Mamdani likely to be New York's next Mayor
Mayor Eric Adams, a Democrat, is running as an independent after his popularity plummeted following his indictment on corruption charges and the subsequent decision by Trump's Justice Department to drop the case. Cuomo also retains the ability to run as an independent, though he has not yet decided whether to do so.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Age
31 minutes ago
- The Age
Suburban Rail Loop will help only the few
Credit when it's due I am not a fan of President Trump, I have been known to make the comment 'America, land of opportunity where even a fool can be elected president'. He has obviously been misguided on the question of tariffs, but I believe he should be congratulated on recognising that Iran cannot be allowed to develop nuclear weapons. The world is indebted to Trump and Israel for the action they have taken. The world is further indebted to Trump for now enabling the peace process to begin. No doubt, Trump exceeded his authority in not going to Congress to obtain approval for the B2 bombing raid on Iran's nuclear facilities, but I believe the venture would certainly have failed had he done so. I can't think of a previous president who would have been prepared to take this necessary action. We are now seeing politics in action by his opponents in belittling what he has achieved. Give him credit when it is due. On this occasion, he has been given expert advice and has followed through on it. Alan Davidson, Altona Feeling less safe Early last week, Benjamin Netanyahu claimed to have bombed Iran in order to make us 'all feel safer'. However, his actions made me, and no doubt many others, feel less safe. Now with Netanyahu having drawn Donald Trump into the 'military action', I feel significantly less safe than last week. Is it because Netanyahu's and Trump's actions were based upon 'intelligence' that is contrary to that of both the International Atomic Energy Agency's and the US State Department? Intelligence that came from the same Israeli people and agency that ignored the warnings of Israeli borders watchers of heightened activity leading up to incursion of Hamas on the October 7, 2023, resulting in the deaths of over 1200 Israelis and now perhaps 50,000 Palestinians in Gaza? Why was that intelligence ignored? Perhaps then US secretary of state, Henry Kissinger's words from the 1970s still ring true: 'There are only 90,000 people out there. Who gives a damn?' ('Deep Water', Good Weekend, 21/6). In the greater scheme of things, ordinary people don't matter to the powerful. We have long known that the first causality of war is truth, and Trump has his own concept of 'truth'. Combine this with having complete disregard for rights, agreements, rules or law, and a preparedness to exert what is basically coercive control on all in his orbit makes for a dangerous combination. At a time when we need greater global cooperation, not competition, I'd feel much safer if Trump insisted countries spent 5per cent of their budgets on addressing global warming and humanitarian aid rather than weapons of war. Trump could then show himself to be a real leader. Rod Eldridge, Derrinallum Israel didn't start conflict Emma Shortis' claim (' Australia needs to find its courage ', 25/6) that Israel 'waged war on Iran' and breached international law is simply incorrect. Israel did not start a war with Iran—rather, Iran has long waged war on Israel through its proxies, including Hamas, whose October 7 attacks were funded, armed, and likely coordinated by Iran. Twice last year, Iran directly attacked Israel with missiles and drones. Israel responded in self-defence to prevent further escalation. Iran openly calls for Israel's destruction, funds groups dedicated to that goal, and even has a countdown clock in Tehran marking Israel's supposed demise. Is that not an act of war? In this context, Israel's actions were lawful self-defence. Likewise, the US acted to protect an ally and deter a regime that repeatedly calls for 'Death to America.' How is any of that illegal—or undesirable? Stephen Lazar, Elwood ABC charter needs attention As Karl Quinn writes, the ramifications of the Antoinette Lattouf case are 'potentially profound' (' Lattouf case has cost much more than just the money ', 26/6). The outcome of the case does little to resolve whether ABC broadcasters are free to express their political views. In deciding that the ABC breached the Fair Work Act by dismissing Lattouf for holding or expressing a particular political opinion, the Federal Court casts doubt over whether the ABC can continue to claim that its broadcasters are impartial, fair and balanced. It might be time to change the ABC Charter, abandon the pretence of impartiality, and allow ABC broadcasters to express their views openly. That would be a refreshing change from the current situation in which most ABC broadcasters play at impartiality while clearly holding progressive, left-leaning worldviews. Rod Wise, Surrey Hills Keep opinion to yourselves I'm amazed and disappointed that the Federal Court has said that journalist Antoinette Lattouf could post information on her social media site that showed a view on the Israel Gaza war. According to the journalists' union the Media Entertainment and Arts Alliance (MEAA), journalists 'Do not allow personal interest, or any belief, commitment, payment, gift or benefit, to undermine your accuracy, fairness or independence'. The MEAA also informs that journalists 'Disclose conflicts of interest that affect, or could be seen to affect, the accuracy, fairness or independence of your journalism'. Journalists' views, such as on politics, should be private, and they should not interfere in any way in their reporting. Marguerite Marshall, Eltham $8 million in super. Really? I could hardly suppress my crocodile tears after reading the first question and answer in the latest 'Ask an expert' financial advice column (2 5/6). The questioners – a retired couple with a combined balance of $8 million in their SMSF – clearly consider the proposed new super tax to be a burden they want to avoid. Noel's answer, assuming the SMSF's earnings in 2025/26 to be $400,000, shows that the extra tax payable would amount to just over $7000. Given that the couple expect to draw from their fund a combined pension of $333,000 in the coming financial year, I suggest they won't struggle to pay this additional amount. And assuming a typical proportion of the funds are invested in shares, it's likely the extra tax would be more than offset by the tax refund associated with franking credits. Kevin Bailey, Croydon Tax helps The headline ' We have $8 million in SMSF. How do we avoid paying the new super tax? ' makes my blood boil. It encapsulates the way superannuation has been hijacked by selfish and greedy members of our society who have no concept of the greater good. If you have that much money in super, you should be appreciative of your good fortune and be happy that your tax is helping to fund services that benefit all. Ann Maginness, Beaumaris Eroding trust The exponential increase in misinformation and disinformation is not a new phenomenon, but, as mentioned in the article by Liam Mannix ″ Brett Sutton made it through a pandemic. Now he's fighting a new war ″, 25/6, has become more concerning with increasingly sophisticated AI technology. The problem has been enabled primarily through the ubiquitous electronic media, and in particular social media which propagates beliefs and opinions often expressed by those with hidden agendas or inexperienced and unqualified ″influencers″, that are often mistakenly confused with truth and verifiable facts. Consequently, trust in trained and experienced experts, including medical specialists, has been significantly eroded to the detriment of community health. Anything that can be done to reverse or mitigate this trend should be supported. I wish Brett Sutton every success in his endeavour to do this. Furthermore, education should from primary school on, emphasise the importance of deep, critical thinking and analysis, thereby empowering populations to differentiate between fact and fiction. Leslie Chester, Brighton 'Red notice' red flag I write as a concerned and angry consumer. I needed a plumber to address a toilet malfunction in my home. I selected a plumbing service from the internet that had thousands of five-star reviews. First hard learned mistake. I am an older woman at home by myself at the time of my call to them. I was quoted more than $30,000 to address the problem. I was absolutely floored by this, and told the attending plumber I would need to speak to my husband before any decision could be made. I was then transferred via phone to his supervisor and was told, effectively, that if I did not accept their quote without delay I would find myself with sewerage leaking everywhere and would be issued with a 'red notice' from the council that would order me to vacate my home. This man was so persistent that I felt bullied and threatened. I refused to succumb to his attempted coercion. I was advised by another plumber that no such work was necessary and the problem could be easily fixed and for far less an amount. I know my problem is not unique. I was stunned to learn that there is very little avenue for me to address this behaviour with an appropriate governing tradesmen's body that would result in this particular plumbing service being sanctioned. Surely, it is wrong that such scams can occur so blatantly without consequence, and that the reputation of honest tradesmen is unfairly sullied by association. Christine Harris, Mordialloc AND ANOTHER THING Trump world Trump's desire for a Nobel Peace Prize by blitz bombing Iran is a classic case of the ends justify the means – which they don't. Greg Curtin, Nunawading How long until Trump launches his own awards system? Joan Segrave, Healesville Let's hope this time Donald Trump has said something true when he says Iran's nuclear capability has been destroyed. Tony O'Brien, South Melbourne NATO secretary general Mark Rutte has given the concept of ″brownie points″ a complete new meaning. Ruth Davis, Carrum Don't upset Donald! It is plaintive to watch the NATO leaders in The Hague to kowtowing to Donald Trump to keep the alliance together. For Trump the solipsist it was all that mattered - he was the centre of attention. Helena Kilingerova, Vermont Can the world's focus please be put back on the situation in Gaza? Israel is committing murder and mayhem. Rhonda Cox, Diamond Creek Re Megan Herbert's cartoon, 26/6: It was Hamas. It did house strategic targets. There never was a negotiating table. Sam Bando, Malvern Bezos' wedding Foam party? (' Protesting locals force Bezos to move Venice wedding spectacular ', 26/6). A foam party for 50 to 60-year-olds? And here's me thinking the US president was childish Pam Cupper, Dimboola Furthermore Twice this week the majority of the sport section has been devoted to the trials and tribulations of just one AFL football club. Enough! Apart from Carlton supporters – who cares! There are 17 other AFL clubs. Brian Kidd, Mt Waverley
Sky News AU
41 minutes ago
- Sky News AU
Douglas Murray shames YouTube star for supporting ‘anti-Zionist' Zohran Mamdani
Author Douglas Murray slams online entertainer Nicolas De Balinthazy 'Sneako' for supporting NYC Democrat mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani just because 'he's the only non-Zionist candidate'. Sneako posted a video to social media showcasing his support for Mr Mamdani, stating the people of New York are 'tired of the Zionism'. 'Isn't it extraordinary he's running to be mayor of New York and the thing he's really best known for is his anti-Israel activism,' Mr Murray told Sky News host Rita Panahi. 'Of course, that attracts a certain type of person. 'Isn't it revealing when people like that guy there, Sneako, that he says, 'I like him because he's not a Zionist', well that just means that he gets the support of people who think 'great, this guy doesn't like Jews, I don't like Jews, lets vote for him'. 'What's not being a Zionist got to do with being mayor of New York?'
ABC News
an hour ago
- ABC News
Former Iranian official says US has not wiped out Iran's nuclear program because of their 'know-how'
Former Iranian ambassador to Germany Seyed Mousavian, who was also part of Iran's nuclear diplomacy team with the UN in the 2000s, says US strikes on major Iranian nuclear sites are only a small victory and Iran's nuclear threat remains real. Mr Mousavian told 7.30 that while physical Iranian assets could have been destroyed as part of the US's so-called Operation Midnight Hammer, the nuclear "know-how" of Iranian scientists has not been. That is despite a number of Iranian scientists being killed in initial Israeli strikes. After the initial Israeli strikes the warring nations exchanged missile attacks before the US president claimed the US attacks caused the destruction of nuclear sites at Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan. "Monumental Damage was done to all Nuclear sites in Iran, as shown by satellite images. Obliteration is an accurate term!" Mr Trump had written on Truth Social. Mr Mousavian, an academic at Princeton University questioned those claims and offered a warning. "I don't know the extent of the damages, nobody knows," Mr Mousavian told 7.30. "There is a dispute in the US ... but even if it is completely destroyed as President Trump has claimed repeatedly, even if it has been severely damaged, what was the objective? To destroy the facilities, building and utilities? "But you cannot destroy the know-how. "The know-how is there, how you can kill the know-how? Iranians, they have the technology and they can reconstruct anything. "Whether that will take one month or five months or six months, it doesn't matter. At the core of why the US says it executed the strikes on the Iranian facilities is yet to be sighted evidence that Iran was closing in on building its own nuclear weapon. It was something Mr Mousavian denied and said Iran had only stockpiled 400 kilograms of uranium enriched to 60 per cent as a "bargaining chip". Weapons-grade uranium is enriched to 90 per cent. He blamed Mr Trump for "killing" Iran's nuclear deal during his first term in the White House, in 2018. "Iran was in full compliance for full three years," Mr Mousavian said. "The US violated when Iran was in full compliance and the US imposed the most comprehensive sanctions ever during the history against Iran. "[The] sanctions and pressures by the US made Iran increase the level and the capacity of its nuclear programme for a bargaining chip in order to bring the US to the table." Mr Mousavian claimed — citing knowledge from a source — that the 400 kilograms was central to negotiations right before Israel struck Iran. "They agreed that the 400 kilograms would be either diluted or exported," he told 7.30. "There would be no danger or fear or concern about making 10 nuclear bombs there. The Iranian enrichment would go below 5 per cent, which is civilian enrichment." 7.30 could not verify these claims. Mr Mousavian said soon after this that Israel launched its first strikes, which have been supported by the US. Where that 400 kilograms of uranium is now remains a mystery but Iran remains a signatory — like the US — to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT). Asked if Iran might now consider leaving that treaty, Mr Mousavian said that would depend on the actions of the US. "If the US would respect the rights of Iran like other members of the non-proliferation treaty, Iran would stay," he told 7.30. "Iran would never go for a nuclear bomb, like before, Iran would cooperate at the highest level of transparency and inspections." He was then asked if a lack of US respect could mean the Islamic Republic pursues a nuclear weapon. "If the US is going to accelerate hostilities, wars, assassinations, terror and cyber attacks ... why should they not," he told 7.30. 7.30 host David Speers then suggested that comment sounded like "a threat", which elicited an impassioned response from Mr Mousavian. "It is American threat. It is Israeli threat," he said. "Iran has been attacked. Israel attacked Iran, but now you are discussing about Iranian threat." He then accused Israel of having nuclear weapons of its own, but that is an oft-repeated claim that the Israeli government has never verified. Asked where the conflict moves to next, he said "everything depends on the US". And with Mr Trump recently saying neither Israel nor Iran knows "what the f*ck they're doing" that could mean anything. Watch 7.30, Mondays to Thursdays at 7:30pm on ABC iview and ABC TV Do you know more about this story? Get in touch with 7.30 here.
