Latest news with #Truth
Daily Mirror
5 hours ago
- Politics
- Daily Mirror
Donald Trump brags he saved Iran leader from ‘ugly death' with order to Israel
Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and other Iranian officials have claimed that the US and Israel backed down from the conflict after Tehran struck a military base in Doha, Qatar Donald Trump has claimed he saved Ayatollah Ali Khamenei from an "ugly" and disgraceful death after the Supreme Leader claimed victory over the "American regime". Iranian officials have been presenting last week's ceasefire to the public as a defeat against the US and Israel aggression against the country, which started on Friday, June 13 and continued for 12 gruelling days. The clearly upset president slammed Khamenei for the claims, taking to his Truth Social platform to say: "I SAVED HIM FROM A VERY UGLY AND IGNOMINIOUS DEATH. "And he does not have to say, 'THANK YOU, PRESIDENT TRUMP!" Trump claims that he saved the life of the political and spiritual patriarch, who is revered by many Shi'a Muslims in the Middle East, by ordering Israeli jets to do a U-turn while en route to assassinate him. Iranian leaders have claimed that their response to the bombing of their nuclear sites, which was the targeting of a US army base in Doha, was the decisive blow that helped them win the war. However, Tehran did admit that the attacks against them had caused "excessive" damage to the nuclear programme. According to Trump, he saved the Ayatollah's life because he "would not let Israel, or the US Armed Forces, by far the Greatest and Most Powerful in the World, terminate his life". He explained: "In fact, in the final act of the War, I demanded that Israel bring back a very large group of planes, which were heading directly to Tehran, looking for a big day, perhaps the final knockout!" He added: "Tremendous damage would have ensued, and many Iranians would have been killed. It was going to be the biggest attack of the War, by far." He also accused Khamenei of wilfully lying to the people of "war-torn" Iran. "Why would the so-called 'Supreme Leader,' Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, of the war torn Country of Iran, say so blatantly and foolishly that he won the War with Israel, when he knows his statement is a lie, it is not so," he said. "As a man of great faith, he is not supposed to lie." But some experts believe it is Trump who is wilfully lying about the extent of the damage caused. His boast that he "obliterated" Iranian nuclear bunkers has been deemed "frankly absurd" by an expert, who is adamant the president "couldn't possibly know." The White House has been forced to defend a report issued by the Defence Intelligence Agency, which casts doubt on Trump's claims he "completely and fully obliterated" Iran's deeply buried Fordo uranium enrichment plant. US B-2 stealth bombers dropped several 30,000-pound bunker-buster bombs, causing the entrance to collapse and damage to the structure, but the underground infrastructure was not destroyed, according to the assessment. Anthony Glees, an academic in security and defence and a lecturer at the University of Buckingham, believes that unless Trump could "look deep into the caves", he "couldn't possibly know the damage" caused.
Irish Examiner
14 hours ago
- Politics
- Irish Examiner
Jennifer Horgan: Why moral clarity won't bring peace — the case for radical acceptance
I'd like to thank Terry Prone for her respectful disagreement with my column on Botox last week. Someone respectfully disagreeing means a lot. In a world of noise and distraction it is a considerable honour. I had a less public disagreement with another of my columns a few weeks back - a letter that came through my door. When I read it first, I felt wounded. Then I re-read it. Like the articulate and always insightful Terry Prone, the reader simply had a different take – an intelligent and considered one. The response was to a column I wrote about Bono mentioning Hamas at the Ivor Novello awards. I suggested that Bono avoided side-taking to achieve peace, even, yes, in the context of genocide. The letter accused me of 'moral blindness' for seeing genocide as equivalent to war. The reader had interpreted my column correctly. Peace to me is the absence of violence – it can be called for anywhere, at any time. It is the most important thing, never redundant. It is also far more important than right and wrong. We need a kind of 'moral blindness' if we are to survive as a species. In the most extreme cases, we must all become temporarily and wilfully 'blind' to right and wrong. Let me explain. I have spent my whole life thinking and teaching about right and wrong. I'm an ethics teacher. I studied philosophy and have taught it too. I've spent hours on the 'trolley problem'. I've debated with teenagers over the morality of travelling back in time to kill Hitler. But I realise now that the right and wrong debate is a surface one. For peace and survival, we must travel a lot deeper - stepping into what is uncomfortable and confronting – the undergrowth of human difference. In this murky slop, lies peace. The most important thing, if we are to get on with each other, is not morality; it is belief in humanity – an unshakeable belief in humanity, no matter what. It has been a terrifying week. Humans in Gaza continue to starve and die. In South Sudan, 45 million children live through crises intensified by cholera outbreaks, malnutrition, drought and floods. Bombs are flying between Iran and Israel. America is taking the return to violence as a petty, personal insult. Trump had wanted to package away the '12-day war' neatly, like a gift, a perfectly wrapped win for America. He had wanted to keep it in his office drawer, taking it out every so often for show and tell, evidence of America being great again. President Donald Trump had wanted to keep the '12-day war' between Israel and Iran in his office drawer, taking it out every so often for show and tell, evidence of America being great again. File photo: AP/Alex Brandon Leaders and their domestic broadcasters are feeding their people stories about winners and losers, goodies, and baddies. It is a tale of right and wrong, one that changes with the teller and the telling. Trump is pushing it to the comical. He was laughing, I presume, when he posted a video with a mash-up of The Beach Boys Barbara Ann on Truth Social. 'Bomb Iran' is the new hook, the song containing the sophisticated lyrics: 'Went to a mosque/Gotta throw some rocks/Tell the Ayatollah gonna put him in a box.' But look at how the rest of us react. We all talk about countries like Israel in absolute terms. To say anything else is to be accused of 'moral blindness', as I was in that letter. Israel are the bad guys, right? They are no longer human beings. The reaction is understandable, but it doesn't solve anything. To solve it, we need psychology. It is not moral philosophy but psychology that has the power to change politics. I am thinking particularly of Unconditional Positive Regard (UPR), a concept developed by Carl Rogers, one of the founding fathers of Humanistic Psychology. It's a tough pill to swallow – to think that even Benjamin Netanyahu deserves radical acceptance. Radical acceptance absolutely isn't about accepting someone's behaviour. We still condemn the action. We condemn genocide. It's about remembering that the other is, ultimately, always a human being. File photo: Ronen Zvulun via AP Radical Positive Regard doesn't mean agreement – it is a temporary moral blindness only, a suspension of morality if you will. It can even mean violence to stop what is happening in the short term, but it demands we engage, listen, and communicate. The driving force is not right and wrong but a belief in humanity – even when the human in question is behaving like a devil. Netanyahu is a human. He is a human facing corruption charges. A human whose reputation was destroyed on October 7 when he failed to protect his people, a traumatised people, and he is doing anything he can do to regain their trust. He is a human with motivations and feelings. The attacks on Iran are increasing his popularity. His people have a bloodlust we must try to understand. Not condone – no. That is not what this is about. We must maintain our positive regard for them as human beings only to engage and bring about change. We will have plenty of time for morality. The need for this approach exists at a local as well as a global level. Look at the research shared by this paper on crime this week. Criminals in Cork, as I have written about before, are far more likely to come from our Northside. Our prison is overpopulated with people with stories of abuse, deprivation and addiction. The behaviours may be morally wrong and abhorrent, but they come from somewhere. Labelling men behind bars 'bad' or worse, 'scumbags', won't change anything; the cycle continues. We must suspend our moral condemnation long enough to listen, thereby putting an end to violence, conflict and anti-social behaviour. The local is global. Rogers proved it in his lifetime by applying his 'person-centred approach' to politics and national conflicts, working with groups in Northern Ireland and Central America. In the early 70s, he worked with the 'Steel Shutter' group of Catholics and Protestants in Northern Ireland. They shared their experiences and their hatred for one another but by the end of it, they felt differently. Rogers didn't have the funds to carry on the work, but the group continued to meet in the home of one of the participants - an ex-British colonel, because his home was the safest. Then they went out in pairs, one Catholic and one Protestant, to show the film of their conversation to community groups, schools, and parishes. 'Radical acceptance' The Israelis have a story to tell. The Palestinians have a story to tell. The Iranians have a story to tell. They all have feelings and motivations. Whether we think they are right or wrong is of secondary importance if we are interested in ending violence. Thankfully, there are people carrying the Rogerian baton – thinkers like Mick Cooper, a UK academic who explains the approach in his recent book Psychology at The Heart of Social Change. It's a tough pill to swallow – to think that even Netanyahu deserves radical acceptance. In terms of responding, that must be balanced against his actions. Radical acceptance absolutely isn't about accepting someone's behaviour. We still condemn the action. We condemn genocide. It's about remembering that the other is, ultimately, always a human being, with human wants and needs like the rest of us, and that few people do things out of 'pure evil'. To create a more compassionate world, we need to understand what people are striving for and dividing the world into 'good people like us' and 'bad people like them' is exactly what Netanyahu is doing, or Hamas, or Trump. If we just buy into that narrative, we perpetuate a world of polarisation and, ultimately, violence. 'Radical acceptance' is about trying to step off that treadmill for good. This week, another letter, by Eddie O'Brien, Director of The Thinking Centre, addressed Ursula von der Leyen in this paper. It drew attention to her comment while attending the G7 summit in Canada, that, 'Israel has the right to defend itself, Iran is the principal source of regional instability, and Iran is the source of terror in the Middle East.' Mr O'Brien writes: 'By so prematurely and so publicly announcing of the taking of the side of Israel against Iran, how can Iran be expected to listen, trust, or have any kind of constructive relationship with any peace initiative the European Union may later propose?' It is a fine letter. Read More Iranian response in Doha was only a carefully choreographed demonstration
New Indian Express
18 hours ago
- Politics
- New Indian Express
'Will bomb Iran again' if it tries to pursue nuclear weapons, says Trump as US media reports a backdoor deal
US President Donald Trump said Friday he had saved Iran's Ayatollah Ali Khamenei from assassination and lashed out at the supreme leader for ingratitude, declaring he would order more bombing if the country tried to pursue nuclear weapons. In an extraordinary outburst on his Truth Social platform, Trump blasted Tehran for claiming to have won its war with Israel and said he was halting work on possible sanctions relief. Trump said that the United States would bomb Iran again "without question" if the country was still able to enrich nuclear-weapons grade uranium following US strikes. The US president accused the Iranian leader of ingratitude after Khamenei said in a defiant message that reports of damage to its nuclear sites from US bombing were exaggerated, and said Iran had beaten Israel and dealt Washington a "slap." Trump posted: "I knew EXACTLY where he was sheltered, and would not let Israel, or the U.S. Armed Forces, by far the Greatest and Most Powerful in the World, terminate his life."
Calgary Herald
19 hours ago
- Business
- Calgary Herald
Trump 'terminating' trade talks with Canada over digital services tax
Article content OTTAWA — U.S. President Donald Trump announced Friday he is putting an end to trade discussions with Canada because of the digital services tax moving ahead next week. Article content Article content 'We have just been informed that Canada, a very difficult Country to TRADE with… has just announced that they are putting a Digital Services Tax on our American Technology Companies, which is a direct and blatant attack on our Country,' he wrote. Article content 'Based on this egregious Tax, we are hereby terminating ALL discussions on Trade with Canada, effective immediately. We will let Canada know the Tariff that they will be paying to do business with the United States of America within the next seven day period.' Article content Article content Donald J. Trump Truth Social 06.27.25 01:44 PM EST — Commentary Donald J. Trump Posts From Truth Social (@TrumpDailyPosts) June 27, 2025 Article content Article content Carney had already lowered expectations this week about reaching an agreement with Trump for an economic and security pact within 30 years, as agreed to during the G7 summit in Alberta, by saying 'the right deal is possible, but nothing's assured.' Article content The first payment for Canada's digital tax is due Monday, according to the Finance department, and covers revenue retroactively to 2022. The tax is three per cent of the digital services revenue a firm makes from Canadian users above $20 million in a year. Earlier this month, Finance Minister François-Philippe Champagne said his government was moving ahead with the tax even though it remained an irritant with the United States. Article content 'That's the law in Canada. We had fairly long, extensive discussions at the G7 about the different regimes that you find in different parts of the world. That's not unique to Canada, by the way,' he said. Article content Article content Trump accused Canada of 'copying' the European Union (EU), which has many countries that also have a digital services tax in place. Article content Article content The EU is also in talks with the U.S. to avoid so-called 'reciprocal tariffs' of up to 50 per cent. Trump issued a deadline of July 9 to strike a deal but said in a press conference on Friday he could decide to extend the deadlines or make them shorter if he wanted to. Article content Trump said he has already made deals with a handful of countries on the world stage, including China and the United Kingdom, and was in the process of making some others. Article content
Irish Examiner
2 days ago
- Politics
- Irish Examiner
Jennifer Horgan: Radical acceptance means treating people like humans - even those doing evil
I'd like to thank Terry Prone for her respectful disagreement with my column on Botox last week. Someone respectfully disagreeing means a lot. In a world of noise and distraction it is a considerable honour. I had a less public disagreement with another of my columns a few weeks back - a letter that came through my door. When I read it first, I felt wounded. Then I re-read it. Like the articulate and always insightful Terry Prone, the reader simply had a different take – an intelligent and considered one. The response was to a column I wrote about Bono mentioning Hamas at the Ivor Novello awards. I suggested that Bono avoided side-taking to achieve peace, even, yes, in the context of genocide. The letter accused me of 'moral blindness' for seeing genocide as equivalent to war. The reader had interpreted my column correctly. Peace to me is the absence of violence – it can be called for anywhere, at any time. It is the most important thing, never redundant. It is also far more important than right and wrong. We need a kind of 'moral blindness' if we are to survive as a species. In the most extreme cases, we must all become temporarily and wilfully 'blind' to right and wrong. Let me explain. I have spent my whole life thinking and teaching about right and wrong. I'm an ethics teacher. I studied philosophy and have taught it too. I've spent hours on the 'trolley problem'. I've debated with teenagers over the morality of travelling back in time to kill Hitler. But I realise now that the right and wrong debate is a surface one. For peace and survival, we must travel a lot deeper - stepping into what is uncomfortable and confronting – the undergrowth of human difference. In this murky slop, lies peace. The most important thing, if we are to get on with each other, is not morality; it is belief in humanity – an unshakeable belief in humanity, no matter what. It has been a terrifying week. Humans in Gaza continue to starve and die. In South Sudan, 45 million children live through crises intensified by cholera outbreaks, malnutrition, drought and floods. Bombs are flying between Iran and Israel. America is taking the return to violence as a petty, personal insult. Trump had wanted to package away the '12-day war' neatly, like a gift, a perfectly wrapped win for America. He had wanted to keep it in his office drawer, taking it out every so often for show and tell, evidence of America being great again. President Donald Trump had wanted to keep the '12-day war' between Israel and Iran in his office drawer, taking it out every so often for show and tell, evidence of America being great again. File photo: AP/Alex Brandon Leaders and their domestic broadcasters are feeding their people stories about winners and losers, goodies, and baddies. It is a tale of right and wrong, one that changes with the teller and the telling. Trump is pushing it to the comical. He was laughing, I presume, when he posted a video with a mash-up of The Beach Boys Barbara Ann on Truth Social. 'Bomb Iran' is the new hook, the song containing the sophisticated lyrics: 'Went to a mosque/Gotta throw some rocks/Tell the Ayatollah gonna put him in a box.' But look at how the rest of us react. We all talk about countries like Israel in absolute terms. To say anything else is to be accused of 'moral blindness', as I was in that letter. Israel are the bad guys, right? They are no longer human beings. The reaction is understandable, but it doesn't solve anything. To solve it, we need psychology. It is not moral philosophy but psychology that has the power to change politics. I am thinking particularly of Unconditional Positive Regard (UPR), a concept developed by Carl Rogers, one of the founding fathers of Humanistic Psychology. It's a tough pill to swallow – to think that even Benjamin Netanyahu deserves radical acceptance. Radical acceptance absolutely isn't about accepting someone's behaviour. We still condemn the action. We condemn genocide. It's about remembering that the other is, ultimately, always a human being. File photo: Ronen Zvulun via AP Radical Positive Regard doesn't mean agreement – it is a temporary moral blindness only, a suspension of morality if you will. It can even mean violence to stop what is happening in the short term, but it demands we engage, listen, and communicate. The driving force is not right and wrong but a belief in humanity – even when the human in question is behaving like a devil. Netanyahu is a human. He is a human facing corruption charges. A human whose reputation was destroyed on October 7 when he failed to protect his people, a traumatised people, and he is doing anything he can do to regain their trust. He is a human with motivations and feelings. The attacks on Iran are increasing his popularity. His people have a bloodlust we must try to understand. Not condone – no. That is not what this is about. We must maintain our positive regard for them as human beings only to engage and bring about change. We will have plenty of time for morality. The need for this approach exists at a local as well as a global level. Look at the research shared by this paper on crime this week. Criminals in Cork, as I have written about before, are far more likely to come from our Northside. Our prison is overpopulated with people with stories of abuse, deprivation and addiction. The behaviours may be morally wrong and abhorrent, but they come from somewhere. Labelling men behind bars 'bad' or worse, 'scumbags', won't change anything; the cycle continues. We must suspend our moral condemnation long enough to listen, thereby putting an end to violence, conflict and anti-social behaviour. The local is global. Rogers proved it in his lifetime by applying his 'person-centred approach' to politics and national conflicts, working with groups in Northern Ireland and Central America. In the early 70s, he worked with the 'Steel Shutter' group of Catholics and Protestants in Northern Ireland. They shared their experiences and their hatred for one another but by the end of it, they felt differently. Rogers didn't have the funds to carry on the work, but the group continued to meet in the home of one of the participants - an ex-British colonel, because his home was the safest. Then they went out in pairs, one Catholic and one Protestant, to show the film of their conversation to community groups, schools, and parishes. 'Radical acceptance' The Israelis have a story to tell. The Palestinians have a story to tell. The Iranians have a story to tell. They all have feelings and motivations. Whether we think they are right or wrong is of secondary importance if we are interested in ending violence. Thankfully, there are people carrying the Rogerian baton – thinkers like Mick Cooper, a UK academic who explains the approach in his recent book Psychology at The Heart of Social Change. It's a tough pill to swallow – to think that even Netanyahu deserves radical acceptance. In terms of responding, that must be balanced against his actions. Radical acceptance absolutely isn't about accepting someone's behaviour. We still condemn the action. We condemn genocide. It's about remembering that the other is, ultimately, always a human being, with human wants and needs like the rest of us, and that few people do things out of 'pure evil'. To create a more compassionate world, we need to understand what people are striving for and dividing the world into 'good people like us' and 'bad people like them' is exactly what Netanyahu is doing, or Hamas, or Trump. If we just buy into that narrative, we perpetuate a world of polarisation and, ultimately, violence. 'Radical acceptance' is about trying to step off that treadmill for good. This week, another letter, by Eddie O'Brien, Director of The Thinking Centre, addressed Ursula von der Leyen in this paper. It drew attention to her comment while attending the G7 summit in Canada, that, 'Israel has the right to defend itself, Iran is the principal source of regional instability, and Iran is the source of terror in the Middle East.' Mr O'Brien writes: 'By so prematurely and so publicly announcing of the taking of the side of Israel against Iran, how can Iran be expected to listen, trust, or have any kind of constructive relationship with any peace initiative the European Union may later propose?' It is a fine letter. Read More Iranian response in Doha was only a carefully choreographed demonstration
