Air Canada Apologizes for Erasing Israel from In-Flight Maps
After an internal investigation, Air Canada told CNN that the issue affected approximately 40 of its planes. In a joint statement with the French aerospace group Thales, which provides the in-flight entertainment systems, both companies issued an apology and explained the situation. A third company, which created the map, remains unidentified.
JUST IN: AIR CANADA ERASED ISRAEL FROM ITS MAPS ON FLIGT & INSTEAD LABELED THE AREA 'PALESTINIAN TERRITORIES' 👏🏻 pic.twitter.com/fkW2yiv9T5
— Sulaiman Ahmed (@ShaykhSulaiman) March 15, 2025
'It was brought to the attention of Air Canada that the interactive map on its Boeing 737 fleet did not consistently portray certain Middle Eastern boundaries, including those of the State of Israel, at all amplification levels,' the airline's statement read.
Air Canada, which uses city names on maps as a general policy, added that the 'configuration on this particular system was not compliant with this policy.' The airline emphasized that the situation had been resolved quickly. 'The planes had their map function immediately disabled, and a revised map was already installed by Friday.'
The controversy has garnered criticism online, with some passengers questioning the omission of Israel from the map, particularly in light of the ongoing geopolitical tensions in the Middle East.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
News24
an hour ago
- News24
Cracks emerge in Trump's MAGA support for Israel over Gaza children ‘starving to death'
Unconditional support for Israel has long been an entry requirement in US Republican politics, but that orthodoxy is being challenged by Donald Trump's populist base - where invocations of the 'special relationship' are falling on deaf ears. Images of starvation and suffering in Gaza have given new impetus to a debate that has been simmering in Trump's 'MAGA' movement over whether US involvement in the Middle East is consistent with the president's 'America First' platform. Trump's first significant break with Israel came on Monday, when he acknowledged that 'real starvation' is happening in Gaza and vowed to set up food centres in the besieged enclave, which has been devastated by Israel's war with Hamas. Asked if he agreed with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's denials of the Gaza hunger crisis, Trump said: 'Based on television, I would say not particularly, because those children look very hungry.' It was a notable retort and prompted commentators to speculate that unwavering US support for Israel might end up as just another conservative sacred cow slayed by MAGA. READ | Palestinian PM calls on Hamas to give up control of Gaza and 'hand over its weapons' at UN meeting Vice President JD Vance went further at an event in Ohio, discussing 'heartbreaking' images of 'little kids who are clearly starving to death' and demanding that Israel let in more aid. Political scientist and former US diplomat Michael Montgomery thinks the tonal shift might in part be emotional - with TV images of starving children resonating more profoundly than the aftermath of air strikes. 'Perhaps it is because no civilised people see starvation as a legitimate weapon of war,' the University of Michigan-Dearborn professor told AFP. Israel has always enjoyed broad bipartisan support in Congress but the rise of the isolationist MAGA movement under Trump has challenged the ideological foundations of the 'special relationship'. MAGA realpolitik seeks to limit US involvement in foreign wars to those that directly impact its interests, and in particular the 'left behind' working class that makes up Trump's base. READ | Gaza people 'stripped of their humanity and rights' say Israel aid groups Pro-Trump think tank The Heritage Foundation in March called on Washington to 're-orient its relationship with Israel' from a special relationship 'to an equal strategic partnership'. Stronger expressions of disapproval have been subdued by a sense that they are a betrayal of Republican thinking, according to some analysts - especially after the 7 October Hamas attacks. But there is a new urgency in the debate in MAGA circles following dire warnings from leading NGOs and the UN World Food Programme's finding that a third of Gaza's population - of about two million - go for days without eating. One sign of the new thinking came in an X post from far-right firebrand congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene, who has pushed to cancel $500 million in funding for Israel's rocket defence system. Greene this week went further than any Republican lawmaker has previously in using the word 'genocide' to describe Israel's conduct and slamming the 'starvation of innocent people and children in Gaza'. While Greene's credibility has been undermined by an extensive record of conspiratorial social media posts, there is no denying that she knows what makes the MAGA crowd tick. A new CNN poll found the share of Republicans who believe Israel's actions have been fully justified has dropped from 68% in 2023 to 52%. Ali Jadallah/Anadolu via Getty Images Youth seems to be the driver, according to a Pew Research poll from April, when food shortages had yet to become a humanitarian catastrophe. While Republicans over age 50 haven't changed much in their pro-Israel outlook since 2022, the survey showed that the US ally's unfavorability among younger adults has climbed from 35% to 50%. 'It seems that for the under-30-year-old MAGA base, Israel has almost no support,' former White House strategist Steve Bannon told Politico, adding that Trump's rebuke would solidify his supporters' enmity. Democratic strategist Mike Nellis described the Gaza food emergency as 'one of those rare moments where the crisis has broken through the usual partisan gridlock'. 'You're seeing people across the political spectrum who just can't stomach it anymore,' he told AFP.
NBC News
an hour ago
- NBC News
How Trump's poll numbers on immigration have shifted as he has enacted his agenda
President Donald Trump started his second term with one huge difference compared with his first term: Polls regularly showed majorities of Americans approving of his handling of immigration. In fact, it was his best issue, whereas it had been one of his least popular before. Six months into his second term, it's still among his best issues, but it's no longer as popular. There has been a clear decline in support for Trump's handling of immigration, with his approval rating dropping across a handful of prominent polls. The trend mirrors the downtick in his overall approval rating as the administration has pursued an aggressive set of policies resulting in many arrests but slow progress on deportations of known undocumented immigrants convicted of major crimes, as well as controversial clashes over deportations. While Trump still gets good marks on some specifics, including border security, many of his more aggressive specific immigration policies don't poll well, even as he continues to press on with immigration as a signature issue. Polls do continue to show immigration remaining among Trump's most popular issues. But the trend is clear. While most Trump voters remain satisfied with his handling of immigration and other issues, some have told NBC News that they take issue with his approach. "For one, I think it's immoral," Jorge, 21, an independent from Florida who voted for Trump last year, said in an interview following up on his responses in a previous poll. He criticized the Trump administration for not "taking the time to separate the people who do not need to be here, which are the criminals, illegal criminals and migrants, and separating from the working people that benefit our society," said Jorge, who declined to share his last name while discussing national politics. "It's disappointing. ... He thinks he can just take everyone." Inside the data In poll after poll in his first few weeks in office, Trump's approval rating on immigration regularly eclipsed 50%. Fifty-six percent of registered voters approved of his handling of immigration in a late January survey as part of Morning Consult's "Trump Tracker," which includes his approval rating on a slew of issues. Other polls found similar results: 51% of U.S. citizen adults approved in a mid-February Economist/YouGov poll, 54% of adults approved in a late February CBS/YouGov poll, and 51% of adults approved in an early March CNN poll. But across each of those polls, there has been a clear downward trend as more Americans are souring on Trump's handling of that major issue. Some of the movement is within polls' margins of error, but overall, they consistently show a measure of decline. In CNN's mid-July poll, just 42% of adults approved of Trump's handling of immigration, while 45% of adults said the same in an early July Economist/YouGov poll, as did 41% in a late June Quinnipiac University poll. While narrowly half or more still approved of Trump's handling of the issue in the most recent Morning Consult (51%) and CBS/YouGov (50%) polls from mid-July and late June, respectively, months of surveys by both found the same trend of slightly decreased ratings on immigration. Fox News' poll, however, hasn't changed much. Fox News tested Trump's approval rating on immigration three times, finding it at 47% in April, 46% in June and 48% in July. That having been said, the landscape remains complicated, especially from a partisan political perspective. When Fox News asked this month which party does a better job on immigration, Republicans had a 6-point lead (52%-46%). While that's down from the double-digit Republican advantage the poll found in 2022 and 2023, Democrats had the edge when Fox tested the question during the first three years of Trump's first term. What has sparked the public reaction A possible reason Trump's broader numbers on immigration have fallen could lie in the administration's policies itself. Even when Trump's numbers on the issue were higher, the harder-edged parts of his immigration policy — the ones the administration has trumpeted in recent months — have always polled worse than his overall numbers on the issue. Then, once Trump started acting on those policies, they drove news coverage and perceptions of the administration. The Wall Street Journal poll conducted in mid-January, before Trump returned to office, provides a clear example of the pre-inauguration warning signs on an issue that was once a strength. Almost three-quarters of registered voters (74%) said they supported detaining and deporting only undocumented immigrants who had been convicted of crimes. It was the second-most-popular immigration proposal tested, behind creating a pathway to citizenship for "undocumented immigrants who have been in the U.S. for many years and pass a background check," which 79% supported. A majority of registered voters also favored increasing the level of legal immigration and the number of H1-B visas available for high-skilled workers. The public was narrowly in favor of a plan to "detain and deport millions of undocumented immigrants" (52% in favor); noting that businesses could face worker shortages because of the plan made it slightly less popular. A majority (53%) also backed building a wall along the Mexican border. By contrast, only 38% favored a plan to detain and deport undocumented immigrants with American citizen children, 31% favored a call to end birthright citizenship, and 26% favored deporting "undocumented immigrants even if they have lived in the U.S. for 10 or more years, pay taxes on earnings, and have no criminal record." Fox News found a similar thing when it polled voters' views on illegal immigration shortly before Trump returned to office and in late July. Both times, 59% said their views hewed closest to "deport only those illegal immigrants who have been charged with crimes but allow others to remain in the U.S. and eventually qualify for citizenship." Twenty-nine percent said they backed deporting all illegal immigrants, and 11% backed allowing all to remain in the country. In other words, there's broader support for general promises of deportations or plans focused on removing criminals than there is support for specifically deporting people who haven't committed crimes outside of coming to the United States illegally or people who have American citizen children. Other, more recent polls have mirrored those findings. A May NPR/Ipsos poll on immigration found near-majority support (48%) for "quickly deporting alleged gang members under the Alien Enemies Act of 1798," and pluralities also supported a border wall and allowing local law enforcement to detain immigrants without legal status. But a near-majority, 46%, backed giving "legal status to immigrants without legal status brought to the U.S. as children," and a majority (53%) opposed ending birthright citizenship, which Trump has tried to do by an executive order that has been challenged in court. And the public was almost evenly divided on support for the "mass deportation of everyone who is in the country without legal status." This week, the Wall Street Journal poll found registered voters close to evenly split on their approval of Trump's handling of immigration — 48% approved, 51% disapproved — and with similar marks for his handling of illegal immigration specifically — 51% approved, 49% approved. But as in many other recent polls, some specific pieces of the administration's policy poll better than others. Sixty-two percent approve of "deporting undocumented immigrants," while 36% oppose. But 58% oppose deporting people "believed to be here illegally without them ever seeing a judge or getting a hearing." And 53% say the "Trump administration is crossing the line" with its deportation efforts, while 45% say it is "doing what is necessary." Most of the swing-state voters who participated still supported Trump and his broad actions on deportations, but a handful of participants criticized the administration's widespread deportations. They said Trump and the government should be prioritizing undocumented immigrants who committed additional crimes over those who have followed the rules since they came to the country illegally. 'He was going to deport people that were criminals and have backgrounds,' Ruby L., a focus group participant who was born in Colombia and lives in Georgia, said last month. 'But I see that he's deporting people that work hard and have been in this country. I think he should find a way to help them stay and get a citizenship or something.'
Newsweek
an hour ago
- Newsweek
What's the Cause of the Gaza Crisis—Hamas' Tyranny or Israel's Blockade? Newsweek Contributors Debate
The war between Israel and Hamas has led to a humanitarian crisis in the Gaza Strip, where food and medicine are cut off and living conditions are deteriorating. Who is responsible for mass starvation in Gaza? Has Israel broken international law? Is a peaceful, prosperous future possible for Gaza? Newsweek contributors Paul du Quenoy and Faisal Kutty debate: Paul du Quenoy: Hamas bears ultimate responsibility for the humanitarian crisis in Gaza. If it sincerely cared about the welfare of the Palestinian people, it would have ended its decades-long genocidal commitment to the destruction of Israel. It would have refrained from the October 7, 2023, attack on Israeli civilians, which precipitated the massive destruction that led directly to the current situation. It would have surrendered when its combat operations consistently failed rather than prolong a hopeless guerrilla war backed by holding innocent civilians hostage. The Palestinian people could end their plight tomorrow if they would only zip-tie their radical Islamist leaders and end the "resistance" that has brought them nothing but woe and the sympathy of Western hysterics who sit far away, totally unable to help them. Faisal Kutty: Mass starvation in Gaza is not a byproduct of war—it is a method of war. While Hamas bears responsibility for war crimes, the root cause of this crisis lies in Israel's decades-long occupation and blockade. Israel controls Gaza's borders, airspace, and access to food, water, and medicine. Over 100 humanitarian organizations, the World Health Organization, and Médecins Sans Frontières have documented "man-made mass starvation," with children dying and civilians shot while seeking food. Leading genocide and Holocaust scholars—including Israeli and Jewish experts—have warned that what is unfolding bears the hallmarks of genocide. Former U.S. envoy David Satterfield called Israel's attempt to blame the UN for starvation in Gaza "knowingly false." Israeli leaders now face International Criminal Court (ICC) charges for using starvation as a weapon—a war crime and an act consistent with genocidal intent. This atrocity will only end with a ceasefire, unfettered humanitarian access, and full legal accountability—without exception. du Quenoy: The antisemitic global Left can blame Israel as much as it wants. There is simply no escaping the fact that the Palestinians who now face starvation in Gaza would not be in this predicament if they were not ruled by Hamas, a violent terrorist organization that allied with Iran's rogue government and Hezbollah, another terrorist organization, to launch a dastardly attack that drew a massive reprisal. The crisis will only end when Hamas ends. Kutty: Calling everyone who criticizes Israel "antisemitic" is a tired deflection. This isn't about who governs Gaza—it's about what's being done to 2.2 million civilians, half of them children. What's happening—siege, starvation, mass death—isn't new. What's new is the scale, and the fact that it's unfolding in plain sight. That's not "defense"—it's collective punishment. Even war has rules. You can condemn Hamas' crimes—and I do—without justifying Israel's genocidal conduct. Ending this crisis requires not revenge, but humanity, law, and moral responsibility. du Quenoy: The only "deflection" here is that 2.2 million civilians, half of them children, live under the murderous yoke of a widely designated terrorist organization. That organization is all too happy for them to suffer, starve, and die so that it can continue holding power. Hamas' rule has disastrously failed to lead to anything even close to a peaceful solution—all while the morally bankrupt international Left meretriciously blames Israel. If Hamas' leaders, who live comfortably in faraway Qatar, had any sense of humanity, law, or moral responsibility, they would give up power. And if they don't, the Palestinians who face an impossible situation should take it from them. Humanitarian Crisis in Gaza Humanitarian Crisis in Gaza Newsweek Illustration/Getty Kutty: It's astonishing to demand that starving, bombed, displaced Palestinians—half of them children—overthrow Hamas while ignoring that Israel controls Gaza by land, sea, and air. That makes Israel the occupying power under international law—and responsible for civilian welfare. Hamas took power in 2007, decades after Israel began dispossessing Palestinians and, at times, quietly enabled Hamas to weaken the Palestine Liberation Organization. Blaming only Hamas while excusing Israel's actions isn't just morally bankrupt—it's legally indefensible. Bombing and starving people, then telling them to fix it, is victim-blaming on a genocidal scale. If you care about justice, demand what international law requires: a ceasefire, aid access, and accountability for all parties—not just the ones you dislike. du Quenoy: It's even more astonishing to demand that the international community—and the starving people themselves—accept government by terrorists. It's never gone well before and will not go well in the future. The only path to peace is the total disempowerment of the terrorist cartel that has for too long oppressed its own people while lethally menacing others. Creating conditions that have led to possible mass starvation after bringing about tens of thousands of needless deaths should be the last straw. Unfortunately, it probably won't be. Kutty: If your answer to mass killing is "accept terrorists or die overthrowing them," you're not offering peace—you're justifying atrocity. Palestinians have lived under blockade, occupation, and apartheid for decades—long before Hamas took power, with tacit support from Israeli leaders. Most of Gaza's residents were children or not yet born in 2007. They didn't elect Hamas. No people should have to pick between bombs and risking death to remove rulers they never chose. That's not justice—it's the oppressor's logic: punish the powerless, excuse the powerful. Peace starts by ending impunity, not deepening subjugation. du Quenoy: The fact that Hamas' terrorist leadership was not chosen by its people alone makes it illegitimate. Its barbaric attack on Israel on October 7, 2023, and the consequences for both peoples means it should be utterly outcast. Rather than coddle terrorists, all concerned parties should work to remove Hamas and establish a governing authority in Gaza—whether indigenous or imposed—that poses no threat to anyone, renounces terrorism, and seeks to live in peace. Only then can proper humanitarian relief, reconstruction, and, one hopes, prosperity return. It will take courage and a willingness to stare down terrorists and those who support or sympathize with them, but this is the way to make Gaza great again. Kutty: The path forward demands more than empty rhetoric. The U.N. must uphold its Charter by enforcing Security Council Resolution 2712—mandating immediate humanitarian access to Gaza—and the many long-ignored Security Council resolutions affirming Palestinian rights. The International Court of Justice's provisional measures must be implemented, and the ICC's war crimes investigations must proceed without interference. The U.S. must end its military complicity and stop shielding Israel from accountability. Gaza cannot be rebuilt on rubble and repression. Palestinian rights are no longer a fringe issue—they are a global moral reckoning that cannot be ignored or buried. Justice demands a ceasefire, unimpeded aid, and accountability for all parties. Peace won't come through collective punishment or violence—it will come when international law is enforced equally, and Palestinians are seen not as expendable lives, but as equal human beings. Paul du Quenoy is President of the Palm Beach Freedom Institute. Faisal Kutty is a Toronto-based lawyer, law professor, and frequent contributor to The Toronto Star. The views expressed in this article are the writers' own.
