News

Why experts see Modi as best mediator in US-Israel-Iran war  India Today

All the Ways Trump Has Said When the Iran War Will End  Barron's

U.S.-Iran-Israel War: The U.S. Dropped $11.3 Billion In 7 Days, Here Is Where It All Went  The Times of India

We asked 1,000 Americans if U.S. strikes on Iran should continue. Here’s what they said.  The Detroit News

Pentagon blocks photographers from Hegseth’s briefings on the Iran war  Free Speech Center

Amid Iran–Israel War Travel Chaos, Woman’s ‘VIP Flight’ To Dubai Goes Viral  News18

Cross-border clashes between the two countries intensified on February 26, two days before US, Israel attacked Iran.

UK government's new counter-extremism measures called 'Prevent on steroids' Imran Mulla on Thu, 03/12/2026 - 10:49 Contentious 'community cohesion' proposals based on extremism definition introduced by former Conservative minister Michael Gove Britain's Housing Secretary Steve Reed speaks during a television interview at the Labour Party conference in Liverpool on 28 September 2025 (AFP) Off The British government has announced contentious new counter-extremism measures inspired by an extremism definition championed by former Conservative minister Michael Gove and denounced by critics as authoritarian. Earlier this week considerable fanfare surrounded Communities Secretary Steve Reed announcing a new, non-statutory, definition of anti-Muslim hostility. The definition was widely attacked by Reform and Tory politicians who said it undermines free speech. At the same time it was welcomed by some Muslim groups and criticised by others, who argued it was insufficiently strong. But alongside the definition, Reed also announced the adoption of another definition - which went relatively unnoticed in the national media.  The Labour government's "Protecting What Matters" policy, which the anti-Muslim hostility definition was unveiled as part of, introduces a raft of new measures on community cohesion and integration. (adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({}); The government will now adopt the expansive definition of extremism proposed by then-Communities Secretary Michael Gove in March 2024 under the previous Conservative government, which caused an outcry at the time. The definition describes extremism as: "The promotion or advancement of an ideology based on violence, hatred or intolerance, that aims to: a. Negate or destroy the fundamental rights or freedoms of others; or b. Undermine, overturn or replace the UK’s system of liberal parliamentary democracy and democratic rights; or, c. Intentionally create a permissive environment for others to achieve the former." This capacious understanding of extremism includes the act of advancing a violent ideology. But it also includes promoting an ideology which is deemed to create a permissive environment for people who want to undermine liberal parliamentary democracy and democratic rights. Embedded across government The "Protecting What Matters" policy document, published this week, says: "The previous government did not properly embed the 2024 extremism definition, which hindered its ability to counter extremism consistently and effectively." (adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({}); When Gove announced the extremism definition in March 2024, just months before his government was voted out in July, he identified a number of Muslim organisations - including the Muslim Association of Britain (MAB), Cage and Mend - which he said the government planned to "hold to account" using the new definition because of their "Islamist orientation". Nigel Farage makes outlandish claim of Islamists 'embedded' within UK establishment Read More » The Muslim Council of Britain (MCB), the largest body representing Muslims in the UK, said at the time it was concerned that some organisations affiliated with it would be targeted by the definition, describing the plans as "undemocratic, divisive, and potentially illegal". MAB and Mend both challenged Gove to repeat his remarks outside the House of Commons where he would not be protected by parliamentary privilege - which he did not do. The Labour government's new policy says it will "embed the 2024 extremism definition across government" so that "public bodies do not confer legitimacy, funding or influence on extremist groups". This suggests the definition will be used by government departments and officials to help them decide which groups they should engage with and fund. The policy also promises to "strengthen Charity Commission powers to tackle extremist abuse, including the power to shut down charities. "We will also introduce measures to tackle extremism in university campuses, including strengthening monitoring and oversight of Prevent compliance issues to enable enforcement action where necessary," it said. 'Deep sense of betrayal' On Thursday, Wajid Akhter, the general secretary of the MCB - Britain's largest umbrella organisation representing Muslim groups - told Middle East Eye that the new plan was a "repackaging" of "old failed counter-extremism policies". Akhter added: "True community cohesion is built on trust, fairness and shared citizenship, not through the narrow lens of securitisation and counter-terror legislation. This has caused a deep sense of betrayal in a community already under constant attack." 'Labour has adopted all of the last government’s initiatives on countering extremism with no discernible contribution of its own, - John Holmwood, University of Nottingham John Holmwood, emeritus professor of sociology at the University of Nottingham and co-author of the People's Review of Prevent, told MEE the new measures show "the emptiness at the heart of government policy". "Labour has adopted all of the last government’s initiatives on countering extremism with no discernible contribution of its own," he said. "In doing so, it allows the Conservative opposition to outflank it on the right and repudiate its own previous positions to say that Labour has not gone far enough. "It is called an action plan – close to two years after being elected – but scrutiny of what is proposed reveals it to be soundbites with no details of implementation." Holmwood added: "This is how the country drifts into authoritarianism while trumpeting the protection of democracy." 'Prevent on steroids' The policy says: "We are seeing rising extremism from a range of quarters – from Islamist extremism to the Extreme Right Wing – and the nature of this threat is fast changing." It says that "Islamist extremism is a predominant threat", and describes Islamism as a "political ideology; its proponents seek to impose their interpretation of religion and ‘sharia’ as law by state power, and, in various manifestations, justify acts of terror to achieve their goal of a global Islamist state – their version of a ‘caliphate’ or ‘Islamic state’". Major report urges overhaul of Prevent and narrower terror definition Read More » Mohammed Abdul Aziz, director of the Muslim Communities Development Trust, told MEE the policy "feels like the discredited Prevent strategy on steroids. This will not help community cohesion in the UK but will only aggravate it further."  This comes just months after the publication of a major review by the Independent Commission on UK Counter-Terrorism Law, Policy and Practice in November, which recommended an overhaul of the Prevent counter-extremism programme. A staggering 90 percent of the 58,000 people reported to Prevent since 2015 were ultimately judged not to be counterterrorism concerns.  And new Prevent data from 2025 revealed that a significant nine percent of people referred to the programme were considered suicide risks. The commission's chair Sir Declan Morgan, a former lord chief justice of Northern Ireland, said at the report's launch that the "premise underlying" Prevent was wrong, calling for the policy to more narrowly "focus on those who pose a significant risk to public security".  The government's new policy suggests this is unlikely to happen in the foreseeable future. UK Politics News Post Date Override 0 Update Date Mon, 05/04/2020 - 21:19 Update Date Override 0

When an air strike hit their Beirut neighbourhood, people were angry with Israel, but they reserved their deepest rage for Hezbollah, for dragging Lebanon into the Middle East war. Israel and the United States launched huge strikes on Iran on February 28, killing its supreme leader and sparking a massive retaliatory campaign. Iran-backed Hezbollah, already weakened by war, attacked Israel in support of its sponsors, pulling Lebanon into a new cycle of strikes, death and mass displacement.

Israeli military reissues expulsion orders for Beirut southern suburbs The Israeli army has reissued an expulsion order for Beirut's southern suburbs, known as Dahiyeh. In a statement on X, the military instructed residents of the neighbourhoods of Haret Hreik, Ghobeiri, Laylaki, Hadath, Burj al-Barajneh, Tahwitat al-Ghadir and Chiyah to flee. Dahiyeh - home to hundreds of thousands of residents, many of them Hezbollah voters - has borne the brunt of Israeli attacks on the city since the military launched renewed air and ground operations in Lebanon.  On 5 March, the Israeli army issued expulsion orders for the entire area ahead of a wave of strikes. Israeli finance minister Bezalel Smotrich warned that the suburbs would "look like Khan Younis".

Iran's New Supreme Leader's Hormuz Mention And A Warning In First Remarks  NDTV

First week of Iran war cost U.S. over $11 billion, military told lawmakers  CBS News

Al Jazeera’s Tohid Asadi shows the aftermath of US-Israeli airstrikes on a residential neighbourhood in Iran.

US destroys aging Iranian warplanes, video shows  Fox News

Iran war is one 'TACO' too far  Reuters

Iran has confirmed it has carried out coordinated attacks with Hezbollah against Israel.

Rubble from damaged buildings fills streets in southern Beirut after Israeli bombing.

In the video, bowling legend Pete Weber can be seen hitting a strike before Lynyrd Skynyrd’s Free Bird starts to play

Fossil fuel supply is more vulnerable to global shocks than renewable power sources and efforts to boost efficiencies Sign up for the Breaking News US email to get newsletter alerts in your inbox Donald Trump’s war on Iran has triggered shocks in fossil fuel markets, exposing the perils of an agenda that prioritizes “drill, baby, drill” while sabotaging renewable power and energy efficiency in the US, experts and advocates say. The US-Israeli war on Iran has already led to hundreds of deaths, created an ecological crisis linked to strikes on oil depots and sent fossil fuel prices haywire across the globe. Continue reading...