement, Andrew will no longer use his remaining royal titles, including the Duke of York

LONDON: It was one scandal too many.
After emails emerged this week showing that Prince Andrew remained in contact with the convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein longer than he previously admitted, the House of Windsor finally moved to insulate the monarchy from years of tawdry headlines about Andrew’s dodgy friends and suspicious business deals.
Buckingham Palace on Friday released a statement from Andrew saying that he had agreed to give up use of his last remaining royal titles so that continued allegations about him “don’t distract from the work of His Majesty.”
This week’s revelations demonstrated that Andrew had committed the unforgivable sin of misleading the British public, said Craig Prescott, an expert on the monarchy and constitutional law at Royal Holloway University of London.
“To say something which is proven not to be true, I think, is the straw that broke the camel’s back,’’ he said.
Signs of a new direction
The move comes as Charles, who is 76 and undergoing treatment for an undisclosed form of cancer, works to ensure the long-term stability of the monarchy under his son and heir Prince William.
William recently gave an interview in which he set out his vision for the monarchy, saying that the institution needed to change to make sure that it is a force for good.
“In some ways, Prince Andrew has been the exact opposite of that,” Prescott said. “And there is no space for that in the modern monarchy.”
Andrew, 65, is the second son of the late Queen Elizabeth II. He spent more than 20 years as an officer in the Royal Navy before leaving to take up his royal duties in 2001.
Following Friday’s announcement, Andrew will no longer use his remaining royal titles, including the Duke of York, though he technically retains them. Formally stripping him of those titles would be a time-consuming process requiring an act of Parliament.
A long time coming
Andrew’s banishment completes a process that began in November 2019, when he gave up all of his public duties and charity roles.
That was triggered by a disastrous interview Andrew gave to the BBC as he sought to counter media reports about his friendship with Epstein and deny allegations that he had sex with a 17-year-old girl, Virginia Giuffre, who was trafficked by Epstein in 2001. The prince was widely criticized for failing to show empathy for Epstein’s victims and for offering unbelievable explanations for his friendship with the disgraced financier.
The interview also sowed the seeds of this week’s upheaval, when Andrew told the BBC that he had cut off contact with Epstein in December 2010.
British newspapers on Sunday revealed that Andrew wrote an email to Epstein on Feb. 28, 2011. Andrew wrote the note after renewed reporting on the Epstein scandal, telling him they were “in this together” and would “have to rise above it.”
Andrew has recently faced another round of grimy stories as newspapers release excerpts of Giuffre’s posthumous memoir, which will be published on Tuesday. Giuffre died by suicide in April at the age of 41.
Andrew in 2022 reached an out-of-court settlement with Giuffre after she filed a civil suit against him in New York. While he didn’t admit wrongdoing, Andrew did acknowledge Giuffre’s suffering as a victim of sex trafficking.
Front-page fodder for wrong reasons
The prince has been the subject of tabloid stories stretching back to at least 2007, when he sold his house near Windsor Castle for 20 percent over the 15 million pound asking price. The buyer was reported to be Timur Kulibayev, son-in-law of Nursultan Nazarbayev, then-president of Kazakhstan, raising concerns that the deal was an attempt to buy influence in Britain.
Last year, a court case revealed Andrew’s relationship with a businessman and suspected Chinese spy who was barred from the United Kingdom as a threat to national security. Authorities were concerned that the man could have misused his influence over Andrew, according to court documents.
While the palace said Andrew had decided to give up his royal titles, royal commentator Jennie Bond said the king and Prince William exerted “enormous pressure” on him.
“We could say he has fallen on his sword, but I think he’s been pushed onto it,” Bond told the BBC. “I don’t think this is a decision that Andrew, quite an arrogant man — very, very fond of his status — would have willingly made without a lot of pressure.”
Insulating the monarchy at a delicate time
While the cumulative weight of Andrew’s scandals demanded a response from the royal family, this week’s revelations came at a particularly sensitive moment for the king as he prepares for a state visit to the Vatican, where he is expected to pray beside Pope Leo XIV.
The visit is very important to Charles, who has made the bridging of faiths an important part of his “mantra,” said George Gross, an expert on theology and the monarchy at King’s College, London.
“I think this was the speediest, really the quickest way of lowering his status even more without having to go to Parliament,” Gross said. “Even if Parliament would have approved, it takes time.’’
Charles may also have been motivated by a desire to protect the work of Queen Camilla, who has made combating domestic violence one of her signature issues, and the Duchess of Edinburgh, who has sought to combat sexual violence in war zones such as Congo.
The king will hope that this move finally draws a line between Andrew and the rest of the royal family, Prescott said.
“If there are allegations, or further stuff comes out, it will all be on Prince Andrew,” he said. “They’ve severed the connection between Prince Andrew and the monarchy as an institution.”