Hamas says no special food privileges for Gaza hostages
"(Hamas) does not intentionally starve the captives, but they eat the same food our fighters and the general public eat. They will not receive any special privileges amid the crime of starvation and siege", Hamas's military wing, the Al-Qassam Brigades, wrote in a statement.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Scroll.in
26 minutes ago
- Scroll.in
Trump says he will ‘substantially' raise tariffs on India over Russian oil purchases
United States President Donald Trump on Monday said that Washington will substantially increase the tariffs imposed on goods imported from India over New Delhi's purchase and sale of Russian oil in the 'open market for big profit'. 'India is not only buying massive amounts of Russian oil, they are then, for much of the oil purchased, selling it on the open market for big profits,' Trump said on social media. He said: 'They don't care how many people in Ukraine are being killed by the Russian war machine. Because of this, I will be substantially raising the tariff paid by India to the USA.' Trump has been threatening to impose a so-called penalty on New Delhi for buying a large portion of its military equipment and fuel from Russia amid the war on Ukraine. The penalty would be in addition to the 25% levy Washington announced on goods imported from India, as part of the so-called reciprocal tariffs on dozens of countries that have not finalised separate trade agreements with the US. The US president's comment on Monday came after Trump on Friday said that he had heard that India was ' no longer going to be buying oil' from Russia. 'I don't know if that's right or not, but that's a good step,' ANI had quoted Trump as saying. 'We will see what happens.' On Thursday, Reuters had reported that Indian state-owned refiners had halted oil purchases from Russia over the previous week. However, on Saturday, ANI quoted unidentified Indian officials as saying that the state-owned refiners are continuing to source oil from Russian suppliers. The US president's remarks on Friday had also come just hours after India's Ministry of External Affairs responded to the Reuters report, stating that decisions on sourcing fuel are guided by market dynamics. Ministry Spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal had said that India and Russia share a 'steady, time-tested ' partnership. 'Our ties with any country stand on their merit and should not be seen from the prism of a third country,' Jaiswal had said. New Delhi's clarification came two days after Trump on Wednesday threatened to impose the ' penalty ' on India for military and energy purchases from Russia. While the 25% reciprocal tariff was to take effect on August 7, the executive order signed by Trump on Thursday had made no mention of the 'penalty'. On Thursday, Trump said that he does not care about 'what India does with Russia' and that 'they can take their dead economies down together, for all I care'. 'We have done very little business with India, their tariffs are too high, among the highest in the world,' Trump had said on social media. 'Likewise, Russia and the USA do almost no business together.' On Wednesday evening, India's commerce ministry said that New Delhi was studying the implications of the US' decision, and that it would take all steps necessary to secure national interests.
New Indian Express
26 minutes ago
- New Indian Express
Trump says he will 'substantially' raise tariff on India over Russian oil imports
"They don't care how many people in Ukraine are being killed by the Russian War Machine. Because of this, I will be substantially raising the Tariff paid by India to the USA," he added. Trump's statements came a day after his top aide accused India of effectively financing Russia's war in Ukraine by continuing to purchase oil from Moscow, and escalated pressure on New Delhi to halt such imports. 'What he (Trump) said very clearly is that it is not acceptable for India to continue financing this war by purchasing oil from Russia,' said Stephen Miller, Deputy Chief of Staff at the White House and one of Trump's most influential aides, reported Reuters. On July 30, President Trump announced a 25% tariff on Indian goods and warned of further penalties over India's purchases of Russian arms and oil. Immediately following the tariff announcement, Trump launched a blistering attack on New Delhi's ties with Moscow, dismissing both countries as 'dead economies' and bluntly stating that he 'does not care' what India does with Russia. Trump also said he would consider imposing steep tariffs, as high as 100% on imports from any country that continues to buy oil from Russia, unless Moscow agrees to a peace deal with Ukraine.
The Hindu
26 minutes ago
- The Hindu
Bombay High Court says ‘No' to contempt proceedings against CPI(M)
The Bombay High Court on Monday (August 4, 2025) refused to initiate suo motu contempt proceedings against the Communist Party of India (Marxist) for publicly criticising the court's recent observations while rejecting its plea to hold a protest in support of Gaza. On July 25, 2025, a Division Bench comprising Justices Ravindra Ghuge and Gautam Ankhad dismissed a petition filed by the CPI(M) challenging the Mumbai Police's decision to deny permission for a protest at Azad Maidan against the ongoing conflict in Gaza. The court observed that the Indian political organisations should prioritise domestic issues over international conflicts. The Bench pulled up the petitioners for focusing on matters outside the country and said, 'Our country has enough issues to deal with. We do not want anything like this. I am sorry to say that you are short-sighted. You are looking at Gaza and Palestine while neglecting what is happening here. Why don't you do something for your own country? Look at your own country. Be patriots. People say they are patriots, but this is not patriotism. Show patriotism for the citizens of our own country first,' the Bench remarked sharply during the hearing. Senior advocate Mihir Desai, appearing for the CPI(M), told the Bench that on June 13, 2025, his client sought permission from the Azad Maidan police to hold a peaceful protest in solidarity with Gaza, calling for a ceasefire. However, on June 17, the police denied the request, citing powers under Section 168 of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) and Section 68 of the Maharashtra Police Act, 1951. Mr. Desai argued that political parties had historically raised important issues and organised health and education camps. The court noted that the CPI(M), being a registered political party, should ideally be engaging with local civic concerns. 'You are a registered party in India. Your party could have taken up issues such as garbage dumping, pollution, drainage, or flooding. Why are you not protesting on these issues? We are only giving examples. Instead, you want to protest over something happening thousands of miles away and showing concern for Palestine and Gaza,' the Bench observed. Following the court's observation, the CPI(M) released a press note on July 25, condemning the High Court's 'anti-constitutional' observations. It said, 'The Polit Bureau of the CPI(M) strongly condemns the observations of the Bombay High Court Bench while rejecting an application by the party to challenge the Mumbai Police's refusal to allow a protest action against the ongoing Israeli genocide in Gaza.' The note further said, 'While doing so, the court went to the extent of calling into question the patriotism of the party. Ironically, the Bench appears to be unaware of either the provisions of the Constitution which enshrines the rights of a political party, or the history of our country and our people's solidarity with the Palestinians and their legitimate right to homeland. The observations smack of distinct political bias in line with the Central government.' On Monday (August 4, 2025), senior advocate S.M. Gorwadkar urged the court to take suo motu cognisance of the CPI(M)'s press note as criminal contempt. He argued that the language used by the party was an attempt to attribute motive to the judges and could erode public confidence in the judiciary. He cited previous cases, including the one involving advocate Prashant Bhushan, to support his argument and requested that notice be issued to the Advocate General. Justice Ghuge dismissed the suggestion and noted that the Bench chooses to ignore the press note and that the party has been saying that they have the right to criticise and condemn the court's order, calling it unconstitutional, 'that is their opinion', so let them do that.
