Connect with us
DAPA Banner
DAPA Coin
DAPA
COIN PAYMENT ASSET
PRIVACY · BLOCKDAG · HOMOMORPHIC ENCRYPTION · RUST
ElGamal Encrypted MINE DAPA
🚫 GENESIS SOLD OUT
DAPAPAY COMING

Politics

Infantino sees with one eye: he called for a French journalist’s release but ignored Palestinian journalists denied the 2026 World Cup

Published

on

Infantino

Infantino

When Gianni Infantino reserved an empty seat for French journalist Christophe Gleizes and called for his release so he could attend the 2026 World Cup, the FIFA president wanted to send a message of solidarity with a reporter who had been prevented from covering the world’s biggest football tournament.

But there are many more empty seats that FIFA’s president has chosen not to acknowledge.

There are Palestinian journalists who covered previous international tournaments, some of whom attended the 2022 World Cup in Qatar, but who will never make it to the 2026 tournament. Not because they are behind bars, but because they were killed during the war. There are also dozens of journalists in Gaza who have been deprived of the opportunity to cover the World Cup because of the realities imposed by war, siege, and border closures — circumstances that have found no place in Infantino’s speeches or press conferences.

Infantino defends French journalist

If Infantino believes that preventing a single journalist from attending the World Cup is an issue worthy of international attention, then surely the plight of journalists who have been prevented from practising their profession altogether — or who lost their lives while carrying a camera or a notebook — deserves at least the same concern.

Advertisement

This is not about ranking one journalist’s suffering above another’s. It is about consistency.

Over recent months, Infantino has repeatedly argued that FIFA cannot intervene in sovereign decisions made by states. He has said that visa restrictions and the exclusion of journalists, officials, and athletes from entering the United States fall outside FIFA’s remit and are matters for American authorities.

If that principle is valid in those cases, then it should apply consistently across all cases. It cannot be invoked when convenient and discarded when it is not.

He could have stood for principles

The FIFA president could have spoken up for the French journalist while also acknowledging the dozens of Palestinian journalists who will never have the chance to reach a World Cup stadium — or even return to their work. He could also have spoken out for the Somali referee who was denied entry to the United States to participate in the tournament, as well as journalists and sporting delegations who have encountered visa obstacles despite receiving official accreditation.

Advertisement

Instead, by highlighting one case while remaining silent on others that are arguably broader and more severe, FIFA leaves itself open to legitimate questions about double standards and the limits of the responsibility it chooses to exercise.

If football is, as Infantino often says, a force for bringing people together rather than dividing them, then fairness and solidarity should be applied universally. They should extend to every journalist denied the opportunity to cover the World Cup, regardless of their nationality or the circumstances that prevented them from being there.

Featured image via Angel Delgado/Getty Images

By Alaa Shamali

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading
Click to comment

You must be logged in to post a comment Login

Leave a Reply

Politics

Madonna Lands Graham Norton Show Special For Confessions II Album

Published

on

Madonna Lands Graham Norton Show Special For Confessions II Album

Graham Norton is devoting a whole episode of his talk show just to Madonna as she gears up for the release of her new album.

On Wednesday, several outlets spotted a special sit-down with the talk show host titled simply Madonna & Graham in the BBC’s scheduling listings.

The special is due to air on Friday 26 June at 10.40pm, just one week before the Queen of Pop unveils her long-awaited 15th album, Confessions II, and is billed as an “in-depth discussion” about Madonna’s “incredible life and career”.

HuffPost UK has contacted the BBC for comment.

Advertisement

Graham has interviewed Madonna on his talk show on several occasions in the past, including on the promo trails for her film W.E. and her most recent album, Madame X.

Asked about his past interviews with Madonna in 2024, the Bafta winner recalled: “She’s done [my show]. And then, I think, she fell out with me, and then the next one she did was Jonathan [Ross, in 2015]. And then she came back to me [in 2019].”

“I like Madonna, but she doesn’t make it easy,” he then admitted. “I always thought that I might become her friend.

“[When I see] her Instagram posts, I like to look behind her at the house, and say, ‘I wonder which house she’s in? Is she in London?’. Sometimes I cycle past it and think, ‘I wonder if she’s in there now?’. But rest assured, I’m not her friend, so don’t be too jealous.”

Advertisement

Back in 2015, Graham was a surprise guest when Madonna brought her Rebel Heart tour to London’s O2 Arena.

Madonna’s Confessions II will be released on Friday 3 July.

The release was preceded by album cuts I Feel So Free and Love Sensation, as well as lead single Bring Your Love, featuring fellow chart-topper Sabrina Carpenter.

Advertisement

Earlier this week, she also unveiled a new short film to promote the album, featuring a host of impressive celebrity cameos.

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

Analysis: John Healey’s Brutal Resignation Is The Final Nail In Keir Starmer’s Coffin

Published

on

Analysis: John Healey's Brutal Resignation Is The Final Nail In Keir Starmer's Coffin

If there were any lingering doubts that Keir Starmer is in the final throes of his time in No.10, they were extinguished this morning.

John Healey’s devastating resignation as defence secretary, and his central charge that Starmer is failing to keep the country safe, means the end is near for the prime minister.

With opinion polls showing that Andy Burnham is on course to be elected the MP for Makerfield in a week’s time, there is a not-inconsiderable chance that it could all be over before MPs leave Westminster for the summer recess.

Starmer has let it be known that he intends to fight any attempt to unseat him. Healey’s resignation means there is now no chance of that.

Advertisement

There have been far too many ministerial resignations in British politics over the past decade, but none have been as catastrophic for a sitting PM than Healey’s.

Healey, one of the most respected figures at Westminster, calmly and methodically set out how both the prime minister and chancellor Rachel Reeves were failing to come up with the money Britain’s armed forces needs at a time of growing global unrest.

The final straw for the now-former defence secretary came on Monday afternoon, when he was shown the full Defence Investment Plan (DIP), a document which has been delayed for months because of wrangling between No.10, the Ministry of Defence and the Treasury.

It set out how defence spending would increase from 2.6% of gross domestic product (GDP) next year to just 2.68% in 2030 – well short of the 3% Healey said was the minimum requirement.

Advertisement

If he accepted that settlement, Healey said, it would see him “being forced to make decisions that would reduce the readiness of our Forces and increase the risk to personnel on operations, and could make the country less safe”.

Nor did his resignation letter spare Reeves from criticism.

“The excellent and extensive cross-government work that completed in January – overseen by you, me and the chancellor – confirmed the scale of the challenge and the rising demands on defence,” he wrote.

“Since then, you have been unable, and the Treasury has been unwilling, to commit the resources that the nation needs to defend the country at this time of rising threats.”

Advertisement

Starmer, like every prime minister before him, has regularly trotted out the line that keeping the country safe is his number one duty.

It is simply impossible for him to repeat that claim when it has been so comprehensively debunked by his own defence secretary.

There are many reasons why Starmer is clearly not cut out for the job of prime minister.

But his failure, with a massive Commons majority behind him, to make and win the case for a huge increase in defence spending is surely the most damning.

Advertisement

It remains to be seen whether Burnham, or whoever else comes next, is able to meet the moment.

Subscribe to Commons People, the podcast that makes politics easy. Every week, Kevin Schofield and Kate Nicholson unpack the week’s biggest stories to keep you informed. Join us for straightforward analysis of what’s going on at Westminster.

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

ICJP issues Serious Crime Prevention Order letter to Met over Great Israeli Real Estate event

Published

on

Har Homa Israeli Settlement

Har Homa Israeli Settlement

The International Centre of Justice for Palestinians (ICJP), in collaboration with the European Legal Support Center (ELSC) and Public Interest Law Centre (PILC), has written to the Metropolitan police asking them to assess the legal issues in relation to a London edition of the Great Israeli Real Estate event under the Serious Crime Act and if appropriate apply for a Serious Crime Prevention Order on 14 June.

ICJP previously issued a letter to the Met calling for an immediate investigation into the legality of the event and those associated with the event under UK domestic law, providing the Met with an overview of the event’s illegality.

The Great Israeli Real Estate event is one of a number of events aimed at marketing and facilitating the purchase of property in both illegal Israeli settlements located in the Occupied Palestinian Territories and cities within Israel.

According to promotional material, the event will feature consultants offering advice on property acquisitions, advertising properties as “your dream home” and providing support for:

Advertisement

important life planning needs in Israel, including burial services.

The Serious Crime Prevention Order letter serves as an urgent escalation in light of the imminence of the event and ICJP has stressed the time-sensitive nature of the situation.

This is yet another attempt to ensure the police uphold their obligations to investigate events of this nature without bias and take available legal measures accordingly.

Israeli property event demands urgent attention

The matters raised in the letter require immediate consideration of investigative steps, preservation of evidence, and assessment of whether preventative or enforcement action may be appropriate within the jurisdiction of England and Wales.

ICJP has raised grounds for concern of the event’s potential illegality under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2022 (ss. 327–329), the Fraud Act 2006 (s. 1), and the Serious Crime Act 2007.

Advertisement

As ICJP has previously noted, the UK government maintains that Israeli settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territories are unlawful under international law.

The International Court of Justice’s July 2024 Advisory Opinion reinforced this position. It concluded that Israel’s continued presence in the territory is unlawful and that third states are under obligations not to recognise or assist in maintaining the resulting situation.

Órlaith Roe, ICJP’s public affairs and communications officer, said:

This order sets out further evidence of the serious concerns surrounding the illegality of this event, concerns we have already raised with the Metropolitan police.

Palestinian land is not for sale, and occupation is not a real estate opportunity.

Advertisement

This event seeks to profit from a settlement enterprise that the UK itself recognises as illegal under international law. We have provided the Met with the evidence. The responsibility now lies with the authorities to act and prevent this event from going ahead.

Featured image via Getty Images

By The Canary

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

Judge who served security services imposes draconian ‘terror’ sentences on Filton peace activists

Published

on

Filton 25

Filton 25

Judge Jeremy Johnson has imposed draconian sentences on four ‘Filton 25’ anti-genocide activists. Johnson had earlier refused to recuse himself from the case over his connections to the security services, Johnson also announced that he would impose ‘terrorism connection’ sentences despite none of the four ever being charged with terror offences, let alone convicted.

Palestine Action had not been proscribed as a terrorist group at the time when these activists were arrested.

Johnson first protected himself against appeals and censure by claiming he was allowing mitigating factors. He then also claimed that “aggravating factors” included upsetting employees of the Elbit death factory — and the fact that the activists wore red jumpsuits and used the word “intifada”.

The sentences imposed are:

Advertisement
  • Two thirds of custodial sentences to be served in prison, then remainder term on parole.
  • The four will be subject to terrorist notification requirements for fifteen years after release. These include having to report relationships, register phones and obtain permission to travel.
  • Forty-five days’ reduction for being on curfew, except for Samuel Corner.
  • All to be disqualified from driving, on release, for one year plus two thirds of the custodial terms imposed.

Filton 25 — Sentence terms

The defendants were not ordered to pay compensation unless police and Israel weapons firm Elbit bring private prosecutions.

Charlotte (Lottie) Head: 6 years (4 years + 320 days custodial)
Eleona (Ellie) Kamio: 6 years (4 years + 320 days custodial)
Fatema Zainab Rajwani: 5 years 8 months (4 years + 200 days custodial)
Samuel Corner: 8 years and 8 days

Corner was also convicted of grievous bodily harm as well as criminal damage, after intervening to protect one of the female actionists. All four have already been in prison for almost two years.

The UK justice system is subordinated to the interests of Israel and its enablers.

Featured image via FiltonActionists

Advertisement

By Skwawkbox

Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

London Travellers Are Learning How Oyster Cards Got Their Name

Published

on

London Travellers Are Learning How Oyster Cards Got Their Name

Life is full of so many little mysteries, like what those little buttons on suit jacket sleeves are really for and why there’s sometimes a little “v” under your sweater’s collar.

And after reading a recent post shared to Reddit’s r/london, I realised I’d been carrying one such puzzle in my pocket for years.

“When I first came to the UK to study, I was always very curious about why the UK’s subway card has the nickname ‘Oyster Card,’” u/Deep-Ad-3363 wrote.

Here’s the history behind the marine-themed name:

Advertisement

Why are they called “Oyster cards”?

Per TfL, the commuter staple could have been named “Pulse” or “Gem” cards. But of the three shortlisted options, “Oyster” won out.

Launched in 2003, the card was created with TranSys, which contracted Saatchi and Saatchi Design to help work on the branding.

Saatchi, in turn, worked with Andrew McCrum, then of Blue Sky Enterprise at the time and now of Appella name consultants.

Advertisement

An archived page on Appella’s site reads: “OYSTER was conceived, mainly, because of the metaphorical implications of security and value in the hard bivalve shell and the concealed pearl.

“Its associations with London through Thames estuary oyster beds and the major relevance of the popular idiom ‘the world is your oyster’ were also significant factors in its selection.”

The company added that the unique sound of the word, and its “sophistication” – as well as the marine theme of Hong Kong’s Octopus card – were added bonuses.

And the name made the design easier and more playful, too.

Advertisement

People were pretty surprised by the connection

“Assumed it was because they came in a clamshell-like wallet,” u/Mattdabes replied to the original Reddit post.

“I’ll never forget our first time in London aged 18 and my friend asked for ‘a mussel card’ by mistake,” u/kaiaemeli added.

And u/Annual-Load3869 wrote, “I always assumed it was ‘world’s your oyster’ but that’s pretty interesting”.

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

American humiliation: Trump is erratic because he knows he’s lost the Iran war

Published

on

Trump

Trump

US president Donald Trump is erratic at the best of times. But his current tendency to threaten Iran with annihilation and then claim peace is at hand five minutes later comes from an awareness that he has lost the Iran war. In truth, we have known this is an American humiliation for a long time.

Iranian politics professor Hassan Ahmadian told Drop Site News on 12 June:

The United States has hit the hard rock of a formidable force that stopped its aggression and they have to deal with it.

President Trump realized that he cannot change the failure, the military failure of the war into a diplomatic win.

You can listen to the full interview below:

Advertisement

Drop Site is one of the few media outlets which has made a point of interviewing people within Iran, including state officials. Most of the legacy media have failed on this front, leaving the war poorly reported from the Iranian perspective.

Drop Site’s Jeremy Scahill wrote:

Advertisement

Throughout the U.S.-Israeli war with Iran, President Donald Trump has constantly flailed in his campaign to portray it as a historic success. The blunt reality is that what Trump announced as a quick and easy war of regime change rapidly transformed into a quagmire.

Adding:

For the past two months, Trump has struggled to find a way to declare victory, alternating between claims that Iran is begging him for a deal and threats to destroy Iranian civilization.

The jig is up, Trump and America are humiliated

US-Israel attacked Iran first on 28 February without provocation. Iran was offering unprecedented concessions in negotiations at the time. The Pentagon has since stated there was no imminent threat from Iran. And the UN’s atomic watchdog, the IAEA, has said there is no evidence Iran was developing a nuclear weapon.

The US has achieved none of its original war aims. Iran predictably closed the Straits of Hormuz, a vital oil channel, once attacked — creating a global energy crisis. Iran has said the war will continue until “the enemy’s inevitable and permanent humiliation, disgrace, regret, and surrender”. Trump came to power on an anti-war ‘America First’ ticket. He now faces worldwide humiliation.

In fact, the jig has been up for a long time.

Advertisement

US journalist Spencer Ackerman was saying as long ago as 1 April that America and Trump have been humiliated. And that they need to be made to feel it.

Ackerman argued that the warmongers can’t be allowed to get away with their ridiculous assertion that the US, which has achieved none of its goals, has in any way won:

A narrative that the 2026 War was a success will hasten both that return [to warfare] and to the deeper catastrophes it will unlock.

He warned that we must tell the truth of the US defeat or:

We will be right back here if the architects, the profiteers, the propagandists and the forerunners of this war get away with their evasions once again.

Trump has bitten off more than he can chew, to put it in simple terms. His desperation to exit the war looks increasingly obvious. Hubris dictates that the US president needs to appear to have won in some sense. But that ship — unlike the estimated 1600 vessels stuck in the Persian Gulf — has sailed.

Advertisement

Featured image via Majid Saeedi/Getty Images

By Joe Glenton

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

Polanski question leads Khan to reveal he told police to investigate Great Israeli Real Estate event

Published

on

Composite image showing Sadiq Khan and Zack Polanski in front of a photo of an Israeli settlement in the West Bank

Composite image showing Sadiq Khan and Zack Polanski in front of a photo of an Israeli settlement in the West Bank

London mayor Sadiq Khan has condemned the Great Israeli Real Estate event, scheduled for Sunday 14 June in London. This came in response to a question from Green Party leader and London Assembly member Zack Polanski at Mayor’s Question Time.

The event promotes the sale of land in illegal settlements in the occupied West Bank. The Israeli property sector is trying to make inroads in the western market. Actress and questionable ‘wellness’ advocate Gwyneth Paltrow has recently sold her face to developers.

Polanski said:

It is morally incomprehensible and unconscionable that this event is scheduled to take place in our city and I welcome the mayor’s strong condemnation of Sunday’s event and its breaches of international law.

The key question now is what comes out of his talks with the Metropolitan police and the Home Office.

Advertisement

In practical terms, the Met should shut down the event on the grounds that it is unlawful. London risks becoming complicit in settlement expansion if people in our capital are profiting from the theft of Palestinian land.

The mayor should call on the government to cancel this event outright. There is real fear that London is being used as a platform for an event associated with the confiscation of land and the destruction of homes.

The cancellation of this event would demonstrate that London will not tolerate complicity in the dispossession and subjugation of the Palestinian people.

Featured image via Jordan Peck – Getty Images for SXSW London / Jon Rowley – Getty Images / Getty Images

Advertisement

By The Canary

Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

Internet Debates Whether It Is OK To Be Naked In Front Of Your Kids

Published

on

Internet Debates Whether It Is OK To Be Naked In Front Of Your Kids

An expectant parent has asked the internet masses whether they think being naked in front of kids is “weird” – and it’s opened up a whole lot of conversation around nudity, children and what’s acceptable.

The parent-to-be wrote on Reddit that they’re having their first child this year and grew up in a “naked household” – where it was totally normal to get dressed, changed, or shower in front of each other. “I’ll also add it was just us girls who did this (no brothers),” she said.

“I’m going to be having a son. Is this concept still weird? My husband thinks so as he grew up with just his mother and much older brother.”

Is it OK to be naked in front of your kids?

Advertisement

In my household, privacy is limited – I can’t even take a shower without someone barging in to sing Wheels On The Bus at me. And I’m fine with that.

I’m not ashamed of my body and I don’t want my kids to grow up feeling shame around their bodies, either. I also personally think it’s great for opening conversations with little kids around what our body parts are called and what their functions are.

Most Redditors seemed to think nudity is fine, with one caveat. It’s OK until someone – whether you or the kids – becomes uncomfortable.

“It’s nothing to be shamed, and nothing to be forced either,” said one commenter.

Advertisement

Another said their husband stopped being comfortable “fully nude” around their daughter when she was a toddler.

“That’s respected, but it’s also not some huge deal if she runs into the room to tell him about her made up dragons while he’s changing, he’ll cover up or turn away and ask for privacy,” they said.

“At 8 she wants privacy for the bathroom mostly, we respect that, but then she will run around the house naked or just in underwear. She sees me changing frequently and it doesn’t make either of us uncomfortable so for now that’s fine. Everyone gets to say in what level of privacy they want within the family.”

There are definitely rules that are useful to follow, though.

Advertisement

One parent said they have three rules in their household: “Respect anyone asking for privacy, no naked butts on the couch, and we all put on clothes for visitors.”

Another said they have conversations around what’s appropriate to do in private (versus out and about), as well as consent.

“We don’t shame nudity, we explain anatomy using anatomical language, we teach about things that are only appropriate to do in private, and who’s allowed to view/touch his private parts and who isn’t,” they said.

“Whenever our son is ready to keep his nudity private or ask us to do the same, that’s fine, we’ll change. He knows it’s up to him.”

Advertisement

Experts agree it can be beneficial, too.

Amy Lang, a child sexual health educator, told The Guardian that while strict rules and guidelines are needed (ie. telling kids not to touch other people’s private parts), family nudity gives kids the opportunity to talk about boundaries, bodies and safety.

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

Delta Goodrem Confirmed For Strictly Come Dancing 2026 Cast

Published

on

Delta Goodrem Confirmed For Strictly Come Dancing 2026 Cast

Pop singer Delta Goodrem will compete on this year’s series of Strictly Come Dancing, the BBC has confirmed.

On Friday evening, the Australian performer became the third celebrity unveiled for the line-up, fresh from her recent success at the Eurovision Song Contest.

She enthused: “I’ve been incredibly honoured to perform on many different stages throughout my career – from TV, theatre, film sets, to touring my own shows around the world.

“There is, however, one stage I’ve never stepped onto and that is the ballroom floor! I’m absolutely thrilled to be joining Strictly and can’t wait to get started!”

Advertisement

After getting her start in Neighbours in the early 2000s, Delta burst onto the music scene with hits including Born To Try and Lost Without You.

In her native Australia she has an impressive nine number one singles to her name, including Innocent Eyes, Predictable and Almost Here, a duet with her ex-partner Brian McFadden.

Last month, she represented her home country at Eurovision 2026 in Vienna, Austria, with her song Eclipse, finishing in fourth place on the night.

This year’s Strictly Come Dancing casting announcements are coming in earlier than usual, with the line-up usually beginning to get unveiled around August time, ahead of the show’s September return.

Advertisement

On Wednesday, fans of the long-running BBC dance show were surprised when, out of the blue, EastEnders favourite Lacey Turner, best known for her performance as Stacey Slater, became the first star revealed to have signed up.

A day later, it was revealed that former Love Island champion Dani Dyer would also be competing in 2026, a year after having to pull out of the series days before the first live show after sustaining a serious injury.

It’s well-documented that the upcoming series of Strictly will be markedly different to recent seasons, most notably thanks to its new presenting line-up, a mass exodus among the show’s resident troupe of professional dancers and, reportedly, a revamped studio.

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

The Epic Story of How Trump Seized the World Cup

Published

on

The Epic Story of How Trump Seized the World Cup

“I was undecided with whether I never wanted to see these people ever again, because we had a pretty good idea of what had happened,” said former U.S. Soccer President Sunil Gulati about a stunning FIFA vote that handed the World Cup to Qatar over a favored American bid. “Or if I want to start bidding the next hour.”

Read the fullinside story of how FIFA’s rejection of a U.S. effort to host the 2022 World Cup sparked bitterness, indictments, a reorganization of soccer’s governing body and, ultimately, a North American World Cup.

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2025