NHL suspends Panthers co-owner over social media posts
Florida Panthers minority owner Doug Cifu has been suspended after making "inappropriate" remarks during a social media spat with a Toronto Maple Leafs fan, the National Hockey League said on Tuesday.
The NHL said in a statement Cifu had been indefinitely suspended following a barbed exchange on X, formerly Twitter, on Sunday which touched on the war in Gaza and U.S. President Donald Trump's vow to make Canada the 51st state of the United States.
"The NHL has concluded that Mr Cifu's X posts were unacceptable and inappropriate. As a result, Mr. Cifu has been suspended indefinitely from any involvement with the Club and the NHL," the league said in a statement Tuesday. "An in-person meeting will be scheduled with Mr. Cifu and the Commissioner at a date to be determined."
In a statement released to U.S. media outlets, Cifu apologized for his remarks and vowed to work with the league over the controversy.
"Two days ago, I posted regrettable and inflammatory comments on social media," Cifu was quoted as saying.
"My behavior does not reflect the standards of the Florida Panthers organization and the Viola family. I sincerely apologize to all those affected by my comments.
"I am committed to working with the NHL to amend my actions," he added.
Cifu had become embroiled in an ill-tempered back-and-forth with an X user over the ongoing playoff series between the Panthers and Toronto.
At one point in the exchange, Cifu branded the fan a "51st state anti semite loser."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Japan Today
an hour ago
- Japan Today
Panthers visit Oilers in Game 1 of Stanley Cup Final
Kids from Pierceland, Saskatchewan, in the city on vacation, stop to touch and look at a nearly 4 meter replica of the Stanley Cup trophy, Tuesday, June 3, 2025, that is a permanent installation in Edmonton, Alberta, ahead of Game 1 of the NHL hockey Stanley Cup final series between the Florida Panthers the Edmonton Oilers. (Darryl Dyck/The Canadian Press via AP) ice hockey By STEPHEN WHYNO The second incarnation of the Florida Panthers against the Edmonton Oilers in the Stanley Cup Final opens in the opposite corner of North America from a year ago. Game 1 is Wednesday night in Edmonton, where fans in the hockey-crazed capital of Alberta get to see their team start a series at home for the first time during this playoff run. 'To be able to start the Stanley Cup Final on home ice, you can just feel a buzz in the city and these people deserve it,' NHL MVP finalist Leon Draisaitl said. 'They've waited a long time for this and, obviously to us, it's all about finishing it.' Starting at home last year, the Panthers went up two games to none and won the first game in Edmonton to take a 3-0 series lead. They lost the next three before winning Game 7 to capture the first title in franchise history. Florida is in the final for a third consecutive season and is four wins away from becoming the NHL's first back-to-back champions since cross-state rival Tampa Bay in 2020 and '21. 'It's why we're here: We're playing hockey in June for the third straight year and a chance to be a part of history,' standout winger Matthew Tkachuk said. 'We've had two kicks at it so far, and they've been very different summers, so we're hoping for the good one.' The Panthers have won 10 of 11 playoff series since Tkachuk joined in a trade from Calgary in 2022 and coach Paul Maurice took over that same offseason. As one of those 10 opponents who ended up on the wrong side of the handshake line against the burgeoning hockey powerhouse in South Florida, the Oilers don't want history to repeat itself. But veteran defenseman Mattias Ekholm, back from an extended injury absence, doesn't want to load up too much pressure on Game 1. 'You ask every single guy in our locker room, we want to come out flying, we want to play great and we want to win Game 1," Ekholm said. 'You go to their locker room, they're probably saying the same thing. One team's going to win it and one team's not.' © Copyright 2025 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without permission.
NHK
11 hours ago
- NHK
US looks to entice Japan with Alaska LNG project
The US wants Asian nations to invest in an Alaska LNG pipeline. An expert says they should shop around as competing projects are under consideration throughout North America.
Japan Times
13 hours ago
- Japan Times
The Europeans are facing an existential choice
For years, I have taken every opportunity to urge the European Union and its member states to invest more in defense. When Russian President Vladimir Putin launched his full-scale invasion of Ukraine, I repeatedly asked (as a member of the European Parliament) what further proof we would need to recognize the threats facing all of Europe. What would we — as Europeans — do if our security was threatened while our closest ally, the United States, was otherwise engaged? Today, we confront that very situation. U.S. officials are openly stating that they do not intend to devote most of their time or resources to dealing with what they deem European issues. According to Secretary of State Marco Rubio, the U.S. has 'other priorities to focus on.' I agree. The global superpower has global responsibilities and the number of flash points that might demand the U.S. government's attention seems only to be growing. In addition to challenges in the Western hemisphere, instability in the Middle East and severe tensions between two nuclear powers — India and Pakistan — there is also the paramount goal of redefining relations with China. Moreover, according to the official U.S. Defense Department planning doctrine, the U.S. can no longer fight more than one major war at a time. The new U.S. administration has been communicating its position plainly. 'We're here today to directly and unambiguously express that stark strategic realities prevent the United States of America from being primarily focused on the security of Europe,' Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth announced in Brussels this February. And U.S. Vice President J.D. Vance was even more direct, stating that 'Europe's entire security infrastructure ... has been subsidized by the United States of America,' even though it is neither in Europe's nor America's interest 'for Europe to be a permanent security vassal of the United States.' President Donald Trump himself has repeatedly accused Europe of 'freeloading' and 'taking advantage' of the U.S.. Europeans may not like what we hear, but we cannot pretend not to hear it. We must be prepared for the U.S. to wash its hands not only of Ukraine, but even of Europe. Le Monde's Sylvie Kauffmann recently argued, 'Preparing for the worst is a safer bet than hoping for the best.' We can and should do both — hope and prepare. Trust but verify. Ever since Trump announced his presidential candidacy back in 2015, there have been two schools of thought on interpreting his words. Some argue that we should take him seriously but not literally, whereas others urge us to do the opposite: treat him literally but not always seriously. I believe that the most reasonable and respectable approach is to treat whatever the U.S. president says both literally and seriously. Given the current state of the world, this implies that Europe faces an existential choice. We can enter the global game united as a heavyweight competitor or we can condemn ourselves to marginalization. Much has been done already to become a heavyweight contender. Since 2016 — just before Trump's first term — NATO members, excluding the U.S., have increased their annual defense spending by 98%, from $255 billion to $506 billion. Moreover, after three years of Putin waging war on Ukraine, the EU and its member states have proven willing to spend even more and to embrace a more cooperative, rational and effective approach to defense planning and procurement. The new joint defense agreement between the EU and the United Kingdom is another step demonstrating this new strategic solidarity. Deterring Russia is not beyond our means. We don't need to match U.S. military capabilities; rather, we just need enough to force Putin to reconsider his chances of winning in a confrontation with a united European community of democratic nation-states. The people of Europe are clearly demanding that we develop a revitalized European defense posture. According to the European Commission, 71% of EU citizens believe that the bloc must strengthen its ability to produce military equipment, while 77% support a common defense and security policy. This gives European leaders a mandate to think and act boldly. But how long will it take to restore peace to Ukraine and stability to Europe? I believe we must act on the basis of three assumptions. First, we should view this as a war of a former imperial metropole against what it regards as a mutinous colony. History suggests that colonial wars usually take about a decade to end. Anything less than that should be considered a bonus. Second, we should accept that for the invading country to start negotiating in good faith, it must conclude that the invasion was a mistake. It must acknowledge that the costs of war and of keeping the former colony subjugated are greater than whatever benefits the colony can possibly yield. Third, given the above, we should remember that colonial wars are usually finished by a different group of leaders than those who started the fighting. Yes, boosting European defense capabilities while supporting Ukraine will cost money. Since the start of Russia's war of aggression, the EU and its member states have provided more than $165 billion in support for Ukraine and its people. That is a significant amount, but it is still less than 1% of the combined gross domestic product of the EU's member countries (some $19 trillion). We can certainly do more. And as we reinvigorate Europe's defenses, we must not lose sight of why we are doing it: we are acting for our own safety, not to undermine transatlantic relations but to improve them. To avoid a strategic dilemma, we Europeans must be able to help the U.S. defend its allies by taking on our fair share of the security burden. Radosław Sikorski is foreign minister of Poland. © Project Syndicate, 2025
