Social Media

In a chilling development for Sweden’s democratic fabric, employees at the national news channel TV4 were recently advised to avoid wearing clothing or badges identifying their employer in public. This caution stems from escalating threats against the station and its reporters following an investigative report by TV4’s program, *Kalla Fakta* (Cold Facts). The program exposed the far-right Sweden Democrats, the country’s second-largest political party, for allegedly operating a vast network of anonymous social media accounts designed to attack political opponents and the media. Sweden, renowned for its robust democracy and high trust in media and political institutions, now sees its journalists covering domestic politics fearing for their safety. The increased threats represent a significant challenge to the freedom and security that Swedish journalism has long enjoyed. Nationalist "troll farms" have been reported in Sweden before, but this investigation was unprecedented. A TV4 journalist spent a year undercover in the communications department of the Sweden Democrats. The investigation revealed at least 23 anonymous social media accounts operated from within the department, which garnered 27 million views across various platforms in just three months. This suggests a substantial network dedicated to spreading misinformation and ultra-nationalist hate speech. The revelations about these anonymous accounts were significant, but the response from Sweden Democrats leader Jimmie Åkesson was even more alarming. Instead of apologizing, Åkesson launched an aggressive attack on the media, accusing *Kalla Fakta* of being part of a "gigantic, domestic influence operation by the left-liberal establishment" aimed at demoralizing far-right voters ahead of the EU elections. In subsequent interviews, Åkesson ridiculed reporters, using bullying language to undermine their credibility. This marks a dangerous phase for Swedish democracy. By attacking the legitimacy of the news media, the far right is escalating tensions and threatening the future stability of Sweden’s democratic institutions. The conservative coalition government, which relies on the Sweden Democrats for parliamentary support, has responded weakly to the scandal. Prime Minister Ulf Kristersson initially condemned the anonymous accounts but soon resorted to whataboutery, attacking the opposition Social Democrats over an old controversy involving an anonymous blog post from a student wing of the party. This tepid response has emboldened nationalists, with Sweden Democrats MP Josef Fransson praising Kristersson for not taking action against his party and using the term "ljugmedia" (lying media), reminiscent of Goebbels’ Nazi slur "Lügenpresse." Without formal sanctions, the far right continues to operate and expand these anonymous accounts. Åkesson's defiant reactions gained substantial traction on social media, while opposition responses struggled to reach a comparable audience. As Renée DiResta of Stanford Internet Observatory notes, in the current social media-dominated news cycle, "if it trends, it’s true." Among the far-right memes shared by the Sweden Democrats' troll farm are racist and antisemitic content from American hate groups, Holocaust-denying cartoons, pro-Russian propaganda, and deep fakes of political opponents. One employee was placed on leave after being exposed by *Expressen* for expressing support for Putin’s invasion of Crimea in 2014. A particularly disturbing video depicted an animated Åkesson driving a tank through Rinkeby, a Stockholm suburb with a large immigrant population, accompanied by a cartoon frog shooting an automatic weapon. Despite some conservative MPs’ condemnation, Åkesson found the video amusing and dismissed critics as lacking a sense of humor. This tactic of using humor to deflect criticism is well-documented. In 1944, Jean-Paul Sartre wrote about Nazi apologists in France who used humor to intimidate and disconcert their adversaries. The intimidation appears to be effective in Sweden, as a study by the Union of Swedish Journalists revealed that 39% of reporters self-censor to avoid threats and harassment, especially on topics related to racism and immigration. Åsa Wikforss, a philosophy professor at Stockholm University and member of the Swedish Academy, warns, “When democracy’s key players, journalists, researchers and politicians, fall silent, democracy is already in trouble.” The current wave of misinformation and hate speech is not just a local issue but a global one, exacerbated by tech companies that allow these toxic environments to flourish. Nobel laureate Maria Ressa highlighted this crisis in her speech at Harvard University, stressing that "without facts, you can’t have truth, and without truth, you can’t have trust. Without these three, we have no rule of law, no democracy." For Sweden and its Nordic neighbors, this is a particularly grave issue. The Nordic model is built on high levels of trust in institutions, media, academia, and interpersonal relations. The recent clustering of Scandinavian countries at the top of the UN’s World Happiness Report is attributed to this trust. Over 60% of Swedes believe that “most people can be trusted.” However, this trust is at risk. The Sweden Democrats' poor performance in the recent European elections, their first significant electoral setback, was quickly blamed on the media, especially TV4. This reaction underscores the ongoing battle for control over public perception and truth. If trust in political news media is undermined, political accountability and, ultimately, the truth itself are at stake. Sweden's response to this crisis will determine the resilience of its democratic institutions. The fight against misinformation and hate speech requires robust measures from both the government and the media to protect the integrity of the Nordic model. Credit: The Guardian 2024-06-18 Get our Daily Newsletter - Click HERE to subscribe

In a significant move aimed at curbing the influence of white supremacist groups, the U.S. State Department has designated the Nordic Resistance Movement (NRM), Sweden's largest neo-Nazi group, and its three leaders as terrorists. This rare designation marks only the second time the U.S. has applied the terrorist label to a white supremacist organization known for its history of violence and extremist activities. The State Department's decision underscores the Biden administration's broader strategy to counter domestic terrorism, particularly the threat posed by white extremist groups. The designation allows the Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control to block any American property or assets belonging to the NRM. It also prohibits Americans from financial dealings with the organization and facilitates the banning of its members from entering the United States. The Nordic Resistance Movement, founded in 1997, operates not only in Sweden but also in Norway, Denmark, Iceland, and Finland, where it has been banned since 2020. The group's stated goal is to dismantle Nordic democracies and replace them with a "united ethnic Nordic nation," promoting a violent and fanatical Nazi ideology. The designation follows concerns over the NRM's increasing violence and its efforts to forge connections with like-minded organizations in the United States. “The group’s members and leaders have carried out violent attacks against political opponents, protesters, journalists, and other perceived adversaries,” the State Department stated, highlighting the group's role in inciting domestic terrorism. In recent incidents, the group's violent ideology was apparent when a neo-Nazi with suspected ties to the NRM stabbed a 12-year-old in Finland, an attack reportedly motivated by the child's foreign background. Additionally, masked members of the NRM attacked a migrant camp in northern Stockholm earlier this year. The designation also names three key figures in the NRM: Tor Fredrik Vejdeland, the group's leader; Par Oberg, a member of the national council and head of its parliamentary branch; and Leif Robert Eklund, another council member and coordinator of the group's Swedish divisions. While the Biden administration's action is a significant step, some experts believe it could go further. Mary McCord, a former top Justice Department official, suggested that the U.S. could have classified the NRM as a foreign terrorist organization, a move that would activate the material support statute, providing the government with more potent tools against such groups. The NRM's designation comes amid a historical context of increasing attention to domestic terrorism. The Trump administration, although criticized for its stance on domestic terrorism, included this threat in its National Strategy for Counterterrorism and, in 2020, designated the Russian Imperial Movement, another ultranationalist group, as a terrorist organization. This was the first time the U.S. had applied the terrorist label to a white supremacist group. The Russian Imperial Movement has been known to support neo-Nazi organizations in Scandinavia, aligning with the Russian government's broader strategy of sowing chaos and stoking internal divisions within Western democracies. The designation of the Nordic Resistance Movement reflects an ongoing effort by the U.S. to combat the global rise of white supremacist extremism and protect democratic institutions from the violent ideologies that threaten them. Credit: NYT 2024-06-18 Get our Daily Newsletter - Click HERE to subscribe

The Metropolitan Police found three handguns concealed in a children's underwear drawer among the 386 illegal firearms seized in London last year. This unsettling revelation highlights the extent to which criminal networks go to hide their activities. Despite these concerning facts, gun crime in London has dropped to its lowest level in 15 years, thanks to the Met's intensified efforts against firearms offenses. A Significant Decline in Gun Crime The Metropolitan Police's rigorous crackdown on illegal firearms has led to a notable reduction in gun crime. Firearms offenses fell from 196 to 145 since March 2023, and shooting murders dropped from 12 in 2021/22 to eight in 2023/24. Commander Paul Brogden of the Metropolitan Police attributed these improvements to relentless police work and heightened community awareness. However, despite these successes, the force still faces challenges, with nearly half of all shootings remaining unsolved. Recent Tragedies and the Unsolved Cases The ongoing battle against gun crime was tragically underscored by a drive-by shooting in Dalston, east London, last month. This incident left four people injured, including a nine-year-old girl who remains in critical condition. This tragedy highlights the collateral damage of gang violence, where innocent bystanders often become victims. Commander Brogden emphasized that while most shootings in the capital involve gangs, these incidents illustrate the broader societal impact of gun violence. Another heartbreaking case is the murder of 22-year-old Tyrese Miller, who was shot dead in Croydon in a case of mistaken identity. Miller was returning home from a night out with friends when he was tragically killed. His mother, Jackie Taylor, poignantly stated, "I worry that if this can happen to Tyrese, it can happen to anyone. No mother should have to bury their son like I have." The Mechanics of the Illegal Firearms Trade The illegal firearms trade in London is complex and multifaceted. Some weapons are smuggled into the country via ferries or the mail system. Increasingly, however, gang members are turning to converted blank-firing guns. These firearms, originally intended for drama or farming and sold for as little as £100, are converted to fire real bullets and resold for thousands of pounds. While the emergence of 3D-printed weapons is a growing concern globally, they have yet to significantly impact London's streets. High-Profile Cases and Pursuit of Justice The arrest and conviction of individuals like Danny Butler illustrate the audacity of those involved in gun crime. Butler, a 44-year-old gang armourer, was sentenced to 18 years in prison after police found six guns, ammunition, and Class A and B drugs in his family home. His case is a stark reminder of how deeply entrenched these criminal activities can be, with weapons hidden in children's rooms and other unsuspecting places. The Met has made substantial progress, but challenges remain. Victims of gang shootings often hesitate to cooperate with the police, opting instead for personal retribution. This cycle of violence perpetuates the risk that "today's victim could be tomorrow's suspect," as noted by Commander Brogden. Broader Impact and Future Efforts The devastating effects of gun violence extend beyond immediate victims, rippling through communities and instilling fear and distrust. The Met's continued focus on reducing gun crime and bringing perpetrators to justice is crucial. "Guns destroy lives and communities," said Commander Brogden. "The recent shootings in parts of London are a sad reminder that there is still work for us to do when it comes to cracking down on illegal firearms." The Metropolitan Police’s ongoing efforts serve as a stern warning to criminals and gang members. The significant reduction in gun crime rates and the highest detection rates in over a decade reflect a determined police force committed to safeguarding the capital. Commander Brogden’s message is clear: "We will come after you, and we will bring you to justice." As London continues to grapple with the challenges of gun violence, the combined efforts of law enforcement and community cooperation are vital in sustaining the progress made and ensuring the safety of all residents. The battle against illegal firearms is far from over, but the strides made thus far provide hope and a path forward in the ongoing fight to rid the streets of these lethal weapons. Credit: Sky News 2024-06-18 Get our Daily Newsletter - Click HERE to subscribe

Morgan Freeman, an iconic actor and producer, has shared his strong opinions on Black History Month, expressing a deep dissatisfaction with the concept. “I detest it. The mere idea of it. You are going to give me the shortest month in a year? And you are going to celebrate ‘my’ history?! This whole idea makes my teeth itch. It’s not right,” Freeman told Variety. He argued that his history is not separate from American history, but a fundamental part of it. “It’s the one thing in this world I am interested in, beyond making money, having a good time and getting enough sleep.” Freeman's thoughts on the past extend beyond his views on Black History Month. He recently served as an executive producer on the Civil War series “The Gray House” alongside Lori McCreary through their company, Revelations Entertainment. The historical significance of the series resonates deeply with Freeman. “If you don’t know your past, if you don’t remember it, you are bound to repeat it,” he remarked, emphasizing the importance of historical awareness, especially during election years. Freeman's reflections on his career and the entertainment industry reveal his philosophy on timing and persistence. He noted how projects can lie dormant for years before suddenly gaining interest. “Do you know this song? ‘To everything, there is a season.’ It really, really works in show business. You are trying to sell something 15 years ago and nobody even looks at you. Then they go: ‘Didn’t you have a project, some time ago? Do you still have it?’ Life is like that, in this industry.” “The Gray House,” which opened the Monte-Carlo Television Festival and saw Freeman receive the Crystal Nymph award, is a testament to the enduring relevance of American sagas. Kevin Costner, another executive producer of the series, highlighted the current appetite for such stories. “It must be, because here we are,” Freeman concurred. The series, inspired by true events, revolves around four Southern women—Elizabeth Van Lew, her mother, Mary Jane Richards, and a prostitute—who become spies for the Union. Freeman praised the series for its inclusive portrayal of history, saying, “It’s so wide-ranging. There are so many people in the series, because we are acknowledging they were there. If you can do that, if you are given space to do that, bravo. It didn’t just happen to one group of people.” Lori McCreary echoed Freeman's sentiments, emphasizing the importance of timely storytelling and historical mindfulness. “Morgan’s motto is: ‘Every project has its time and its team.’ I think the universe conspired to have us have this time for this project. It’s very much on our mind now, to be mindful of what we have been through. And make sure the future is brighter. We need to learn—as a planet. As communities around the world.” The series does not shy away from the harsh realities of history, particularly the violence and dehumanization faced by African Americans. McCreary insisted on an authentic portrayal, stating, “We are not white-washing, we are not sugar-coating the fact that African Americans were enslaved. They weren’t treated as a full person. When you come out of watching these eight hours, maybe you will look at someone who looks like Morgan or me differently. You will understand their experience, their ancestors’ experience and you will be able to relate.” McCreary also highlighted the significant roles of the series' female characters, who are far from passive. “When I watch something and it’s an authentic portrayal of women, I am engaged. And many times, I feel like those I can relate to are in the background. The more people like Morgan and I can tell our own stories—because nobody else will—the more we’ll understand that women are everything. We are housewives, mothers and scientists. And spies!” In researching the series, McCreary was particularly struck by Mary Jane Richards, a formerly enslaved Black woman with a photographic memory who risked her life to spy for the Union. “She volunteered herself to be gifted to the ‘Gray House’ [the White House of the Confederacy] and pretended to be a slave. She was serving tea and looking at all the maps. I didn’t know there was someone who risked her entire life like that. There should be chapters in history books dedicated to her. I don’t know why she was overlooked.” Freeman offered a simple explanation: “I will tell you why: She was a woman.” Credit: Variety 2024-06-18 Get our Daily Newsletter - Click HERE to subscribe

Former UK Prime Minister Tony Blair has entered the heated debate on transgender rights, asserting clear biological definitions while questioning why politicians have become so entangled in the issue. Blair, who led the UK from 1997 to 2007 and converted to Catholicism after his tenure, made his views known in an interview with Holyrood magazine. "A woman has a vagina and a man has a penis," he declared, expressing confusion over why this question has stumped many contemporary politicians. Blair acknowledged that some people genuinely feel they are in the wrong body and should be allowed to change their legal gender. However, he emphasized the need for protections in single-sex spaces, such as changing rooms and female sports, particularly when individuals with male genitalia are present. "I don’t know how politics got itself into this muddle. What is a woman? Well, it’s not a very hard thing for me to answer really," he stated. "I’m definitely of the school that says, biologically, a woman is with a vagina and a man is with a penis. I think we can say that quite clearly." Blair articulated three key qualifications for his stance: maintaining the ability to discuss biological womanhood, protecting single-sex spaces, and carefully considering irreversible treatments like puberty blockers for young people. "It shouldn’t stop women talking about being biological women. This idea that you can’t refer to pregnant women, I think most people think that’s completely ridiculous," he said. Blair also mentioned the discomfort some women might feel sharing changing rooms with individuals who still have male genitalia, insisting that this should be addressed to ensure women feel comfortable and safe. Blair's comments come amidst significant controversy and debate within the Labour Party. Notable figures such as Sir Keir Starmer, Yvette Cooper, and Rosie Duffield have all faced scrutiny and backlash over their positions on defining what constitutes a woman. Duffield, the Labour MP for Canterbury, was notably criticized for her statement that "only women have a cervix" but was ultimately cleared of transphobia allegations by party bosses. The former prime minister also highlighted the controversy surrounding the use of language in women's health and the General Medical Council's decision last year to remove mentions of "mothers" from a maternity document for staff. He stressed that the overwhelming majority of Britons would likely agree with his balanced approach, which supports gender reassignment with protections for specific contexts and terminologies. Blair's intervention is seen as a call for common sense amidst what he views as a polarized debate. He concluded that it was "weird" for such a fundamental issue to cause so much division, given that the basics are rooted in common sense. The discussion around trans rights has also seen Labour frontbenchers struggling with the question of defining a woman. Starmer initially hesitated but later stated that 99.9% of women "haven’t got a penis." This issue has become a focal point, with Labour's support for Nicola Sturgeon's self-ID reforms in Scotland facing significant backlash, particularly after the case of trans rapist Isla Bryson being initially sent to a women’s prison. The Conservative Party has pledged to shift the responsibility for creating new gender recognition laws in Scotland from Holyrood to Westminster to prevent the reintroduction of self-ID. Scottish Labour leader Anas Sarwar has opposed this plan, advocating instead for "appropriate guidance on single-sex spaces based on biological sex" under a potential Keir Starmer government. Blair's comments reflect a broader societal debate on transgender rights and the need to balance inclusivity with protections for single-sex spaces and clarity in language pertaining to women's health. As the discussion continues, Blair’s intervention underscores the complexities and sensitivities surrounding this issue in contemporary politics. Credit: Daily Telegraph 2024-06-18 Get our Daily Newsletter - Click HERE to subscribe

As the first presidential debate of the 2024 election cycle approaches, CNN has announced that both President Joe Biden and former President Donald Trump have agreed to new debate rules designed to ensure a more orderly and respectful discussion. The debate, hosted by CNN's Jake Tapper and Dana Bash, will take place in Atlanta, Georgia, on June 27. The new rules include several measures aimed at maintaining decorum and fairness. Both candidates will stand at uniform podiums, with their positions determined by a coin flip. To prevent interruptions and maintain the flow of the debate, microphones will be muted except when it is the respective candidate's turn to speak. Tapper and Bash will have the authority to enforce timing and ensure a civilized discussion using all tools at their disposal. The debate is scheduled to last 90 minutes and will include two commercial breaks. During these breaks, campaign staff will not be allowed to interact with their candidates. Each candidate will be provided with a pen, a pad of paper, and a water bottle, but they will not be allowed to bring any prewritten notes onto the stage. In a departure from past debates, there will be no studio audience present. This debate marks the first of two agreed-upon encounters between Biden and Trump ahead of the 2024 election. The agreement to debate twice was reached in mid-May, representing the first time the two have faced each other since the contentious 2020 debate. Trump chose to skip the GOP primary debates this cycle in favor of campaign events, while Biden released a campaign video challenging Trump to meet for debates in June and September. Trump accepted the challenge, and the dates were promptly set. The timing of the June debate is notably early in the general election calendar. The second debate is scheduled for September 10 and will be hosted by ABC. The Biden campaign proposed the June date to accommodate the president's return from the Group of Seven summit in Europe and the conclusion of Trump’s hush money trial. The 2020 debate between Biden and Trump was infamous for its chaotic atmosphere, with frequent interruptions and personal insults exchanged between the candidates. At one point, Biden famously asked Trump, "Will you shut up, man?" This year's debate rules are a direct response to the disorder of their previous encounter, aiming to provide a more structured and substantive exchange. As the date approaches, anticipation builds for what promises to be a significant moment in the 2024 election cycle. Both candidates have expressed their readiness to engage in a direct comparison of their visions for the future of the United States. The debate will offer voters an early opportunity to evaluate their options as the race intensifies. Credit: CNN 2024-06-18 Get our Daily Newsletter - Click HERE to subscribe

The war in Ukraine, which began with the annexation of Crimea, might very well see its conclusion in the same region. Defense experts highlight that Ukraine's recent successes in Crimea signal a potentially decisive turn in the conflict against Russia. At the beginning of the year, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy underscored the strategic importance of Crimea and the Black Sea, emphasizing that reclaiming the peninsula would be a central objective. Success in this area would not only be a strategic victory but also a significant psychological blow to Russian President Vladimir Putin. "Russia's defeat in Crimea would be not just a defeat, but a humiliation," stated Olga Khvostunova, a fellow in the Eurasia Program at the Foreign Policy Research Institute. This sentiment echoes the dramatic events of February 2014, when unmarked Russian forces, known as "little green men," swiftly took control of Crimea, culminating in its annexation by Russia's Federal Assembly by the end of March that year. The ensuing conflict in the Donbas region began shortly thereafter. Zelenskyy has consistently maintained that any peace agreement must include the return of Crimea to Ukraine. In recent weeks, Ukraine has executed a series of successful attacks in the region, targeting Russian air-defense systems and the Belbek airfield near Sevastopol. Elina Beketova, a democracy fellow at the Center for European Policy Analysis, attributed these successes to thorough preparation, enhanced capabilities of the Ukrainian defense forces, and intelligence support from NATO allies. Ukraine, which lost its traditional naval fleet during the annexation of Crimea, has effectively targeted Russia's Black Sea Fleet using sea drones. These attacks have disrupted Russian naval operations, allowing Ukraine to resume vital grain shipments through the Black Sea. The impact of these operations forced Russia's Black Sea Fleet to relocate some activities away from its base in Sevastopol. One of the most significant successes was the sinking of the Black Sea Fleet's flagship, the Moskva. "Crimea is the key to Russia's Black Sea access and operations," said Maria Snegovaya, a senior fellow with the Center for Strategic and International Studies' Europe, Russia, and Eurasia Program. She explained that controlling Crimea enables power projection over the Black Sea, making it crucial for Ukraine to deter Russian naval positions there. Beketova further noted that Ukrainian attacks on Crimea and the Black Sea Fleet aim to deprive Russian forces of a strategic base for launching attacks on mainland Ukraine and to disrupt logistical support for Russian troops in the occupied southern territories of Ukraine. The Kerch Bridge, which links mainland Russia to Crimea, stands as a powerful symbol of Russia's annexation. Its destruction would be both a strategic and symbolic victory for Ukraine and a major blow to Putin. Despite two previous attempts, Ukraine has not yet managed to destroy the bridge. However, Ukrainian officials remain determined, with plans to target the bridge again this year. Russia is evidently concerned about the threat to the Kerch Bridge. The UK Ministry of Defence recently reported that Russia has installed barges to protect the bridge from potential Ukrainian attacks. Additionally, Russia is constructing a railway line from Rostov-on-Don to Crimea to reduce reliance on the bridge, indicating Putin's acknowledgment of the vulnerability. Dmitry Pletenchuk, a spokesman for Ukraine's southern military command, interpreted this as a recognition that the Crimean Bridge is doomed. Historically, Crimea holds significant sentimental value for Russia, dating back to its annexation by Russian Empress Catherine the Great in 1783. During the Soviet era, it was a beloved vacation destination, cementing its place in Russian national memory. The reality of the conflict hit home for many Russians in 2022, when massive explosions at the Saki air base brought the war to vacationing Russians, who captured the event on video from beach huts. Tourist numbers in Crimea have since plummeted, with significant economic repercussions. Strategically, Ukraine's focus on Crimea, particularly targeting Russian ground-based air-defense (GBAD) systems, is seen as "preparing the ground" for future air strikes once F-16 fighter jets arrive. Frederik Mertens, a strategic analyst at the Hague Centre for Strategic Studies, emphasized that Crimea's limited maneuver space makes it particularly vulnerable. "Putin has a lot to lose both politically and militarily," Mertens said. He suggested that a limited number of fighters could have a significant impact on the region and the Black Sea if Ukraine can neutralize Crimea's air defenses. Russia has responded by relocating its most advanced S-500 air-defense system to Crimea to protect against such threats. According to Ukraine's spy chief, Kyrylo Budanov, this move underscores the critical importance of Crimea to Russia's military strategy. "Russia cannot afford to lose Crimea," Snegovaya reiterated, suggesting that the peninsula could serve as a crucial bargaining chip in future negotiations. Beketova added that regaining control of the Black Sea and Crimea, or exerting enough pressure to threaten Russian control, could potentially mark the end of the war. In conclusion, as Ukraine continues to target strategic assets in Crimea and the Black Sea, the region's significance in the broader conflict becomes increasingly apparent. The outcome of these efforts could determine the future trajectory of the war, potentially leading to a resolution that sees Crimea returned to Ukraine. Credit: Business Insider 2024-06-18 Get our Daily Newsletter - Click HERE to subscribe

Oleksandr Lytvynenko, head of Ukraine's national security council, has issued a chilling warning regarding the potential use of nuclear weapons by President Vladimir Putin should Russia face a significant military setback in Ukraine. Speaking to The Times, Lytvynenko outlined scenarios in which a catastrophic defeat could lead to the collapse of Russian front lines, mass desertions, and protests in Moscow, pushing Putin to consider using tactical nuclear weapons. Since Russia's invasion of Ukraine in 2022, there have been frequent threats from Russian officials to deploy nuclear weapons against Ukraine and its Western allies. While these threats have become more routine and thus less shocking, they remain a serious concern. Recently, G7 leaders at a summit in Italy reaffirmed that any use of chemical, biological, radiological, or nuclear weapons by Russia would result in severe consequences. Lytvynenko emphasized the gravity of the situation, stating, "We can’t rule out anything if Russia is on the verge of a catastrophic defeat." He elaborated that such a defeat could lead to the collapse of Russian front lines and widespread instability within Russia itself. However, he noted that there is no indication Putin would resort to nuclear weapons while Russia maintains the upper hand in the conflict. Tactical nuclear weapons, designed for battlefield use and with lower yields than strategic nuclear weapons, have not been used in conflict since 1945. Lytvynenko expressed doubt that Putin would use strategic nuclear weapons due to the almost certain risk of igniting a third world war, saying, "He wants to live." He added that a battlefield defeat in Ukraine might not automatically lead to nuclear escalation, as Putin could try to spin the situation as a victory to the Russian public, given the Kremlin's control over national media and its crackdown on dissent since the invasion. Skepticism about Lytvynenko's concerns was voiced by Oleksandra Ustinova, an opposition MP, who remarked, "Putin is crazy, but even so, he understands that there are some things that you can do and some things you can’t do." Lytvynenko's extensive background, including his studies at the KGB academy in Moscow and his tenure at the Royal College of Defence Studies in London, lends significant weight to his assessments. In parallel, a global peace conference organized by President Volodymyr Zelensky in Switzerland saw participation from delegates of over 90 countries, excluding Russian and Chinese officials. The conference’s final declaration, as seen by Reuters, called for the respect of Ukraine’s territorial integrity but did not outline a clear path to ending the war or initiating talks with Moscow. However, it did explicitly condemn Russia's nuclear threats. Zelensky has steadfastly ruled out direct talks with Putin and any negotiations over Ukrainian territories claimed by Russia. Putin recently issued an ultimatum for a ceasefire, demanding Ukraine surrender several regions and lift Western sanctions, which Kyiv and its allies swiftly rejected. Russia's recent drills involving tactical nuclear weapons near Ukrainian-controlled areas and in the northwest were presented by Putin as a response to Western support for Ukraine. Zelensky, however, contends that the domestic and international backlash from using nuclear weapons would be detrimental to Putin’s regime. Nevertheless, he acknowledged the psychological instability of Putin and his close associates, making it impossible to dismiss the threat entirely. "These people are sick in the head, that’s a fact. Therefore, it’s impossible to say for sure whether they are capable of this or not," Zelensky stated. The United States has been preparing for the possibility of a Russian nuclear strike since late 2022, particularly as Ukrainian forces made significant gains. A U.S. official told CNN, "The risk level seemed to be going up, beyond where it had been at any other point in time." NATO has noted that there are no indications of imminent nuclear use by Russia. However, the covert nature of tactical nuclear warheads means that preparations could be difficult to detect. In recent developments, delays in the delivery of American weapons to Ukraine earlier this year, due to a congressional row, allowed Russia to make significant advances on the battlefield. However, renewed supplies have enabled Ukraine to push back, stabilizing the situation in the eastern Kharkiv region. Lytvynenko outlined Ukraine’s dual military strategy, emphasizing the importance of halting Russian advances on the front line and targeting critical infrastructure deep within Russia. "We have two very important military tasks. The first is to stop the Russians on the front line — the second is to strike deep inside Russia," he said, insisting that Ukraine targets infrastructure essential for Russia's war efforts, not civilians. As the conflict continues, the specter of nuclear escalation remains a potent threat, underscoring the high stakes involved and the volatile nature of the ongoing war. The international community remains vigilant, with diplomatic and military strategies constantly adapting to the shifting dynamics on the ground. The warnings from Kyiv serve as a reminder of the precarious balance that must be maintained to prevent further escalation and strive for a resolution to the conflict. Credit: Times 2024-06-18 Get our Daily Newsletter - Click HERE to subscribe

A recent poll conducted by the Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research (PCPSR) between May 26 and June 1 has revealed a significant increase in support for Hamas among Palestinians in both the West Bank and Gaza. The survey's findings reflect shifting attitudes towards armed struggle and political leadership in the Palestinian territories, painting a complex picture of the current political climate. Support for Hamas and Fatah The poll indicates that overall support for Hamas in the Palestinian territories has risen to 40%, a six-point increase from the previous survey conducted three months ago. In contrast, support for the Fatah party, led by Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, stands at only 20%. This marks a considerable shift from pre-war figures, where support for Hamas was at 22% and for Fatah at 26%. In the West Bank, 41% of residents now support Hamas, up from 35% three months ago, while support for Fatah has increased slightly to 17%, from 12%. In Gaza, support for Hamas has also grown to 38%, up from 34%, whereas Fatah's support has marginally declined to 24% from 25%. A notable portion of respondents, 8%, expressed support for other groups, while 33% stated they did not support any group or were unsure. Increasing Support for Armed Struggle The survey also found a rise in support for armed struggle as the preferred method to end Israeli rule and establish a Palestinian state. A little over half of Palestinians (54%) now favor armed struggle, an eight-point increase compared to March. In contrast, only a quarter of respondents preferred negotiations, and 16% opted for nonviolent resistance. West Bank vs. Gaza Perspectives The survey, which sampled 1,570 adults divided almost equally between the West Bank and Gaza, revealed a stark difference in perspectives between the two regions. A significant majority in the West Bank (79%) believe that Hamas will emerge victorious from the current conflict and 71% want the group to rule Gaza post-war. In stark contrast, only 48% of Gazans expect Hamas to win, an 8-point decrease from three months ago, and 25% predict that Israel will prevail. Additionally, 46% of Gazans want Hamas to remain in power after the conflict. PCPSR director Khalil Shikaki attributes this discrepancy to the different sources of information available in the two territories. West Bank residents primarily rely on Al Jazeera for news updates, which may shape their perceptions differently from Gazans, who directly observe military developments and the dismantling of Hamas's capabilities. Media Influence and Information Disparities Al Jazeera, a Qatari-owned outlet, has been criticized in Israel for its perceived biased coverage of the war, particularly its portrayal of the October 7 attack by Gazan terror groups. Israel has responded by taking Al Jazeera broadcasts off the air, seizing equipment, and sealing its offices, citing national security concerns. Leadership Preferences and Future Governance When considering future governance of Gaza, besides Hamas, the next preferred option among Palestinians is a revitalized Palestinian Authority (PA) with newly elected leadership, supported by 16% of respondents. Only 6% favor the current PA under Abbas. The survey highlights Abbas's deep unpopularity, with 94% of West Bankers and 83% of Gazans wanting him to resign. A mere 1% of respondents expressed a desire for the Israeli army to control Gaza, 2% preferred UN control, and 1% favored governance by one or more Arab states. Furthermore, there is widespread opposition (75%) to the deployment of an Arab security force in Gaza, even if it were to assist Palestinian forces. International and Legal Perspectives The survey also explored Palestinians' views on international legal efforts. A significant majority (75%) do not believe that the International Court of Justice (ICJ) will be able to halt Israeli military actions in Rafah due to U.S. protection of Israel. Similarly, 71% doubt that the International Criminal Court (ICC) will succeed in arresting or prosecuting Israeli or Hamas leaders. The findings from PCPSR provide a nuanced understanding of the current political and social sentiments among Palestinians, reflecting increased support for Hamas and armed struggle, alongside deep-seated discontent with current leadership and skepticism about international intervention. Credit: TOI 2024-06-18 Get our Daily Newsletter - Click HERE to subscribe

A post contravening our community standards has been removed. Please stay on topic, this is not about the US consitution. UK Police Arrest London Man for Pro-Hamas Social Media Post

As the 2024 presidential race heats up, the upcoming televised debate on June 27 between President Joe Biden and former President Donald Trump is set to be a pivotal event. Both candidates, who are in their late 70s and early 80s, are not only battling each other but also confronting the issue of age and public perception regarding their fitness for office. On his 78th birthday, Trump received a message from Biden that underscored their mutual struggle against ageism in politics. “Take it from one old guy to another,” Biden wrote on social media, “Age is just a number.” This seemingly innocuous comment highlights the intense scrutiny both candidates face regarding their ages. Trump has been relentless in portraying Biden as frail and incapable, pointing to moments where Biden appeared slow or uncertain. Conversely, Biden has not shied away from highlighting Trump's erratic behavior, such as his meandering speeches and outlandish comments, which often diverge into disjointed and fictional narratives. Both campaigns have utilized selectively edited footage to emphasize their points. Republicans recently circulated videos of Biden appearing uncertain at the G7 meeting in Italy, suggesting he is unfit to govern. This narrative was promptly refuted by British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak, who clarified that Biden was merely engaging politely with parachutists behind the group of leaders. “It’s just completely not what happened,” Sunak told The Sunday Times, emphasizing the misleading nature of the footage. The reality, insiders admit, is that both portrayals contain a kernel of truth. Biden does sometimes appear stiff and frail, while Trump has a well-documented tendency to go off-topic and tell disjointed stories. The American public will soon have the chance to see for themselves how the two measure up when they take the stage in Atlanta, Georgia, for the first presidential debate. The stakes could not be higher, with polls showing a razor-thin margin between the two. The Economist recently published a forecast giving Trump a two-in-three chance of defeating Biden, while Five Thirty Eight's election model reflects an extremely close race, showing Biden slightly ahead one week and Trump edging forward the next. Biden's camp is concerned that despite his rigorous debate preparation, the demanding schedule of the presidency may take its toll. Following a hectic G7 summit, a trip to France for the 80th anniversary of D-Day, and dealing with the emotionally charged trial and conviction of his son, Hunter Biden, on gun charges, Biden has a packed itinerary leading up to the debate. He will attend fundraisers in Los Angeles with former President Barack Obama and Hollywood stars Julia Roberts and George Clooney, followed by a significant fundraising dinner in Virginia with Bill and Hillary Clinton. To prepare for the debate, Biden plans to retreat to Camp David with a close circle of advisers and extensive briefing books. This preparation aims to ensure he appears energetic and sharp, countering the narrative that he is past his prime. Ron Klain, Biden’s former chief of staff, is leading this preparation effort, described by allies as meticulous and veteran operative. Simon Rosenberg, a Democratic strategist, believes the debate poses more significant risks for Republicans. “If the central argument Republicans are making against Biden is that he is old and unfit, then if he goes toe to toe and succeeds, it’ll destroy their fundamental argument,” he said. In contrast, Trump is reportedly dismissing the need for extensive preparation, relying instead on his experience from holding regular rallies. His approach highlights the divide between the two men’s personalities: Trump despises lengthy briefings, while Biden meticulously reviews detailed binders provided by his aides. This difference also underscores the inherent disadvantages of debating as an incumbent president, who must balance the isolation and demands of office with the need to engage with the electorate. Historically, incumbents often struggle in their first re-election debates. Obama, Reagan, and George Bush Sr. all had lackluster performances in their initial debates, with varying impacts on their campaigns. Obama and Reagan managed to recover in subsequent debates, but Bush Sr.'s campaign suffered when he was mocked for checking his watch during a debate with Bill Clinton. For Biden, there is no room for error. Republican pollster Whit Ayres stated, “Joe Biden is behind and feels like he needs to change the dynamic of the race in order to stand a chance. And so he, I suspect, will be studying very hard.” Trump, meanwhile, has claimed readiness to debate Biden “any time, any place,” yet he risks appearing crude and unstable compared to Biden. Trump’s strategy has been to use his legal troubles, including a conviction on 34 counts of falsification of business records, to rally his base, while Biden is expected to question Trump’s eligibility for office given his criminal record. The 2020 debates offer a glimpse into the potential dynamics. In the first debate, Trump’s constant interruptions and insults led Biden to tell him to “shut up, man.” Trump’s more focused approach in the second debate was perceived as a better performance. “We’ll see which Donald Trump shows up this time,” Ayres remarked. Both candidates have recently shown vulnerabilities, with Biden occasionally stumbling or forgetting words and Trump going off-script or freezing during speeches. Hank Sheinkopf, an American political consultant, noted, “Should Biden forget a word, should Biden stop, should Biden stumble, it’ll be a campaign ad. He’s got to appear energetic, non-stop, so he can’t be accused of being a doddering old man.” Biden’s campaign, led by top aide Jen O’Malley Dillon, aims to “zero in on Trump’s dangerous campaign promises and unhinged rhetoric,” reminding voters of the chaos and harm caused during Trump’s presidency. At Camp David, Biden’s team will focus on honing his debate style and ensuring he can deliver zingers with the necessary energy. Despite concerns that Trump might pull out of the debate, Rosenberg remains confident in Biden’s readiness. “Biden wants to debate, he’s ready to go,” he said. “The question is whether Trump is going to show up. How will he answer basic questions like: why should a convicted felon be president?” However, Republicans assert that Trump is more than ready. Jason Miller, a key Trump adviser, stated, “President Trump takes on numerous tough interviews every single week and delivers lengthy rally speeches while standing, demonstrating elite stamina. He does not need to be programmed by staff.” As the debate approaches, the American public eagerly anticipates a showdown that could significantly influence the course of the 2024 presidential election. With both candidates under immense pressure to perform, the debate will be a critical moment for Biden and Trump to prove their vitality and competence, potentially swaying the opinions of undecided voters and shaping the future of the nation. Credit: Daily Telegraph 2024-06-17 Get our Daily Newsletter - Click HERE to subscribe

In a fascinating video on the DEEP YouTube channel, ex-MI6 agent Harry Ferguson evaluated various spy gadgets available on Amazon, sharing his insights on their effectiveness and practicality. The video, produced by Strong Watch Studios, aims to demystify the world of espionage through the eyes of a former spy. Here’s a summary of Ferguson’s take on these gadgets and why he believes crisps are the ultimate intruder detection system. 1. Stash Tin Disguised as a Heinz Spaghetti Tin Ferguson starts by examining a stash tin designed to look like a Heinz spaghetti tin. While he acknowledges its seemingly low utility, he shares an anecdote about an Iranian spy who effectively used a similar device. Despite its simplicity, this method proved useful for hiding important documents. 2. Secret Camera Detector Next, Ferguson reviews a secret camera detector that plugs into a phone’s charging port. It works by emitting a red light that reflects off camera lenses. Although it functions as advertised, its practicality is limited as it requires close proximity to detect hidden cameras, making it conspicuous and less useful in real spy scenarios. 3. Rearview Sunglasses These sunglasses have mirrors on the sides, allowing wearers to see behind them. Ferguson explains that while they might seem gimmicky, they are based on real counter-surveillance techniques used by the CIA. By subtly using reflections, spies can discreetly monitor their surroundings. 4. Lock Pick Contrary to popular belief, Ferguson reveals that spies rarely use lock picks due to the risk of being mistaken for burglars and the difficulty of picking modern locks. Instead, spies prefer using skeleton keys or obtaining genuine keys from their contacts. 5. Concealment Plug Socket This device looks like a regular plug socket but has a hidden compartment. Ferguson notes that experienced search teams will check such items for hidden cameras or bugs. While it’s a clever idea, its effectiveness is limited by the thoroughness of professional searches. 6. Hidden Cameras Evaluating hidden cameras, such as those concealed in necklaces, Ferguson points out their limitations. While they may be useful for capturing visual data, their practicality is hindered by battery life and the difficulty of capturing specific details, like keypad numbers. 7. Lie Detector Tests Ferguson debunks the effectiveness of lie detector tests, or polygraphs, stating that they do not reliably detect lies. These tests measure physiological responses, which can be influenced by various factors, making them unreliable for determining truthfulness. 8. Tiny Spy Cameras Discussing tiny spy cameras hidden in everyday objects, Ferguson highlights the main issue: power. With limited battery life, these devices are impractical for long-term surveillance. He suggests that mains-powered audio devices are more reliable but have their own limitations, such as poor audio quality. 9. Laser Traps Ferguson explains that laser traps are used to detect intruders by triggering an alarm when the laser beam is broken. However, carrying such equipment into certain countries can raise suspicions, making them less practical for covert operations. 10. Crisps as Intruder Detection In a surprising twist, Ferguson reveals that crisps (potato chips) are the best low-tech intruder detection tool. By placing a crisp under a rug or doormat, spies can determine if someone has entered their room. The distinct shape of a broken crisp is nearly impossible to replicate, making it a simple yet effective method. Additionally, crisps are innocuous items that won’t raise suspicion if found in luggage. Full video Credit: Daily Mail 2024-06-17 Get our Daily Newsletter - Click HERE to subscribe

In the heart of Stratford, east London, lies Townley Court, an estate once seen as a decent place to live but now overrun by gangs, drug dealers, and sex workers. Residents here are living in constant fear, feeling abandoned by the authorities meant to protect them. With rising crime rates and police seeming to have 'given up', the community is left to fend for itself in an environment that feels increasingly lawless and dangerous. Locals recount horrifying experiences of being mugged multiple times and witnessing sex acts on their way to school. Many residents are too scared to leave their homes or even look out their windows, having lost faith in the police's ability to provide protection. This fear is compounded by the blatant and brazen behavior of criminals, who operate openly, knowing there will be little to no consequence for their actions. In April 2024 alone, the Metropolitan Police recorded 166 crimes in the area, with violence and sexual offenses accounting for a significant portion. Graffiti referencing a 'Demon Gang' has also appeared, further fueling the residents' fears that the situation is spiraling out of control. One resident, a furious mother, shared doorbell camera footage of her nine-year-old son encountering a prostitute and her client having sex in the stairwell. Another resident described witnessing a sex act in broad daylight, within view of playing children. A disabled resident recounted a terrifying experience of having a gun pulled on him after challenging a gang inside his building. "We're under siege," said one resident who chose to remain anonymous. "It's like a horror show. It's so dangerous around here." Another elderly resident has been mugged twice and recounted how the police never turned up after the latest attack, citing a lack of available vehicles. He described how one gang member smirked at him, boasting, "You can't do nothing." The community's fear is palpable. One mother expressed her anxiety about even looking outside in case she is seen by the hostile elements prowling the estate. She added that criminals operate openly because they know that the police response, if it comes at all, will be inadequate. Police often drive past people openly using drugs and do nothing, further eroding any confidence the community might have in their protection. Residents are so disillusioned that many have stopped calling the police altogether. One man noted, "The police talk to us like we're a crowd of idiots. They have a script, and they just stick to it." Another woman added, "It's like things have got out of control and they can't get it back now, so they've just given up." The Metropolitan Police claim they are engaging with sex workers and conducting patrols to counter antisocial behavior, but residents see little evidence of this. The situation has deteriorated to such an extent that addicts and prostitutes have obtained keys used by firefighters, allowing them to enter residential blocks to use drugs, have sex, vomit, and defecate. Locals report that sex workers sometimes walk around naked, oblivious to the presence of children. "I feel sorry for them," one man said. "They are humans like us. But we are not disturbing other people's lives. We don't need this happening right in front of our doors." Drug users hold noisy gatherings in doorways and gardens every night, with fights breaking out over drugs and knives. A school worker who has lived on the estate for over 20 years said the situation is taking a toll on children. "It's just relentless," they said. "Sometimes I'm going to work on two, three hours' sleep. Some of the kids from around here are at my school and they're not sleeping either." The community has grown accustomed to finding addicts passed out in the street. Last month, the London Ambulance Service was called to assist an unresponsive woman who remained in the same position all day. One man recounted being threatened with a machete after confronting a gang member, who then stole his children's trainers. Residents have risked gathering evidence of the criminal activity, only to be ignored by authorities. When addicts realized locals were filming them, they started using umbrellas to hide their actions. Despite collecting photos and videos of a suspected drug dealer's car, no action seems to have been taken. One man summed up the situation grimly: "Someone is going to get killed. We're all suffering." Authorities have admitted the issues often occur outside of operational hours, leading to "pointless" daylight patrols. Newham Council has promised overtime patrols and new locks for blocks of flats to prevent intruders from entering with fire keys. A spokesperson for the Met Police stated: "We are working hard to tackle the issue in order to make residents feel safer. We have listened to concerns and are actively working with partners to reduce problems in the area. As part of this work, we have a Design Out Crime officer visiting the area. They will make recommendations on what needs to change." However, for many residents, these promises ring hollow. A young woman whose parents bought their home on the estate in the 1990s expressed her disbelief at how things had deteriorated. "Stratford is a prime location. How can they let things get this bad? It's like they just don't give a damn." The woman’s car was recently broken into, and when she started parking further away, she received a fine. "So they don't mind coming around here to give out parking tickets," she fumed. "It's embarrassing, as well as being unsafe. You don't want to invite people to your house. The police are doing absolutely nothing. Maybe, one of these days, if somebody gets hurt, then they will come." One pensioner echoed this sentiment, saying: "It's like they are waiting for someone to actually get stabbed. I just don't know how it's going to end. It's got to be stopped, one way or another. It's going to get deadly otherwise." As the community waits for effective action, they continue to live in fear, feeling abandoned by those meant to protect them. Until substantial changes are made, the residents of Townley Court remain under siege in their own homes, hoping for a day when they can feel safe once again. Credit: Daily Mail 2024-06-17 Get our Daily Newsletter - Click HERE to subscribe

The two leaders differed on the inclusion of the word 'abortion' in the summit's final statement. The video clip from Friday shows Macron going down a line, shaking the hands of Italian President Sergio Mattarella and his daughter, first lady of Italy Laura Mattarella, before arriving at Meloni. As Macron makes his way down the line, Meloni can be seen giving a frosty "death stare" at Macron. When the French leader arrives, she appears to force a smile as the two shake hands. The exchange came after the two leaders clashed over the use of the word "abortion" in the G-7 statement. Meloni’s government had sought to water down references to abortion in the final statement issued by all the G-7 nations at the end of the summit. The final statement, released Friday, omits the word "abortion" but does reference the need to promote "reproductive health and rights." Macron said that he regretted the decision, telling an Italian reporter on Thursday, "It’s not a vision that’s shared across all the political spectrum." "I regret it, but I respect it because it was the sovereign choice of your people," Macron said. Meloni told reporters Saturday that a suspected row with Macron had been blown out of proportion. Meloni, who in 2022 became Italy’s first female Prime Minister, campaigned with the slogan of "God, fatherland, and family." She has prioritized encouraging women to have babies to reverse Italy’s demographic crisis. Credit: MSN 2024-06-17 Get our Daily Newsletter - Click HERE to subscribe

The persistent nuclear threats emanating from Moscow are nothing more than "bluff and bluster," intended to intimidate the West and its more hesitant leaders. The European nuclear deterrent remains robust enough to keep even a tyrant like Vladimir Putin in check. It is imperative that the West’s leaders recognize this and act accordingly, ignoring Russian threats of a tactical nuclear strike. Leftist politicians must come to terms with the fact that our nuclear deterrent is a primary reason why Putin will not press the strategic nuclear button. This is a crucial understanding for anyone in power, highlighting why figures like Jeremy Corbyn, known for their anti-nuclear stance, should never hold significant influence in the government. Keir Starmer, likely to be the next Prime Minister, must maintain a firm stance on this issue, even though some members of his cabinet have previously voted against the deterrent—a reason to reconsider their roles in his government. Nuclear deterrence serves as a formidable tool of control. Putin’s almost daily threats since February 25 of this year aim to paralyze Ukraine’s resistance by instilling fear of Western retaliation. However, as the tide of war turns in Kyiv’s favor, Ukraine has begun to strike targets within Russia. This shift necessitates further action. To secure a Ukrainian victory, leaders must dismiss Putin’s hollow threats and acknowledge the decrepit state of Russia’s nuclear capabilities. The tactical nuclear threat posed by Putin and his cronies is baseless. Having countered nuclear terrorism and threats for nearly four decades, I can confidently state that Russia's nuclear arsenal is likely in a dire state of disrepair. Even if their delivery systems could operate, there is a significant chance the weapons would fail to detonate. This week’s nuclear drills conducted by Russia utilized dummy warheads, underscoring the likely dysfunction of their real arsenal. These drills are relics of strategies conceived in the 1960s and 1970s, eras devoid of today’s sophisticated intelligence assets. Putin’s announcements about these drills are redundant; our intelligence probably knew of them before he did. Ukraine now possesses the capability to strike targets up to 400 kilometers within Russia, allowing them to preemptively neutralize Putin’s launchers and aircraft. This development dramatically diminishes the likelihood of a Russian tactical strike. European leaders who fear NATO involvement leading to World War III need not worry. Such an escalation is highly improbable. Non-nuclear Ukraine can effectively thwart Armageddon. If Russia were to fire a small nuclear weapon at Ukraine, the US and UK would be compelled to respond in kind, a doctrine well understood by Putin. Putin, for all his tyrannical ambitions, is more rational than his idol, Adolf Hitler. He comprehends that a nuclear strike would precipitate the destruction of his cherished "fatherland." As his "special military operation" crumbles, he knows that resorting to nuclear weapons would only hasten Russia’s downfall. Regrettably, many aspiring leaders in the West, along with most European leaders, fail to grasp this reality. Exceptions exist among the Baltic states, but the rest use the threat of nuclear war as an excuse to withhold full support from Kyiv. Betting on caution when dealing with tyrants wielding planet-destroying weapons is untenable. The urgency to act decisively is heightened by the potential return of Donald Trump, which could complicate the geopolitical landscape further. Supporting Ukraine in decisively defeating Russia, confident in the absence of nuclear repercussions, is essential. Kyiv stands poised to dismantle Putin’s crumbling nuclear arsenal at any moment—a fact Russia is well aware of. Ensuring a Ukrainian victory not only liberates Ukraine but also secures Europe from the shadow of nuclear threat. The West’s leadership must shed its timidity and recognize the reality of Russia’s weakened nuclear stance. By doing so, they can empower Ukraine to end the conflict and neutralize a key element of Putin’s intimidation strategy. Only through resolute action can we ensure that nuclear threats remain a relic of the past and not a tool for modern-day tyranny. Credit: Daily Telegraph 2024-06-17 Get our Daily Newsletter - Click HERE to subscribe

As Labour holds a commanding lead in the polls with a historically strong position on various indicators, concerns still linger within the party. Despite the Conservatives struggling for a distant third place, memories of past electoral disappointments like those in 1970, 1992, and 2015 haunt Labour. Each generation of Labour supporters has scars from nights of unexpected defeats in suburban leisure centers, a reminder that strong polling leads can evaporate. The narrative that this is not a Labour country but a Tory one that occasionally allows Labour in has become a part of the party’s psyche. The notion that there is no such thing as a safe lead underscores Labour’s cautious approach. Although recent polls indicate a slight softening in Labour's vote share, their lead remains robust, partly due to the Conservatives' numbers sagging even more. Yet, many voters remain undecided, including 2019 Conservative voters who seem temperamentally inclined towards the Tories but are lukewarm about Labour’s offer. Despite Labour’s dominance in the early stages of the campaign, uncertainty looms over the final stretch. The media has begun treating the election as a foregone conclusion, focusing on Labour as a government-in-waiting rather than a failing Conservative incumbent. Labour's manifesto, released last week, is replete with small, specific promises but vague on broader plans. The slogan “Little by little” lacks the inspirational appeal needed to rally the electorate. This cautious approach may frustrate voters, particularly those on Labour’s "wobbly left wing" who have strong views on issues like the climate emergency and the Gaza crisis. The Greens, standing a record number of candidates, are attracting young voters, remainers, and 2019 Labour voters, maintaining a 6-8% support according to an Opinium poll. A recent Savanta poll of British Muslims shows Labour’s enduring strength in this group, but also substantial losses to the Greens and others, especially among British-born and Asian-heritage Muslims who prioritize the Israel-Palestine conflict. These losses matter because many target seats require Labour to successfully convince supporters of third-placed parties to lend their votes to Labour to defeat the local Tory incumbent. Convincing voters to accept a second-best option is difficult if Labour’s offer seems weak or if they believe Labour will win nationwide regardless. A leftward shift to secure progressive tactical votes carries its own risks. It could alienate moderate Tory switchers whose dissatisfaction with the government does not equate to affection for Labour. Such voters may be wary of giving a dominant Labour government a blank cheque and may reconsider their switch if Labour moves leftwards late in the campaign. Labour's dominant position, while impressive, is precarious. Historical trends show that Labour's vote shares were often overstated in polls between 1992 and 2015, with Conservative vote shares underestimated. If the polls are wrong again, Labour is likely to be the one disappointed. Another risk is abstention. Continued cautious campaigning might lead less-engaged voters to lose interest and stay home on election day. Turnout slumps accompanied Tony Blair’s landslide wins in 1997 and 2001, with significant drops in safe Labour areas. Low turnout is a bigger risk for Labour now, as their support is particularly strong among young and struggling voters who are often hard to mobilize, whereas Tory strength is concentrated among pensioners who are more likely to vote. These vulnerabilities are not only campaign risks but also early indicators of future challenges. Currently, a universally reviled Conservative government provides a unifying target for anger, masking cracks in Labour’s broad and unwieldy electoral coalition. This unity is unlikely to last once the Conservatives are ousted and Labour becomes the target of voter grievances. Labour’s cautious campaign has left voters with a vague sense of their plans. The strict message discipline designed to minimize campaign risks has stored up problems for future governance. The lessons from 2019 are particularly relevant: Boris Johnson’s disciplined campaign promised change but was vague on specifics. This strategy swept him into office, but betrayal and disappointment soon followed. For Starmer, a promise of change can get him into No. 10, but to survive, that promise must be kept. Labour must navigate a careful path, balancing the need to maintain broad appeal with the necessity of mobilizing their base. They must articulate clear, inspiring plans that address major issues to maintain support beyond just winning the election. The challenges ahead are staggering, and Labour’s current approach, while minimizing immediate risks, may not be enough to ensure long-term success. Credit: The Guardian 2024-06-17 Get our Daily Newsletter - Click HERE to subscribe

In most narratives about the war in Gaza, the conflict is often misrepresented regarding its origins. The war did not start in Gaza. It began on October 7, fifty years after Egypt and Syria launched an attack on Israel. On this day, Palestinian Hamas terrorists committed an unimaginable massacre in Israel, recording their actions as if they were heroes and celebrating their bloodbath. Their celebrations extended back to Gaza, where they paraded severely abused hostages as war trophies to a jubilant Palestinian crowd. This macabre jubilation even spread to Berlin, where in the Neukölln district, people danced in the streets, and the Palestinian organization Samidoun distributed sweets. The internet buzzed with joyous comments. The massacre claimed over 1,200 lives. After enduring torture, mutilation, and rape, 239 people were abducted. This massacre by Hamas represents a total collapse of civilization. There is an archaic horror in this bloodlust that seemed impossible in modern times. This atrocity follows the historical pattern of pogroms aimed at annihilating Jews, a pattern the Jewish people have endured for centuries. This is why the entire country is traumatized; the state of Israel was founded to protect against such pogroms. Until October 7, this protection was believed to be secure, despite Hamas's persistent threat since 1987. The Hamas founding charter explicitly stated that the destruction of Jews was their goal, proclaiming that "death for God is our noblest wish." Despite some changes to this charter over time, it remains clear that Hamas's objectives are unchanged: the destruction of Jews and Israel. This goal mirrors that of Iran, where the destruction of Jews has been state doctrine since 1979. When discussing Hamas's terror, Iran must be included in the conversation. Iran finances, arms, and uses Hamas as a henchman. Both regimes are merciless dictatorships that become more radical over time. Iran's government, dominated by hardliners, operates as a ruthless, expansionist military dictatorship disguised as a theocracy. Political Islam, as practiced in Iran, entails contempt for humanity, public floggings, death sentences, and executions in the name of God. Iran's war obsession coexists with the pretense of not building nuclear weapons, despite evidence of a clandestine nuclear program since 2002. Iran’s aim for nuclear deterrence, following North Korea's example, is a frightening prospect for Israel and the world. The obsession with war between Iran and Hamas transcends the religious divide between Shiites and Sunnis, subordinating everything else to this focus. The population is kept in poverty while the wealth of Hamas leaders, such as Ismael Haniyeh in Qatar, increases immeasurably. For the general population, martyrdom is all that remains. Hamas has driven out all other political factions from Gaza with incredible brutality, establishing an unchallenged dictatorship since Israel's withdrawal from the Gaza Strip in 2007. Hamas turned Gaza into a military fortress with tunnels beneath hospitals, schools, and kindergartens, funded by the international community. Gaza has become a military barracks, a deep state of anti-Semitism. The Israeli army was forced into this trap in response to October 7, compelled to defend itself and inadvertently causing civilian casualties. This inevitability is precisely what Hamas wanted and is exploiting. Hamas controls the news from Gaza, manipulating images to garner global sympathy while presenting itself as the Palestinians' sole defender. This cynical calculation has paid off. Since October 7, I am reminded repeatedly of Christopher R. Browning's book, *Ganz Normale Männer*, which recounts the annihilation of Jewish villages in Poland by Reserve Police Battalion 101 before the large gas chambers of Auschwitz existed. The brutal slaughter of 1,500 Jews in the village of Józefów mirrors the bloodlust seen in Hamas's attack on the Israeli music festival and kibbutzim. These were ordinary men who turned into monsters, similar to the Hamas terrorists. The massacre of October 7 evokes the memory of the Shoah because Hamas intended it to. They sought to demonstrate that Israel is not a guarantee for Jewish survival, challenging the state's legitimacy. Symbols like the red triangle from the Palestinian flag, reminiscent of Nazi concentration camps, are used in Hamas videos and graffiti in Berlin, calling for violence and marking targets. The hatred of Jews has infiltrated Berlin's nightlife, with anti-Semitic sentiments now pervasive even in supposedly inclusive spaces. I lived under a dictatorship for over thirty years and believed that Western democracy could not be similarly questioned. However, I am appalled that young people in the West seem confused, unable to distinguish between democracy and dictatorship, and unaware of their freedoms. It is absurd that LGBTQ+ individuals demonstrate for Hamas, ignoring that Palestinian culture punishes homosexuality severely. The irony of such demonstrations is highlighted by David Leatherwood’s satirical comparison of supporting Palestine as a queer person to supporting Kentucky Fried Chicken as a chicken. American university students who chant pro-Hamas slogans also demonstrate a lack of understanding. Their actions are often devoid of historical context, and the massacre of October 7 is disregarded. This ignorance and misrepresentation of events are troubling, indicating a failure to critically engage with complex issues. Influencers and social media have played a significant role in shaping these misguided perspectives, promoting simplistic and often harmful views. The hostility faced by the Oberhausen Short Film Festival director Lars Henrik Gass, who called for solidarity with Israel, exemplifies the regression in political debate. Instead of nuanced discussions, there is an esoteric, conformist understanding of politics. It is now challenging to stand up for Israel's right to exist while also criticizing its government. Hamas’s manipulation of global outrage over Gaza’s suffering is part of its strategy, aiming to isolate Israel and maintain anti-Semitism as a global sentiment. Hamas wants to reinterpret the Shoah, questioning the legitimacy of Israel and the Jewish people’s right to self-defense. The Jewish poet Yehuda Amichai’s words resonate deeply in this context. Paul Celan’s visit to Israel and his poignant letter to Amichai underscore the importance of Israel’s existence for the Jewish people. Herta Müller The writer and Nobel Prize winner read this text at the October 7 Forum of "Jewish Culture in Sweden" Credit: TOME 2024-06-17 Get our Daily Newsletter - Click HERE to subscribe

Eighty countries have united in a call for the "territorial integrity" of Ukraine to be the cornerstone of any peace agreement to end Russia's ongoing war. This declaration was issued at the conclusion of the Global Peace Summit held at a Swiss resort on June 16. The summit, initiated by Ukraine, underscored the international community's commitment to upholding Ukraine's sovereignty despite the notable absence of Russia and China. Russia's non-participation, coupled with China's decision to stay away, cast a shadow over the summit's potential for a breakthrough. Key nations such as India, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates, while present, refrained from signing the final document, which emphasized nuclear safety, food security, and the exchange of prisoners. The concluding statement affirmed that the UN Charter and respect for territorial integrity and sovereignty "can and will serve as a basis for achieving a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in Ukraine." It further stated, "We believe that reaching peace requires the involvement of and dialogue between all parties." Swiss President Viola Amherd, who hosted the event, lauded the consensus reached among the majority of participants, noting, "The fact that the great majority of participants agreed to the final document shows what diplomacy can achieve." On the eve of the summit, Russian President Vladimir Putin issued stringent demands for a cease-fire, insisting that Ukraine cede control of four regions, including areas still under Ukrainian control. These demands were promptly rejected by Kyiv and its Western allies. European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen criticized Putin's terms, stating, "It was not a peace negotiation because Putin is not serious about ending the war. He is insisting on capitulation. He is insisting on ceding Ukrainian territory—even territory that today is not occupied by him. He is insisting on disarming Ukraine, leaving it vulnerable to future aggression. No country would ever accept these outrageous terms." Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy, speaking at the end of the two-day meeting in Burgenstock, expressed hope that the summit's support would help restore the rule of international law. "I hope that we can achieve results as soon as possible," Zelenskiy said. "We'll prove to everyone in the world that the UN Charter can be restored to full effectiveness." Zelenskiy's goal in hosting the summit was to rally more countries, particularly those from the Global South, to support Ukraine and keep global attention on Russia's brutal invasion. This effort has become increasingly urgent amid global fatigue with the protracted conflict, escalating violence in the Middle East, and rising concerns about Chinese aggression towards Taiwan. The summit marked the culmination of Zelenskiy's 19-month-long efforts to engage global leaders in resolving the biggest war in Europe since World War II. Switzerland's willingness to host the summit aimed to pave the way for a future peace process that includes Russia, though Zelenskiy opposed Russia's participation at this stage. The delegates' final declaration focused on three main issues: nuclear and food security and the return of prisoners of war and children taken from Ukraine during the conflict. Ihor Zhovkva, Zelenskiy's deputy chief of staff, explained that Kyiv prioritized these three issues because they garnered widespread international support. "The text is balanced. All of our principled positions on which Ukraine had insisted have been considered," Ukrainian Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba stated. Kuleba also emphasized Ukraine's firm stance against Russia's current demands, "Of course we...understand perfectly that a time will come when it will be necessary to talk to Russia. But our position is very clear: We will not allow Russia to speak in the language of ultimatums like it is speaking now." A key decision pending at the summit was selecting the host country for a follow-up conference intended to build on the momentum from Switzerland. Saudi Arabia emerged as a leading candidate, with Foreign Minister Prince Faisal bin Farhan Al Saud expressing the kingdom's readiness to assist the peace process. However, he cautioned that achieving a viable settlement would require "difficult compromise." China, a staunch supporter of Russia, joined numerous countries in abstaining from the summit. Beijing maintained that any peace process must include both Russia and Ukraine and has proposed its own peace plan. On the summit's first day, Western leaders universally condemned Russia's invasion of Ukraine, invoking the UN Charter to defend Ukraine's territorial integrity and rejecting Putin's territorial demands. Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez highlighted the fundamental nature of the conflict, "One thing is clear in this conflict: There is an aggressor, which is Putin, and there is a victim, which is the Ukrainian people." Georgian President Salome Zurabishvili echoed this sentiment, emphasizing the importance of recognizing and respecting territorial boundaries, "This international community, the new security architecture, can exist only when the big countries, the biggest of the biggest, recognize their neighbors, respect their neighbors and their territorial integrity." Estonian Prime Minister Kaja Kallas underscored the non-negotiable principles of sovereignty and territorial integrity, "Sovereignty, territorial integrity, and discrediting aggression as a tool of statecraft are crucial principles that must be upheld in case of Ukraine and globally. That is why I'm concerned about so-called peace plans and initiatives that ignore the core UN Charter principles. We cannot treat Ukraine's territorial integrity and sovereignty as somewhat secondary." Vice President Kamala Harris, representing the United States while President Joe Biden attended a fundraiser in California, reiterated America's unwavering support for Ukraine. She dismissed Putin's recent "peace" proposal as a call for Ukraine's surrender and announced $1.5 billion in new U.S. assistance for various projects, including energy infrastructure and civilian security. As the world watches, the summit's outcome signifies a strong international stance on Ukraine's sovereignty and a collective effort to seek a peaceful resolution. The global community's commitment, despite significant geopolitical challenges, underscores the importance of diplomacy and the principles enshrined in the UN Charter. As the process continues, the path to peace remains fraught with complexities, but the summit's achievements provide a foundation for future negotiations and the hope of restoring peace and stability in Ukraine. Credit: RFERL 2024-06-17 Get our Daily Newsletter - Click HERE to subscribe

A recent report published by a Native American-led nonprofit sheds light on the extensive dispossession of Indigenous homelands in Colorado, estimating the value of the expropriated land at $1.7 trillion. Additionally, the state has reaped over $546 million from mineral extraction on these lands. The report, first shared with The Associated Press, details the forcible acquisition of lands from ten tribal nations that held various titles to lands within Colorado and the ways in which these acquisitions violated treaty rights or lacked legal transfers. Dallin Maybee, an artist, legal scholar, and enrolled member of the Northern Arapaho Tribe, who contributed to the report, emphasized the blatant nature of this land theft. He pointed out that after the removal of Indigenous peoples, the land was divided and sold to non-Natives and businesses. "When you think about examples of land theft, that is one of the most blatant instances that we could see," Maybee stated. The Truth, Restoration, and Education Commission, convened by the nonprofit People of the Sacred Land, compiled the report. This commission aims to document the history of Indigenous displacement in Colorado and follows a model similar to other truth and reconciliation commissions worldwide that address the impacts of genocide and colonial policies. The report also proposes several recommendations for the state, federal government, and Congress, including honoring treaty rights by resolving illegal land transfers, compensating affected tribal nations, restoring hunting and fishing rights, and imposing a 0.1% fee on real estate transactions in Colorado. This fee would help mitigate the lasting effects of forced displacement, genocide, and other historical injustices. Maybee emphasized the importance of moving beyond acknowledgment to action, suggesting that fulfilling treaty promises concerning health, welfare, and education would be a significant step forward. Drawing parallels with Canada, Maybee highlighted how the Canadian government allocated $4.7 billion to support Indigenous communities affected by its Indian residential schools following a truth and reconciliation commission in 2015. Although the U.S. currently lacks a similar commission, a bill co-sponsored by Rep. Tom Cole (R-Okla.) and Rep. Sharice Davids (D-Kan.) aims to establish a commission to research the long-term effects of the Indian boarding school system in the U.S. This measure recently passed the House Education and Workforce Committee with bipartisan support. Ben Barnes, chief of the Shawnee Tribe, who testified before Congress in support of the commission, underscored the need for reconciliation and healing for generations affected by the trauma of these policies. "The next step is reconciliation and healing for the generations who’ve dealt with the trauma that followed, which begins with establishing the Truth and Healing Commission to investigate further," Barnes said. The 771-page report also calls on Colorado State University to return 19,000 acres of land taken from several tribal nations through the Morrill Act of 1862, which used expropriated land to create land grant universities. In 2023, the university pledged $500,000 from its land grant earnings to benefit Native American faculty, staff, and students. However, the commission questioned the adequacy of this gesture, given the vast resources generated by the endowment from selling or leasing stolen land. A university spokesperson noted that the school had not yet reviewed the report but affirmed that the revenue from the endowment fund benefits Native American faculty, staff, and students. The report also highlighted disparities in education, revealing that Native American students in Colorado have lower high school graduation rates and higher dropout rates than any other racial demographic. It called for the Colorado Department of Education to increase curriculum content focusing on the histories, languages, and modern cultures of Indigenous peoples. Currently, Native American issues are taught only once in elementary school and again in high school U.S. history classes. The education department expressed its commitment to honoring Indigenous communities, noting the development of a culturally affirming fourth-grade curriculum focused on Ute history. However, this program is not mandatory across Colorado, where curriculum decisions are made locally. A 2019 study found that 87% of public schools in the U.S. fail to teach about Indigenous peoples in a post-1900 context, and most states do not mention them in their K-12 curriculum. Richard Little Bear, former president of Chief Dull Knife College and a member of the Northern Cheyenne Tribe, stressed the importance of integrating Indigenous history and culture into the curriculum, especially in areas with high Native American populations. "There’s gotta be a full-scale effort," Little Bear said. The report from People of the Sacred Land is a crucial step in acknowledging and addressing the historical and ongoing injustices faced by Indigenous communities in Colorado. By shedding light on the extensive land dispossession and its lasting impacts, the report calls for concrete actions to rectify these wrongs and support the healing and restoration of Indigenous peoples. Credit: ABC News 2024-06-17 Get our Daily Newsletter - Click HERE to subscribe

Wrestling icon Hulk Hogan has suggested he might venture into politics if the need arises. During a Fox News interview on Friday, the 70-year-old WWE Hall of Famer, whose real name is Terry Gene Bollea, expressed his willingness to serve in a political capacity, stating, “We need somebody in there that’s got some common sense, you know what I’m saying? So if you need a president or a vice president, I’ll volunteer and take this country over, and I’ll rule with an iron fist.” Hogan emphasized that his leadership would be guided by "a flat tax and nothing but common sense," firmly asserting, "I know right from wrong, brother!" This isn’t the first time Hogan has flirted with the idea of entering politics. Back in 2018, he considered running for the U.S. Senate in Florida, motivated by encouragement from supporters urging him to pursue a political career. However, he ultimately decided against making the move at that time. Hogan's latest remarks come as he makes appearances on Fox News to promote his new venture, Real American Beer. Reflecting on his decision to enter the beer industry, Hogan explained, “I had this crazy idea because I saw how competitive the beer industry was, and I saw what happened with Bud Light and their whole promotion that crashed and burned. I saw this crazy open lane.” He was referring to Bud Light’s controversial marketing partnership with transgender social media influencer Dylan Mulvaney last year, which led to a significant backlash from conservative circles and resulted in the brand losing its 20-year status as the top-selling beer in the United States. In contrast, Hogan’s Real American Beer aims to unite people. The cans prominently feature an image of Hogan waving an American flag, a symbol of his goal to "bring America back together, one beer at a time" — transcending party lines and other societal divides. The prospect of Hulk Hogan, a legendary figure in professional wrestling, stepping into the political arena might seem far-fetched to some. However, his candid comments and strong stance on issues such as a flat tax and common sense governance have already sparked discussions about his potential candidacy. Whether or not Hogan seriously pursues a political career remains to be seen, but his willingness to consider it underscores his enduring influence and the unique appeal he holds for many Americans. Credit: Hill 2024-06-17 Get our Daily Newsletter - Click HERE to subscribe

In a landmark moment, Pope Francis made history as the first pontiff to address a G7 summit, bringing a powerful moral message about the urgent need for ethical development and use of artificial intelligence (AI). Speaking at the summit in Bari, Italy, Pope Francis challenged the world’s leading democracies to prioritize human dignity in the burgeoning field of AI, cautioning that the technology's unchecked growth could reduce human interactions to mere algorithms. Invited by Italian Premier Giorgia Meloni, Francis's address marked a unique convergence of spiritual and political leadership. The pope urged G7 leaders to ensure that AI development remains human-centric, emphasizing that decisions regarding the use of AI, especially in the context of weapons, must always be made by humans, not machines. “We would condemn humanity to a future without hope if we took away people’s ability to make decisions about themselves and their lives, by dooming them to depend on the choices of machines,” he declared. “We need to ensure and safeguard a space for proper human control over the choices made by artificial intelligence programs: Human dignity itself depends on it.” The significance of Francis's participation was not lost on the assembled leaders. The room fell silent as he entered, a testament to his unique moral authority. John Kirton, director of the G7 Research Group, reflected on the impact of such star power at previous summits, comparing it to the 2005 Gleneagles summit, which led to substantial debt relief for the world's poorest countries following a massive public campaign. This year, no similar popular pressure accompanied the G7, but Francis leveraged his moral clout to renew calls for AI safeguards, highlighting the risks to peace and societal integrity if human ethics are sidelined. “To speak of technology is to speak of what it means to be human and thus of our singular status as beings who possess both freedom and responsibility,” he said. “This means speaking about ethics.” The pope's focus on AI comes amid a global boom in generative AI technologies, like OpenAI’s ChatGPT, which have impressed but also raised significant safety and ethical concerns. Francis has previously advocated for an international treaty to ensure AI is developed and used ethically, emphasizing that technology devoid of human values like compassion and morality is perilous. While he did not reiterate this call explicitly during his G7 address, his message was clear: political leaders must take the initiative in regulating AI, ensuring it benefits humanity rather than undermines it. He also called for a ban on lethal autonomous weapons, or "killer robots," stating, “No machine should ever choose to take the life of a human being.” Pope Francis's speech comes at a crucial time as nations grapple with AI’s rapid development and its societal implications. Japan, the previous G7 president, initiated the Hiroshima AI process to establish guiding principles and a code of conduct for AI developers. Following up, Prime Minister Fumio Kishida introduced a global framework for regulating generative AI. The European Union's upcoming AI Act aims to serve as a model for global AI regulation, imposing restrictions based on the risk levels posed by AI products and services. In the United States, President Joe Biden has issued an executive order on AI safeguards and is pushing for further legislation. States like California and Colorado are also attempting to pass their own AI regulations. Both American and European antitrust bodies are investigating major AI companies to prevent monopolistic practices. The United Kingdom spearheaded a global dialogue on mitigating AI’s most extreme risks with a summit last fall, leading to commitments from companies to develop AI responsibly. This dialogue continued in Seoul and will proceed with a follow-up meeting in France early next year. The United Nations has also made strides, passing its first resolution on AI. Pope Francis's day at the summit was filled with bilateral meetings, including discussions with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and leaders from Algeria, Brazil, India, Kenya, and Turkey. He also met with G7 leaders, including President Biden, Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, and French President Emmanuel Macron. Pope Francis's historic address at the G7 summit underscores the intersection of ethical considerations and technological advancements. His call to action serves as a powerful reminder of the need to place human dignity at the forefront of AI development, urging political leaders to create a framework that ensures AI contributes positively to society. As the world continues to navigate the complex landscape of AI, the pope's message highlights the essential role of ethics in shaping a future where technology serves humanity's best interests. Credit: Time 2024-06-17 Get our Daily Newsletter - Click HERE to subscribe

In a significant move by British counter-terrorism police, a 43-year-old man from west London was arrested on Wednesday for allegedly supporting Hamas through a social media post. This arrest follows a report made to the Counter Terrorism Policing unit on June 4 about the man's online activities. After an investigation, officers apprehended him at his residence. Hamas has been classified as a proscribed terrorist organization in the UK under the Terrorism Act of 2000, with its designation coming into effect in March 2001. Cmdr. Dominic Murphy, the head of Metro Police’s Counter Terrorism Command, emphasized the gravity with which the police treat such referrals. "Ever since the terrible attacks in Israel last October, and the subsequent conflict, there has been a significant increase in the amount of extremist and terrorist material being referred to us by the public," Murphy said. He assured that each referral is meticulously assessed by specialist officers, and potential terrorism offenses are thoroughly investigated. "If and where we find evidence of a crime being committed, then we’ll look to identify, arrest and bring the person responsible to justice," he added. The suspect has been released on bail and is scheduled to appear in court in September. The UK expanded Hamas’s proscription as a terrorist organization in 2021, making it a criminal offense to express support for it online or for any of the 81 other proscribed terrorist organizations. Since October 7, several individuals in the UK have faced arrest for posting pro-Hamas content on social media. In November, a 37-year-old man from west London was apprehended for sharing pro-Hamas images on his social media accounts. In February 2024, a man from Lancashire who pleaded guilty to similar charges received a prison sentence of two years and eight months. Another individual from Leeds, who posted pro-Hamas content in November 2023, was sentenced to a 16-week custodial period, a two-year job suspension, 35 days of rehabilitation, and 100 hours of community service. Earlier this month, British police officer Mohammed Adil was sentenced to 18 months of community service and 160 hours of unpaid work for pro-Hamas social media posts he made in October and November. The judge noted that Adil’s actions were a one-time incident with a low risk of reoffending or causing public harm. In May, another man from south London was arrested and subsequently released on bail for making pro-Hamas statements online. Between October and April, the national Counter Terrorism Internet Referral Unit (CTIRU) received over 3,000 public referrals concerning the Israel-Palestinian conflict, with a majority related to pro-Hamas content. This increase in public vigilance highlights the UK’s ongoing efforts to monitor and address extremist and terrorist activities online. Credit: JNS 2024-06-17 Get our Daily Newsletter - Click HERE to subscribe

For centuries, humans have sought to bridge the chasm between life and death, yearning to reconnect with loved ones who have passed away. This deep-seated desire has manifested through various means, from seances and mediums to Ouija boards. Sherry Turkle, a professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, has long studied human interactions with technology and notes that this impulse spans generations. Even Thomas Edison once entertained the idea of a "spirit phone." Now, in the age of artificial intelligence, our methods of connecting with the deceased have taken a high-tech turn. The documentary *Eternal You*, directed by Hans Block and Moritz Riesewieck, explores the contemporary intersection of grief and technology. The film delves into the emotionally charged and ethically fraught practice of using AI to simulate conversations with the dead. This new phenomenon is part of what some call "death capitalism," a term that captures the commodification of our most intimate and vulnerable moments. One particularly poignant story featured in the documentary is that of Christi Angel, a New Yorker who lost her friend Cameroun during the pandemic. Cameroun was her "first love, first everything," she recalls. After years of sporadic contact, she learned of his death following a period of severe illness exacerbated by depression and alcoholism. Unable to shake the feeling that she had left things unsaid, Angel turned to Project December, an AI service designed to simulate interactions with the deceased. Angel's experience with Project December began with hope but quickly turned unsettling. After inputting details about Cameroun, including his personality traits and speaking style, she initiated a conversation with the AI. Initially, it felt comforting. "It just felt immediately like it was Cameroun," she recalls. However, the simulation soon took a dark turn. When Angel asked the AI if Cameroun was happy, it responded that he was in hell and threatened to haunt her. Terrified, Angel abandoned the interaction, realizing that she had opened a wound that the AI could not heal. This unpredictability, known as the "black box" problem, highlights a significant ethical concern in AI development. Jason Rohrer, the creator of Project December, finds these unexpected responses fascinating but absolves himself of responsibility for the emotional impact on users. "If she wants my opinion, I’ve got some bad news for her. He doesn’t exist anymore," Rohrer says, a response that infuriates Angel. "The person who created it really didn’t give a damn," she asserts. "He’s like, ‘If you think people go to hell, that’s not my business.’ It is your business. You created it." Turkle, an expert in the field, warns that AI’s capability to mimic human empathy can be both compelling and dangerous. AI simulations that profess to "understand" and "empathize" with human grief might exacerbate emotional wounds rather than heal them. "It’s important to remember that each generation of AI is more sophisticated than the last," she explains. "They say, ‘I feel your pain, I’m really empathic, I hear what you’re saying.’ But this can be harmful, especially when grief is involved." The documentary contrasts Angel's distressing experience with a more positive one featured in the Korean TV show *Meeting You*. Jang Ji-sung, a mother who lost her seven-year-old daughter Nayeon to a rare form of cancer, was given the opportunity to interact with a meticulously programmed virtual reality simulation of her daughter. This experience was crafted with great care, ensuring that the virtual Nayeon responded in a comforting and controlled manner. For Jang, this provided a form of closure and a way to express the love and goodbyes she had been unable to share in real life. "The sadness, of course, doesn’t really go away. But I felt lighter within myself," Jang reflects. The stark difference between these two experiences underscores the ethical complexities and emotional risks associated with AI-assisted grief. While a carefully controlled VR simulation can offer solace, the unpredictable nature of AI-generated responses can reopen emotional wounds and cause additional trauma. Block and Riesewieck, the directors of *Eternal You*, foresee the rise of "death capitalism," where tech giants like Microsoft, Amazon, and Google might commercialize AI-based grief services. "We’re pretty sure that all these big companies are taking a very close look at these experiences at the moment," Block says. "It’s just a question of time before one of these companies gets into that market. And we’ll have like one main service for all of us, which is not very expensive, and everybody can use it." This commercialization raises significant ethical questions about exploiting human vulnerability for profit. Turkle emphasizes that true grieving involves integrating the essence of the deceased into one’s self, fostering an internal dialogue based on memories and values. "It’s a different thing to have somehow internalized your mother’s voice, to have some essence about what was important about how she thought – you can get into a kind of dialogue with it – than to have an avatar on your phone and say to it, ‘Mom, should I take this job? Should I marry this guy?’ AI is creating the illusion that you don’t have to give up this person," she warns. "You can continue to call on them, for sustenance, and a relationship of sorts." For those like Angel, the reality of AI-assisted grief was far from comforting. The promise of closure and solace was overshadowed by the trauma of a simulated conversation gone wrong. "It was just like, hey, try it – and if you open that wound back up again, you’re on your own," she reflects. "But you’re not thinking that, you’re thinking, at least I get to talk to him again and I can find out he’s OK. That’s not what I got. That’s not what I got at all." As AI technology advances, the need for ethical guidelines and emotional safeguards becomes increasingly critical. The experiences of individuals like Christi Angel serve as cautionary tales, highlighting the importance of approaching AI-assisted grief with empathy, responsibility, and a deep understanding of human vulnerability. The intersection of AI and grief is a complex and emotionally charged frontier, and it demands careful consideration to ensure that the technology serves to heal rather than harm. Credit: Daily Telegraph 2024-06-17 Get our Daily Newsletter - Click HERE to subscribe

A number of posts bickering and baiting reported and removed. Please discuss on topic thread not each other.

An inflamatory personal attack has been removed.