‘Dangerous': Aus response to strikes slammed
Deputy Opposition Leader Ted O'Brien has slammed Anthony Albanese's response to US strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities, claiming it sends a 'dangerous message to the world'.
Iran overnight fired missiles at the Al Udeid Airbase in Qatar in response to US strikes on its nuclear facilities at the weekend.
The Trump administration has suggested it was informed of the attack beforehand and Qatar was able to shoot down the Iranian missiles without any casualties.
Donald Trump announced on Tuesday morning - hours after the strike - that Israel and Iran had agreed to 'a complete and total ceasefire'.
The Prime Minister has been widely criticised by the Coalition and other political figures for his response to the US strikes, not fronting media until after a National Security Committee meeting on Monday.
Mr Albanese did officially back Mr Trump's actions, though refused to directly answer whether Australia was briefed prior to the decision to strike being made.
Mr O'Brien claimed Mr Albanese showed a 'lack of leadership' on the day of the strikes.
'The Prime Minister was silent – he put out no statement, he did not speak to the Australian people, he did not call a meeting of the National Security Committee,' he said on Today.
'He did not come out and decisively back the United States, our key ally. Unfortunately, that only weakens our relationship with the United States.
'And it sends a very dangerous message to the world that Australia, under this government, is passive. It's a failure of a leadership test.'
Appearing alongside Mr O'Brien, Employment Minister Amanda Rishworth hit back at claims Mr Albanese was 'defensive, dismissive, and really on edge' in Monday's press conference.
'What we saw was the Prime Minister come out and clearly explain Australia's position – clearly explain that we don't have a central role in this conflict and clearly explain what we're doing for Australians,' Ms Rishworth said.
'We are a methodical government … you might be used to the chaos of previous Coalition governments coming up with different positions, but we're a methodical government.'
Ms Rishworth did not answer directly when pressed by host Karl Stefanovic on whether the government would support further US strikes.
'I think these strikes were very targeted by the reports from the US,' she said.
'They have been effective in disrupting the nuclear facilities, and that was what their focus was, of course.
'The world for a long time has recognised that it is inconceivable that Iran gets access to nuclear weapons, and we – you know, for the peace and stability, stability of the world – that's been important.'
'The US has been pretty clear that it thinks it was a successful targeting of those facilities, but we want to see some return to diplomacy to actually de-escalate this, because a wider conflict in the Middle East is an incredibly difficult circumstance that no one wants to see.'
Foreign Minister Penny Wong and other senior Labor ministers on Tuesday morning condemned Iran's retaliatory strike on the US base.
Coalition's renewed calls to 'stand with US'
Sussan Ley has reaffirmed the Coalition's support for the US in the wake of Iran's strike, and called on Mr Albanese to attend this week's NATO Summit to seek a meeting with Mr Trump.
In a statement on Tuesday morning, the Opposition Leader reiterated their support for actions taken by the US to 'prevent the Iranian regime from acquiring nuclear weapons'.
'The Coalition condemns, in the strongest possible terms, the Iranian regime's direct missile attack on a United States base in Qatar,' Ms Ley said.
'We note President Trump has said the United States was provided with prior notice to prevent loss of life and injury. That said, this provocative act is a violation of Qatari sovereignty.
'Australia must stand firmly with our allies and partners, including the United States, in the face of such aggression.
'Noting reports that President Trump may be seeking meetings with IP4 nations - including Australia - at NATO, we continue to urge (Mr Albanese) to attend.
'Now is a time for Australia to stand with the United States and Anthony Albanese should be taking every opportunity to do so.'
Deputy Prime Minister Richard Marles has already travelled to Europe to represent Australia at the NATO Summit.
More to come
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Miami Herald
5 minutes ago
- Miami Herald
Who is Senate parliamentarian? What to know about staffer Trump seeks to overrule
At the heart of the debate over the 'Big, Beautiful Bill' stands one little-known official: the Senate parliamentarian. The low-profile congressional official has been thrust into the spotlight after issuing a procedural decision on the GOP-backed spending bill, drawing sharp responses from some Republicans. President Donald Trump himself has even weighed in, calling for the 'unelected senate staffer' to be ignored. Who is the Senate parliamentarian? What powers do they have? And why are Republicans up in arms? Here is what to know. Who is the parliamentarian? The Senate parliamentarian is a nonpartisan advisor who makes recommendations to lawmakers regarding the interpretation of rules and precedents in the upper chamber. The role was established in 1935 amid the passage of a slew of New Deal-era laws, which 'expanded opportunities for procedural confusion and mischief,' according to Senate records. The parliamentarian is appointed by the Senate majority leader and serves at their pleasure, according to the National Constitution Center. The official's rulings are not necessarily final. The presiding officer of the Senate — typically the vice president or the president pro tempore — can simply ignore their advice, according to the Bipartisan Policy Center. This has happened a few times in recent history, including in 2017, when GOP lawmakers changed Senate rules to allow Supreme Court nominees to be confirmed with a simple majority. That said, the Senate typically adheres to the parliamentarian's guidance, according to Time. This included in 2021, when the staffer rejected Democrats' attempt to include a pathway to citizenship for illegal immigrants in the 'Build Back Better' bill. Currently, the office of the parliamentarian is held by Elizabeth MacDonough, who has served in the position since 2012. She was appointed by then-Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, a Democrat. MacDonough formerly worked at the Senate library and as a trial attorney, according to the Wall Street Journal. She also advised former Vice President Al Gore during a recount dispute following the 2000 election. Why are Republicans upset? Some Republicans expressed outrage at the parliamentarian after she issued rulings on the 'Big Beautiful Bill,' which is currently being considered by the Senate, following its passage in the House in May. In late June, MacDonough ruled that a series of provisions in the bill violate the Senate's Byrd Rule, which prohibits 'extraneous' provisions from being included in budget reconciliation bills. One such provision would have charged immigrants a $1,000 fee to apply for asylum in the U.S., according to The Hill. MacDonough also ruled against several provisions that affect Medicaid. One was a proposed cap on provider taxes, which states use to fund Medicaid, according to CNBC. Another would block noncitizens from accessing Medicaid in addition to other health programs, according to USA Today. In response to these proposed changes, multiple GOP lawmakers telegraphed their frustration with MacDonough. 'The WOKE Senate Parliamentarian, who was appointed by Harry Reid and advised Al Gore, just STRUCK DOWN a provision BANNING illegals from stealing Medicaid from American citizens,' Sen. Tommy Tuberville, a Republican from Alabama, wrote on X, formerly Twitter, on June 26. 'THE SENATE PARLIAMENTARIAN SHOULD BE FIRED ASAP.' Rep. Greg Steube, a Florida Republican, also singled out MacDonough for criticism. 'How is it that an unelected swamp bureaucrat, who was appointed by Harry Reid over a decade ago, gets to decide what can and cannot go in President Trump's One Big Beautiful Bill?' he wrote on X. He then called on Vice President JD Vance — using his power as the presiding officer in the Senate — to ignore the proposed changes. Trump appeared to concur with this view. 'Great Congressman Greg Steube is 100% correct,' he wrote on Truth Social on June 29. 'An unelected Senate Staffer (Parliamentarian), should not be allowed to hurt the Republicans Bill. Wants many fantastic things out. NO!' However, Senate Majority Leader John Thune, a South Dakota Republican, poured cold water on the push to sideline MacDonough. When asked by Politico about overruling her on June 26, Thune said, 'No, that would not be a good option for getting a bill done.' Meanwhile, other Republicans have defended MacDonough. North Carolina Sen. Thom Thillis, who recently announced he will not seek reelection, called her a 'straight shooter,' according to Reuters. And Louisiana Sen. John Kennedy told reporters, 'Nah, never overrule the parliamentarian.'
Newsweek
13 minutes ago
- Newsweek
DOJ Says Harvard Committed 'Violent' Civil Rights Violation
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Harvard University committed "violent violations" of U.S. civil rights and is "among the most prominent and visible breeding ground for race discrimination," according to a new letter sent Monday to the higher education institution by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and Department of Justice (DOJ), alongside a federal interagency task force. Why It Matters The agency findings against Harvard by the joint task force could carry major implications for both federal oversight of higher education and institutional accountability, in addition to federal funding. President Donald Trump and his administration has taken aim at the prestigious university, including earlier this month signing a proclamation blocking nearly all foreign students from entering the United States to attend the Ivy League institution. Graduates gather as they attend commencement ceremony at Harvard University in Cambridge, Massachusetts, on May 29, 2025. Graduates gather as they attend commencement ceremony at Harvard University in Cambridge, Massachusetts, on May 29, 2025. RICK FRIEDMAN/AFP via Getty Images What To Know The letter, delivered jointly to Harvard President Alan Garber, states that the task force has found that the university engaged in a "violent violation" of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act due to what officials called deliberate indifference and, at times, willful participation in antisemitic harassment targeting Jewish students, faculty, and staff on campus. Federal investigators stated that unless Harvard implements significant changes immediately, the Ivy League school risks losing all federal financial privileges, potentially jeopardizing its access to research grants and other U.S. government resources. The probe, led by the HHS Office for Civil Rights, concluded that the university's response to antisemitic incidents constituted both neglect and active complicity, violating statutory protections against discrimination based on race, color, or national origin. Citing the Supreme Court's opinion in Students for Fair Admission v. Harvard (2023), federal officials alleged that Harvard remains "among the most prominent and visible breeding grounds for race discrimination." The investigation concluded that Harvard's failure to adequately protect Jewish students reflects broader, systemic issues within the institution. The HHS notice warned that continued federal funding for Harvard may violate U.S. law unless the university addresses these issues decisively. The joint letter argued, "Any institution that refuses to meet its duties under federal law may not receive a wide range of federal privileges," underscoring the possibility that Harvard—if found noncompliant—could lose critical federal funding and grants. Officials said that the situation at Harvard represents not simply a failure to address specific incidents, but a structural climate that has allowed antisemitism to persist, prompting government intervention to uphold civil rights standards. The letter was signed by senior officials from DOJ, the General Services Administration, HHS, and the Department of Education. Harvard's Response Harvard University, in a statement provided to Newsweek following the issuance of the letter, called the institution "far from indifferent on this issue" of antisemitism and "strongly disagrees with the government's findings." "Antisemitism is a serious problem and no matter the context, it is unacceptable," the statement says. "Harvard has taken substantive, proactive steps to address the root causes of antisemitism in its community. "In responding to the government's investigation, Harvard not only shared its comprehensive and retrospective Antisemitism and Anti-Israeli Bias Report but also outlined the ways that it has strengthened policies, disciplined those who violate them, encouraged civil discourse, and promoted open, respectful dialogue." It added that the university "has made significant strides to combat bigotry, hate and bias," and that it is not alone in confronting the ongoing challenge. Harvard's summary of actions and commitments, per its own Task Force on Combating Antisemitism and Anti-Israeli Bias, outlined multiple initiatives currently being undertaken. Some include strengthening academic and residential life and including more Jewish student representation; supporting belonging and promoting respectful dialogue; and updating campus use rules and other procedures. The letter claimed Harvard did not dispute the factual findings. The officials argued that the university's "inaction in the face of these civil rights violations is a clear example of the demographic hierarchy that has taken hold of the University." Details of the Investigation and Findings The HHS Office for Civil Rights found that Jewish and Israeli students at Harvard reported a climate of bias, harassment, and fear. The official notice outlined that "the majority of Jewish students reported experiencing negative bias or discrimination on campus, while a quarter felt physically unsafe." Specific incidents included assaults, being spit on, and students hiding their kippahs or Jewish identity out of fear. In addition, antisemitic symbols and imagery were widely circulated at Harvard, including images depicting a dollar sign inside a Star of David and stickers showing an Israeli flag altered with a swastika. Campus protests extended beyond peaceful assembly, with the task force citing demonstrations that, according to the agencies, "included calls for genocide and murder and denied Jewish and Israeli students access to campus spaces." The campus experienced a "multiweek encampment" at its center, purportedly instilling fear and disrupting academic life for Jewish and Israeli students. Disciplinary actions for those involved in these encampments and protests were described in the notice as "lax and inconsistent," with none of the charged students facing suspension and some university leadership criticizing the process as "not fair" and "not right." Potential Consequences for Harvard The notice specified that Harvard may "continue to operate free of federal privileges," but with the clear implication that all U.S. taxpayer funding—including research grants and student aid—could be withdrawn. The joint task force said the intervention was driven not only by documented harm to individuals, but by the historic dangers of ignoring antisemitism, invoking the Holocaust as a historic warning. Calls for Immediate Reform One in four American adults now exhibiting prejudice toward Jewish people and skepticism about antisemitism—an increase of 26 million people compared to 18 months ago—according a study released in May by the Foundation to Combat Antisemitism. "The enclosed document serves to focus Harvard on the need for meaningful and immediate reform and fulfill the requirement under law that Americans cease funding discriminatory institutions," the letter read. "Failure to institute adequate changes immediately will result in the loss of all federal financial resources and continue to affect Harvard's relationship with the federal government." What People Are Saying Roz Rothstein, co-founder and CEO of StandWithUs, an international nonpartisan education organization that supports Israel and fights antisemitism, to Newsweek: "We are encouraged that DOJ and OCR utilized Harvard's own Antisemitism Task Force report to determine that Harvard is in violation of Title VI and issued an actual finding of violation. "This is necessary for any further action by the federal government, including withholding of funding, and a welcome development in the enforcement of Title VI. We look forward to seeing what steps Harvard's administration will take next to bring itself into compliance with federal law and finally make its campus one where Jewish and Israeli students not only find physical safety but equal protection under the law." Harmeet K. Dhillon, assistant attorney general for civil rights at DOJ, stated in the letter: "Harvard's inaction in the face of these civil rights violations is a clear example of the demographic hierarchy that has taken hold of the University. Equal defense of the law demands that all groups, regardless of race or national origin, are protected." The letter further stated, "That legacy of discrimination persists with Harvard's continued anti-Semitism." Josh Gruenbaum, commissioner of the Federal Acquisition Service, U.S. General Services Administration, joined the co-signatories warning of immediate consequences: "Failure to institute adequate changes immediately will result in the loss of all federal financial resources and continue to affect Harvard's relationship with the federal government." What Happens Next Harvard University now faces a deadline to take actions requested by the task for or risk losing all federal funding, as outlined in the notice. Federal agencies have indicated that unless "meaningful and immediate reform" is demonstrated, enforcement actions—which could include cutting off federal research grants and support—will proceed. Continued monitoring and potential further government action are expected as the situation develops.
Gizmodo
19 minutes ago
- Gizmodo
Trump Whines About AT&T Conference Call Glitches: ‘Totally Unable to Make Their Equipment Work Properly'
Donald Trump is upset with his phone company. And whether he's complaining about issues big or small, you know the president is going to whine about it online. 'I'm doing a major Conference Call with Faith Leaders from all over the Country, and AT&T is totally unable to make their equipment work properly,' Trump wrote on Truth Social Monday afternoon. 'This is the second time it's happened. If the Boss of AT&T, whoever that may be, could get involved—It would be good. There are tens of thousands of people on the line!' John Stankey is the CEO of AT&T and he was just elected as chairman of the board this past February. It's not clear if Trump doesn't actually know Stankey or if he's being sarcastic in his typically obnoxious way. But Trump didn't stop there. The president followed up with a second post, apologizing to the faith leaders on his conference call and vowing to use a different company next time. 'I apologize for the long wait on the Faith Leaders Conference Call,' Trump wrote. 'AT&T ought to get its act together. Please pass along the word to the tens of thousands of people who are there. We may have to reschedule the call, but we'll use another carrier the next time. AT&T obviously doesn't know what they're doing!' Trump has a long history of complaining about things in a manner that would've previously been seen as childish or unethical coming from the office of the president. Obviously the most powerful person in the country can influence business decisions and markets, though most Americans have become numb to Trump's wild mood swings and the way he breaks norms like a wrecking ball. Business leaders do take note of Trump's power to hurt their companies, however, as we've seen companies provide payouts to stay in the fascist's good graces. AT&T, like many other companies, contributed $1 million to Trump's inauguration committee, according to the Wall Street Journal. Trump has previously complained about AT&T, like in his first term when the company owned CNN back in 2020. The cable news network is a frequent target of Trump's online attacks, writing just two days ago that CNN host Abby Phillip was '3rd rate' and had 'no idea what she is talking about.' AT&T's share price is up 1.8% on the day to $28.60. The company didn't immediately respond to a request for comment on Monday. Gizmodo will update this post if we hear back.
