Israel's weird war clock: 12 days for Iran, 21 months in Gaza
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Spectator
12 minutes ago
- Spectator
History does not favour Musk's new America party
The world's richest man, Elon Musk, has announced that he intends to create a new third party in the US called the America party. After his own poll on X showed that two out of three favoured the venture, the outspoken billionaire has now put his money where his mouth is and taken the plunge to found and finance his new party. Although the 54-year-old owner of X, Tesla, SpaceX and other hi-tech enterprises has been a US citizen since 2002, because he was born in South Africa he cannot run for president himself. But he says he will fund the new party after spectacularly falling out with President Trump in May following Musk's short stint as Trump's Doge tsar with a brief to cut government waste, largely by sacking federal employees. Musk hates Trump's recently passed 'big, beautiful bill' to cut taxes and spending, saying it will ruin business. And so the billionaire, with an ego almost as big as his wallet, now believes that Americans frustrated with both the Democrats and Trump's Republicans are ready to support an entirely new party. History, however, does not favour his plan. There have been many third party launches since the Democrat versus Republican duopoly emerged in the 1850s just before the American civil war, but all have failed. The Republicans themselves were born then, originally as a progressive anti-slavery movement. They challenged the Democrats, then an agricultural party strong in the south, and after the north won the civil war, the Republican 'Grand Old Party' ( GOP) dominated both the presidency and wider US politics until the 20th century. A feud between conservative and liberal Republicans saw former Republican President Teddy Roosevelt launch his Progressive or 'Bull Moose' party in 1912, which split the Republican vote and handed the presidency to Democrat Woodrow Wilson. On the other side of the aisle, increasing industrialisation and class conflict between the world wars led to socialist Norman Thomas running for the White House six times – and failing every time. Instead, left-wing urban voters and ethnic minorities backed the statist high spending New Deal policies of Democrat Franklin D. Roosevelt – and sent him to the White House an unprecedented four times. By then, the Republicans had evolved into a right-wing party backing big business and free enterprise. An attempt by radicals to launch a left-wing Progressive party after the second world war failed, as did right-wing efforts to form an Independent party led by the racist southern Governor George Wallace in the 1960s. Like Norman Thomas, left-wing ecologist Ralph Nader repeatedly ran for the presidency on a 'Green' ticket – and just as often failed. In the 1990s businessman Ross Perot tried to break the two-party system with a right-wing Libertarian party, but failed yet again. Trump did break the mould in 2016 when he captured the GOP with his own unique brand of patriotic nationalist rhetoric, but he was still working from within the two-party system. Partly in reaction to Trumpism, the Democrats have now moved sharply to the left. The party is predominantly woke and identifies with sexual and racial minorities (who don't always return the favour). It also is mainly internationalist and anti-Israeli. Musk is hoping that with his own brand of radical right-wing politics, he will achieve the same kind of breakthrough that Trump managed, aided by his own command of social media, his large public profile and his almost limitless wealth. There is, though, precious little evidence that the attention-seeking tycoon commands the same levels of uncritical personal popularity and mass support that Trump can count on with his MAGA base, and history offers him little encouragement either.
Daily Mail
23 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Iran's Supreme Leader emerges amid nuclear crisis and post-war fallout
Iran 's Supreme Leader has made his first public appearance since the 12-day war between Israel and Iran began. Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, 86, on Saturday attended a mourning ceremony on the eve of Ashoura - a significant day in Islam marking the death of Husayn ibn Ali, the Prophet Muhammad's grandson. The octogenarian leader was shown in state TV footage waving to the cheering crowds and greeting worshippers who had gathered at a mosque near his office in Tehran. Khamenei could be seen on stage dressed in black and white as the audience before him, fists in the air, chanted: 'The blood in our veins for our leader!' State TV said the clip was filmed at central Tehran's Imam Khomeini Mosque, named for the founder of the Islamic republic. The leader, who has been in power since 1989, spoke last week in a pre-recorded video, but had not been seen in public since before Israel initiated the conflict with a shower of surprise airstrikes on June 13. Khamenei's absence during the war suggested the Iranian leader, who has final say on all state matters, had been in seclusion in a bunker - something not acknowledged by state media. There was no immediate report on any public statement made. Iranian officials such as the parliament speaker were present. Such events are always held under heavy security. After the US inserted itself into the war by bombing three key nuclear sites in Iran, US President Donald Trump sent warnings via social media to the 86-year-old Khamenei that the US knew where he was but had no plans to kill him, 'at least for now.' On June 26, shortly after a ceasefire began, Khamenei made his first public statement in days, saying in a prerecorded statement that Tehran had delivered a 'slap to America's face' by striking a US air base in Qatar, and warning against further attacks by the US or Israel on Iran. Trump replied, in remarks to reporters and on social media: 'Look, you're a man of great faith. A man who's highly respected in his country. You have to tell the truth. You got beat to hell.' Iran has acknowledged the deaths of more than 900 people in the war, as well as thousands of injured. It also has confirmed serious damage to its nuclear facilities, and has denied access to them for inspectors with the U.N. nuclear watchdog. Iran's president on Wednesday ordered the country to suspend its cooperation with the watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency, further limiting inspectors' ability to track a program that had been enriching uranium to near weapons-grade levels. Israel launched the war fearing that Iran was trying to develop atomic weapons. It remains unclear just how badly damaged the nuclear facilities are, whether any enriched uranium or centrifuges had been moved before the attacks, and whether Tehran still would be willing to continue negotiations with the United States over its nuclear program. Israel also targeted defense systems, high-ranking military officials and atomic scientists. In retaliation, Iran fired more than 550 ballistic missiles at Israel, most of them intercepted, killing 28 people and causing damage in many areas. The ceremony that Khamenei hosted Saturday was a remembrance of the 7th century martyrdom of the Prophet Muhammad's grandson, Hussein. Shiites represent over 10 per cent of the world's 1.8 billion Muslims, and they view Hussein as the rightful successor to the Prophet Muhammad. Hussein's death in battle at the hands of Sunnis at Karbala, south of Baghdad, created a rift in Islam and continues to play a key role in shaping Shiite identity. In predominantly Shiite Iran, red flags represented Hussein's blood and black funeral tents and clothes represented mourning. Processions of chest-beating and self-flagellating men demonstrated fervor. Some sprayed water over the mourners in the intense heat. NetBlocks, a global internet monitor, reported late Saturday on X that there was a 'major disruption to internet connectivity' in Iran. It said the disruption corroborated widespread user reports of problems accessing the internet. The development comes just weeks after authorities shut down telecoms during the war. NetBlocks later said internet access had been restored after some two hours.
Telegraph
an hour ago
- Telegraph
Muslim charity boss delivered sermon on killing Jews six days after Oct 7
The charity regulator has issued an Islamic charity with an official warning and banned one of its trustees after he was accused of encouraging violence against Jews after the Oct 7 Hamas attack. Harun Abdur Rashid Holmes, a leading figure with Nottingham Islam Information Point (NIIP), has been barred from acting as a charity trustee for three years after delivering a sermon in which he stated that Muslims would kill Jews until they 'hide behind a rock'. Holmes was accused of anti-Semitism and incitement to violence after delivering the sermon on the charity's premises in which he stated: 'The hour will not begin until the Muslims fight the Jews and the Muslims will kill them until a Jew hides behind a rock or a tree. And the rock or tree will say 'Oh Muslim... there is a Jew behind me. Come and kill him'.' During the same sermon, Mr Holmes is understood to have offered prayers for the 'mujahideen' – a common Islamic term for fighters – in Palestine. Holmes delivered the sermon just six days after Hamas launched its attack on southern Israel in 2023, killing more than 1,200 Jews and taking 251 hostage. The Charity Commission found that Holmes's words were 'inflammatory and divisive' at a time when conflict was setting communities against each other. It found he did not act in accordance with his duties as a trustee, despite the charity receiving previous guidance when he was its chairman. Following a 20-month investigation, the regulator has now disqualified Mr Holmes from serving as a trustee or holding any senior management position in a charity in England and Wales for three years. It also issued NIIP with a formal warning over its failure to put effective policies in place to manage its affairs and those who speak in its name. The commission told The Telegraph that its investigation into NIIP was one of more than 300 regulatory cases it had opened in the last 18 months involving groups supporting different sides of the Middle East conflict. It has so far issued formal statutory guidance to charities in about 100 of these cases, and has made more than 70 referrals to the police where it considered that a criminal offence might have been committed. Stephen Roake, assistant director of investigations and compliance at the Charity Commission, said: 'In times of conflict, people expect charities to bring people together, not to stoke division. In this case, we found due consideration had not been given to the words and rhetoric used. The sermon was inflammatory and divisive, and we acted robustly and disqualified the trustee who gave the sermon. We also issued the charity with a formal warning.' During his sermon, Mr Holmes also called on attendees not to 'busy yourselves with politics and voting', which the commission found could be interpreted as encouraging people not to vote or to disengage from the democratic process. The commission said some of the content of the sermon had been taken from a specific 'Hadith', a narration of historical events ascribed to the prophet Mohammed but it was delivered without the appropriate context and 'as such was inflammatory and divisive'. It found that Mr Holmes, a former care home assistant manager, lacked the good judgment expected of a trustee. Mr Holmes, who was not a qualified Iman at the time he delivered the sermon, told the regulator that, in hindsight, he accepted the Hadith was sensitive, and he did not give sufficient context to it. The investigation concluded that the sermon did not further the charity's purposes, including to provide relief to those in need, was not in its best interests and amounted to misconduct and/or mismanagement. Mr Roake added: 'Following our intervention, the charity's remaining trustees have taken positive steps to improve their governance. This includes the introduction of a more robust events policy. All charities that host events and speakers should take note of this case and ensure they have sufficient due diligence in place.' NIIP, which showed an income of £59,200 and an expenditure of £47,700 in its last set of accounts, was set up in 1997 to relieve poverty and 'clear up misconceptions on the religion of Islam'. Following Mr Holmes' sermon, NIIP apologised for any offence he may have caused. It stated: 'Mr Holmes is not a qualified Imam and has not formally studied Islam. He was given the responsibility of the sermon at late notice and was not able to provide the necessary explanation to references used in the short timespan available. 'In hindsight he recognises that other references would have been more appropriate. The trustees recognise that certain portions of the sermon may have been construed in a negative light and inadvertently and unintentionally caused offence. We apologise for this.' Mr Homes did not respond to requests for comment. There can be no hiding place for those who use charities to promote hate By David Holdsworth During times of heightened international conflict, global instability, and economic hardship, the work of UK charities is more pressing, and more vital, than ever. Every day, and across every continent of the world, thousands of UK charities relieve desperate need and bring communities together, supporting the most vulnerable and serving as beacons of hope and unity. We should take pride in the work of these charities, the difference they make to countless lives as well as the global projection of the very best of the Great British people. Sadly, however, there are some people who undermine that trust and betray their and other charities' potential for good. Over the past few years, and particularly since the escalation of conflict in the Middle East in October 2023, we have seen charities misused to promote the personal views of those linked to the charity, in some cases inciting hate, or condoning violence. We have also seen examples of charities funding military equipment for foreign military forces. As chief executive of the Charity Commission – which regulates charities in England and Wales – I am clear that such abuse of the special status of charity is unacceptable. We won't hesitate to take firm action to stop such wrongdoing, and, where necessary use our enforcement powers against those responsible. For example, we have this weekend announced our findings in a case regarding Nottingham Islam Information Point, a centre set up to help relieve poverty and explain the religion of Islam. We have issued an official warning to the charity after one of its trustees delivered an inflammatory sermon at the charity's premises. We also used our powers to disqualify the trustee who gave the sermon. This follows an official warning against the Abdullah Quilliam Foundation earlier this month, again for providing a platform for unacceptable, divisive language. We have recently issued an official warning to the UK Friends of the Association for the Wellbeing of Israel's Soldiers after the charity posted distressing footage on social media, and earlier in the year, we gave a similar rebuke to a charity that advances the Jewish religion after it sent funds to an IDF soldier stationed in northern Israel. Over the last 18 months, the commission has opened more than 300 regulatory cases involving charities supporting different sides of the Middle East conflict. We have so far issued formal statutory guidance to charities in about 100 of these cases, and have made more than 70 referrals to the police where we consider that a criminal offence might have been committed. We know some would like us to move further or faster in these types of cases. But we have a duty to carefully follow the evidence and reach decisions in a way that is both fair and legally robust. While trustees, like all of us, have personal rights to freedom of speech, there can be no hiding place for those who seek to use charities to promote hate or harm to others. This is not only to put a stop to fundamentally uncharitable activity, but also to help protect and promote public trust in the wider charitable sector. Research confirms that charities are among the most trusted groups in society, behind only NHS doctors. This status cannot be taken for granted. I see it as the commission's responsibility to do whatever is in our power to uphold the good name of charity. As the regulator of 170,000 registered charities that together generate more than £100 billion of annual income, with about 400 staff, that is no mean feat. We work to enable all well-run, life-changing charities to deliver on their purpose. We do this by providing clear guidance helping volunteer trustees get it right, and by being available by phone, email or in person to those who need help and support along the way. Even when dealing with serious complaints, wherever possible, our default position is to try and get charities back on track to deliver their vital work. But I will not shy away from using the more robust powers Parliament has granted us when that is necessary – and taking action against those who risk undermining the incredible positive impact of charities at home and abroad.
