Houthi Rebels Fire Missile Toward Israeli Airbase; IDF Says Attack Thwarted, Projectile Downed
'Some Will lose Sleep': PM Modi Roasts Congress in Kerala, Shares Stage with Tharoor, Vijayan
PM Modi just dropped another roast—this time aimed at the INDI Alliance—as Kerala CM Pinarayi Vijayan and Shashi Tharoor shared the stage. With a grin and a jab, Modi claimed 'many will lose sleep' seeing this Kerala camaraderie. Is this a power move or just another spicy soundbite from the PM? Watch to see how this unexpected duo got the spotlight... and Congress got the insomnia.#toibharat #Modi #Congress #KeralaPolitics #INDIAlliance #PoliticalRoast #ShashiTharoor #PinarayiVijayan #PMModiSpeech #VizhinjamSeaport #KeralaSeaport
5.1K views | 1 hour ago
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
NDTV
18 minutes ago
- NDTV
No, India Is Not Israel, And Pak Is Not Palestine
In the immediate aftermath of the April 2022 Pahalgam terror attack - where Indian civilians were targeted in a region long destabilised by cross-border militancy - an old but deeply flawed analogy began circulating with renewed vigour: that India is becoming Israel, with Pakistan being touted as the new 'Palestine'. This comparison, invoked by a range of commentators from populist influencers to academic quarters, attempts to overlay the Middle Eastern fault lines onto South Asia. However, while superficially tempting, this analogy is strategically misleading, historically untrue, and morally hazardous. At its core, the Israel-Palestine conflict is a struggle between a militarily dominant state and a stateless people living under occupation. It is defined by asymmetric power, a denial of sovereignty, and ongoing territorial annexation. India and Pakistan, by contrast, are both fully sovereign states that emerged from a negotiated partition of British India in 1947, each with their own internationally recognised borders and UN memberships. The bilateral conflict, especially over Kashmir, stems not from a denial of statehood but from unresolved territorial claims. Pakistan's continued insistence on linking Kashmir to Palestine flattens these distinctions and obfuscates the history of Pakistan-sponsored terrorism across Indian territory - from Punjab and Jammu & Kashmir to episodic destabilisation in India's Northeast. Equating Pakistani actions with Palestinian resistance also undermines the moral and strategic integrity of the Palestinian cause. It erases the fact that, unlike Palestinians under occupation, Pakistan has used its sovereign apparatus to sponsor and shelter groups involved in acts of terror. This deliberate state complicity - acknowledged even by global institutions - makes Pakistan an aggressor, not an aggrieved actor. Minorities, Democracy, and Statehood One of the more dangerous simplifications of the analogy lies in the misrepresentation of internal minority politics in both regions. It is true that India is facing criticism over recent communal tensions, polarised discourse, and policies perceived as marginalising Muslims. However, equating that with the condition of Palestinians under occupation ignores the difference between a flawed democracy and an apartheid state structure. In India, Muslims remain an electorally significant, constitutionally recognised group whose cultural, linguistic, and religious institutions are protected under law. Their political presence - though under strain - remains visible. From Maulana Abul Kalam Azad, the country's first Education Minister, to Dr APJ Abdul Kalam, one of India's most beloved Presidents, the leadership and legacy of Indian Muslims is historically well-anchored. In contemporary times, figures like Asaduddin Owaisi, a staunch government critic, and Salman Khurshid, a senior Congress leader with no constitutional post, were both part of an all-party delegation sent abroad to brief international counterparts in the aftermath of Operation Sindoor. Their inclusion, despite being politically oppositional, signals a rare bipartisan consensus on matters of national security. Contrast this with Pakistan, where Ahmadiyyas are constitutionally barred from calling themselves Muslims, and Shias are frequently targeted in sectarian violence. The state's own structures are often complicit in marginalising non-Sunni groups, with blasphemy laws regularly weaponised against minorities. These are not merely social biases but systemic exclusions - legally and politically embedded. Meanwhile, in Palestine, the question is not one of minority rights within a sovereign state but of basic human existence under foreign occupation. Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza live without freedom of movement, due legal process, or political autonomy. Lumping these distinct contexts together does violence to the nuance required to address each problem on its own terms. Terrorism, Occupation, and Policy India's security doctrine has consistently emphasised that its conflict is not with the people of Pakistan but with its military-intelligence apparatus and its use of terrorism as statecraft. From the insurgency in Kashmir and the Khalistani separatist movement in Punjab to arms flowing into the Northeast in the 1980s and 1990s, India's internal challenges have often traced back to external sponsorship. These were not acts of a stateless community demanding dignity but the result of a neighbour using irregular war to destabilise a regional adversary. Israel, by contrast, has often responded to Palestinian armed resistance with disproportionate force - demolishing homes, bombing refugee camps, and applying collective punishment policies. These actions have generated global concern about human rights violations, and rightly so. However, attempts to map these punitive actions onto India's counter-terror operations obscure the scale, nature, and intent of both countries' military strategies. What makes the analogy particularly hollow is India's long-standing commitment to the Palestinian cause. Even under the Modi government, which has expanded strategic ties with Israel, India has repeatedly reaffirmed its support for a two-state solution and spoken against occupation at UN fora. Far from mimicking Israeli policy, India has walked a diplomatic tightrope - deepening bilateral defence relations with Israel while maintaining principled solidarity with Palestine. Conflating these divergent positions is not only analytically lazy but diplomatically counterproductive. It risks damaging India's credibility in the Global South, especially at a time when New Delhi seeks to position itself as a mediator and developmental partner in multilateral spaces. More importantly, it insults the Palestinian struggle by associating it with Pakistan's agenda of using terrorism and religious nationalism as tools of foreign policy. Reject Lazy Analogies Both the Israel-Palestine and India-Pakistan conflicts demand global attention. But attention should not mean abstraction. The occupation of Palestine is a human rights crisis rooted in land, displacement, and statelessness. The India-Pakistan dynamic, while also involving land and identity, is situated in a very different matrix: of two sovereign nations, one of which has routinely used terrorism to internationalise what is essentially a bilateral issue. Sympathy for the Palestinian cause should not be hijacked to justify flawed analogies that exonerate state complicity in South Asia. Nor should India's legitimate counterterrorism operations be lumped with settler-colonial violence. Doing so only weakens both struggles - reducing history, diplomacy, and suffering to hashtags. In times of polarisation, strategic clarity is not just a virtue, it is a necessity. India is not Israel. Pakistan is not Palestine. And equating them does justice to neither the complexity of history nor the urgency of peace. (Ashraf Nehal is an author, analyst and columnist, who writes on South Asian geopolitics, climate action and world affairs. He was a former PM Young Writing Fellow)
NDTV
25 minutes ago
- NDTV
"Our Relationship Not Limited To Politics": Rahul Gandhi On Lalu Yadav
New Delhi: Congress leader Rahul Gandhi greeted RJD president Lalu Prasad Yadav on his birthday on Wednesday and said their relationship is not limited to politics but is a deep human bond based on common values and the struggle for social justice. Mr Yadav, a former chief minister of Bihar, turned 77 on Wednesday. "Happy Birthday to former Bihar Chief Minister and RJD President Lalu Prasad Yadav Ji. Our relationship has not been limited to politics - it has been a deep human bond, based on common values and the struggle for social justice," Mr Gandhi said in a post in Hindi on X. "Your life has been full of struggles, but you have always raised your voice with strength and courage for those who are often unheard," the former Congress president said. "Today on your birthday, I wish you good health and a long life," Mr Gandhi said. Congress president Mallikarjun Kharge also extended birthday wishes to Mr Yadav. "I wish you good health and a long life," Mr Kharge said. The Congress and the RJD are alliance partners and will be contesting the upcoming Bihar polls as part of the Mahagathbandhan against the NDA coalition.
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
35 minutes ago
- First Post
Is Trump's position weakening in the US? LA protests give a hint despite allies' claims
As Los Angeles protests turn into a mass movement against his rule and approval ratings fall, US President Donald Trump appears to be on a shaky wicket. Even as he prepares to roll down tanks and soldiers on his birthday, the brewing discontent and opposition challenges the show of strength. read more Demonstrators holding signs and flags face California National Guard members standing guard outside the Federal Building as they protest federal immigration operations in Los Angeles, on June 9, 2025. (Photo: AFP) US President Donald Trump had a euphoric start to his second term: he had just scored a historic victory, his approval ratings were soaring, the Democratic Party was in shambles, the Congress was essentially a rubber stamp body, and the Supreme Court was in his pocket. Now, five months later, Trump is facing brutal reality checks: the Los Angeles protests against his immigration policy are spiralling into a mass movement against his rule, he has received rebuke after rebuke from the courts about his executive overreach, his policies have plunged the US economy into recession fears and trade war with China has backfired, and his approval ratings have fallen. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Trump's international reputation is also in tatters as he has failed to end wars in Ukraine and Gaza — he had said he would end the war in Ukraine in 24 hours. After National Guards, Trump has deployed US Marines in Los Angeles — the deployment of military on domestic soil against own citizens is an extraordinary step. More Americans oppose such a deployment than support and more Americans disapprove of Trump's performance than approve, as per latest polls. Americans reject US Marines deployment, Trump's policies California Governor Gavin Newsom has said the deployment of US Marines to Los Angeles amounts to crossing a red line and the American public agrees. As many as 47 per cent Americans oppose Trump's deployment of Marines against 34 per cent who support it, according to a YouGov poll published on Tuesday. 'US Marines serve a valuable purpose for this country — defending democracy. They are not political pawns. The Secretary of Defense is illegally deploying them onto American streets so Trump can have a talking point at his parade this weekend. It's a blatant abuse of power. We will sue to stop this. The Courts and Congress must act. Checks and balances are crumbling. This is a red line — and they're crossing it. Wake up!' said Newsom. The YouGov poll also found that 52 per cent Americans disapprove of Trump's policies in the week ending Monday. Trump plans birthday parade — even as uprising swells Even as the uprising against his rule is swelling, Trump is planning a military parade for his birthday on Saturday. Formally, the parade is supposed to mark the 250th foundation day of the US Army, but critics have said that the scale of the parade has been ramped up to unprecedented scale for the pleasure of Trump who would mark his birthday with the parade like leaders of authoritarian regimes usually do by removing the difference between their personal life and public office. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD While Trump looks forward to the parade, Los Angeles protests have spread to at least 22 places across the United States, such as New York, Boston, Chicago, Dallas, and Atlanta. NBC News has reported that at least 25 rallies and demonstrations have been organised against Trump's rule since Monday. Unlike his first term when mass protests against his rule were rather frequent, such protests had not been reported until this month in Trump's second term. Trump defies laws and courts — again With his deployment of military and mobilisation of National Guards, Trump has not just triggered Democrats, but has also possibly triggered courts — again. In his second term, Trump has defied courts multiple times by not following its orders regarding immigration crackdown and deportations. Now, as Newsom has challenged the troop deployment, Trump is expected to defy courts again if they don't rule in his favour. If and when such defiance comes, the rule of law in the United States would further erode in the eyes of Trump's critics and possibly fan further protests. By law, the US government cannot deploy military for domestic law enforcement for law enforcement purposes unless certain laws like the Insurrection Act are invoked. Trump has so far not invoked the act. The Trump administration has maintained that National Guards were mobilised and Marines were deployed to just protect federal law enforcement personnel and properties. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Critics have said that owing to authoritarian tendencies where Trump does not recognise anything that goes against him, whether it is court orders or election results as seen in 2020 election when he egged on a mob to attack the Capitol to illegally overturn the result in his favour, the deployment of the military on American soil is a very dangerous precedent.
