Israelis take Trump tirade in stride, give thanks
HAIFA, Israel, June 24 (Reuters) - Israelis responded calmly on Tuesday to U.S. President Donald Trump's criticisms and accusations their country had violated a truce he brokered with Iran, expressing gratitude for his mediation and relief at the conclusion of the 12-day war.
Earlier in the day Trump admonished Israel with an obscenity in an extraordinary outburst at an ally whose air war he had joined two days before by dropping massive bunker-buster bombs on Iran's underground nuclear sites.
"Honestly, I don't care that much about what Trump said about Israel. At the end of the day, I think he's the one that truly helped to bring an end to this war and that's what's important to me,' said Daniel Kopylkov, a 27-year-old cook.
Kopylkov was one of several people interviewed in Haifa, northern Israel, a target of Iranian missiles during the conflict. It is Israel's third largest city after Jerusalem and Tel Aviv and home to Israel's busiest seaport and a naval base.
Historian Marc Volovici, 42, said Trump's outburst underscored Israel's dependence on U.S. political, military and financial support.
"This was just a very small but significant demonstration of how Israel relies on international legitimacy, and especially (the) American one,' he said.
A 70-year-old resident identifying herself only as Esther said: "It's like a parent scolding the child. He's scolding us. But it's not anything dramatically serious," she said. "I'm not a politician, you know, I'm just feeling it like that.'
Lawyer Ephraim Glazberg, 75, expressed a similar view.
"I think it was the agony of the moment. I don't think this is a problem,' he said.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
16 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Starmer's pointless globetrotting proves how irrelevant he is
Sir Keir Starmer clearly finds burnishing his credentials as a statesman on the world stage far more to his liking than dealing with pesky domestic concerns, such as cutting disability benefits and the winter fuel allowance. British prime ministers usually seek solace in endless overseas jamborees once they have first served a lengthy apprenticeship in Downing Street. Tony Blair was well into his third term before taking refuge in foreign junkets as his domestic popularity waned. By contrast, Starmer, who now has the unenviable honour of the lowest net favourability rating on record, has developed the taste for travelling abroad remarkably early in his premiership. Rather than investing effort in rallying support for policies, 'Never-Here Keir' prefers to spend his time hobnobbing with other world leaders. Last week our Prime Minister was missing in action, attending the increasingly irrelevant meeting of G7 leaders in Canada. It was memorable solely for Donald Trump's sensible decision to head for the exit early to attend to the deepening Iran-Israel conflict. Starmer was in The Hague attending the annual get-together of Nato leaders, where he desperately sought to persuade an increasingly sceptical Trump administration that his Government really was committed to spending 5 per cent of GDP on defence by 2035. By that date, Starmer's undistinguished term in office will be a distant memory. And the defence of the realm will not have been improved a jot by the investment in rural broadband and national roadworks that Starmer now claims is a vital part of his plan to increase overall defence spending. A more detailed examination of the Government's defence plans – one that our allies in the Pentagon will be studying closely – is that there will be no new money to increase the number of troops available to fight the wars of the future. Starmer's boast at the Nato summit that the UK would meet the alliance's new spending target of 5 per cent of GDP 'to deepen our commitment to Nato' is nothing more than an elaborate Treasury 'smoke and mirrors' exercise. Even the highly publicised decision to buy 12 F-35A stealth fighters, which can carry tactical nuclear weapons, has been taken at the expense of buying more of the F-35B variant used by the Royal Navy's two 65,000-ton aircraft carriers, thereby severely diminishing their war-fighting capabilities. Nor does Starmer's endless globetrotting appear to have had any noticeable bearing on his ability to influence key events, as was evident during the Trump administration's decision to bomb Iran's nuclear facilities. While Starmer has an unerring habit of making sure he is photographed next to Trump whenever there is a summit photo op, his ability to bring any influence to bear on the Trump administration's decision-making process is negligible. The first Starmer knew that Trump had given the go-ahead for the bombing raid was when he received a telephone call from the US leader at Chequers, after the B-2 stealth bombers were already in the air. It was merely a courtesy call from Trump, not a consultation with a key ally. The fact that Starmer was completely blindsided by Trump's decision to attack Iran is hardly surprising given that David Lammy, his hapless Foreign Secretary, had returned from meeting Trump administration officials earlier that week insisting there was still a 'window of opportunity' to de-escalate the conflict. The bitter truth is that, for all Starmer attempts to ingratiate himself with world leaders, no one is taking him seriously as a statesman. And this is no wonder given his default response when faced with an international crisis is to indulge in legalistic sophistry and equivocation. Starmer's inability to formulate a clear and coherent response when faced with a global crisis was clearly evident from his handling of the Gaza conflict, when he supported Israel's right to defend itself while at the same time backing the imposition of punitive measures against key members of the Israeli government. The prime minister's leadership failings were again in evidence in the aftermath of the US raid on Iran's infrastructure. While insisting that the UK remained opposed to the ayatollahs acquiring nuclear weapons, Starmer could not bring himself to issue a public declaration of support for Trump's decisive action, which has destroyed any hope the Iranians may have entertained of developing nuclear warheads in the near future. The result is that, for all Starmer's grandstanding at global summits, no one is going to take a politician seriously who is quite content to deceive the outside world about the UK's defence commitments, while at the same time being temperamentally incapable of making his mind up on international issues. Starmer may like to project the image of a global statesman, but the brutal truth is that few world leaders, least of all in Washington, have much interest in hearing the views – or lack of them – of Starmer and his Government.
Telegraph
16 minutes ago
- Telegraph
‘Iran-linked' group backs Palestine Action
An Iran-linked group has backed Palestine Action's violent protest campaign against Israeli targets despite the group's proscription as a terrorist organisation. The Islamic Human Rights Commission (IHRC) has been described as an 'Islamist group ideologically aligned with the Iranian regime' that has a history of 'extremist links and terrorist sympathies' in a Government review of the counter-terror Prevent programme. In social media posts and at events over the past 10 months, the IHRC in north London has campaigned in support of 10 Palestine Action activists charged with criminal damage, violent disorder and aggravated burglary after a protest at a factory belonging to Israeli arms company Elbit Systems in Bristol last August. The so-called 'Filton 10' were initially arrested under the Terrorism Act, which meant they could be held for 14 days without charge. None were charged with terrorism offences but the Crown Prosecution Service said there was a 'terrorism connection'. The break-in was cited by Yvette Cooper, the Home Secretary, on Monday as she announced plans to proscribe Palestine Action as a terrorist organisation after the group damaged two military plans at RAF Brize Norton at a potential cost of millions of pounds. However, in its response to the proscription, the IHRC said it stood by Palestine Action, saying: 'We are all part of the resistance! We are all Palestine Action!' If posted after the official designation as a terror group, the statements could be a criminal offence. The ban has meant that any members of Palestine Action or anyone who supports it could face up to 14 years in prison. The order banning the group will be laid in Parliament on Monday and is expected to become law on July 4. The IHRC, which is funded by a registered charity, said that if Ms Cooper proscribed Palestine Action, 'it will not only be the latest outcome of unchecked political and legal Islamophobia in the UK but another nail in the coffin of the British legal system'. There is no suggestion of any wrongdoing by the IHRC, which has said it has consistently supported the right to protest and civil resistance, particularly by holding governments and companies accountable for 'their roles in enabling human rights abuses, such as the genocide taking place in Gaza.' It said it has 'no institutional or financial link' with the Iranian government, and that allegations suggesting otherwise were 'baseless.' However, Lord Walney, the former Government adviser on political violence, said: 'It is outrageous that a body with a registered charitable arm is proclaiming itself 'part of the resistance' in support of a group about to be proscribed under terrorism law. 'The IHRC has spoken up for Palestine Action time and again while claiming to be a legitimate charity. 'Ministers must wake up to the links between supporters of the Iranian regime and Palestine Action's long campaign of criminal damage inflicted on the UK defence industry.' Chris Philp, the shadow home secretary, said he condemned the IHRC for supporting Palestine Action, which has used 'violence, intimidation and criminal damage' to try to achieve its political aims. 'The IHRC and the MPs who support [Palestine Action's] violent methods are advocating mob rule and should hang their heads in shame,' he said. 'Just because you disagree with someone doesn't give you the right to smash up their property. Mob rule has no place in a civilised country. 'The IHRC Trust is, in essence, the same organisation as the IHRC and has charitable status. I call on the Charity Commission to urgently revoke their charitable status – no close affiliate of a registered charity should be allowed to support mob violence and attacks on police officers.' The IHRC has described itself as a campaign, research and advocacy non-profit that 'struggles for justice for all peoples'. It was created in 1997 and has special consultative status with the economic and social council of the United Nations. In a letter to Jonathan Hall KC, the independent reviewer of terrorism legislation, in January, the IHRC accused the police and Government of misusing anti-terror legislation against the Filton 10. In a letter to the UN, it called for charges to be dropped against Palestinian activists. 'The rights of free expression and protest are too important in a democracy to allow individuals to be investigated for potential terrorism merely because they may have been involved in protests or hold critical opinions,' the IHRC said. Senior figures in Palestine Action have spoken at Quds Day rallies organised by IHRC, a tradition which began in Iran in 1979 shortly after the Iranian revolution. Responding to The Telegraph, the IHRC said Palestine Action was 'not a terrorist organisation'. 'The move to proscribe it illustrates how politicised and malleable the term 'terrorism' has become – now so broad as to border on the meaningless,' it said in a statement. It said the assertion that the IHRC was 'ideologically aligned' with Iran was 'not evidence – it is opinion, and a deeply prejudiced one at that.'
The National
28 minutes ago
- The National
Why you won't hear about child poverty improving in Scotland
A study carried out by The Big Issue magazine reports that the incidence of child poverty in Scotland has dropped by 12% since the Scottish Government introduced reduction targets into law in 2017. This is equivalent to 21,000 children who are no longer living in poverty. However, over the same time period, the incidence of child poverty in England and in Labour-run Wales increased by 15%. The magazine writes that England and Wales must follow the lead of Scotland and set legal targets to reduce child poverty. READ MORE: Nato chief calls Donald Trump 'Daddy' during press conference An analysis of UK child poverty statistics which was conducted alongside the publication of a new Big Issue report, highlights the Child Poverty (Scotland) Act 2017, which introduced statutory targets for reducing child poverty, as marking a divergence in the trajectories of the issue of child poverty in the various nations of the UK. Since the passing of the Act in Scotland, there has been a 27% divergence in the incidence of child poverty between Scotland on the one hand and England and Wales on the other. The Scottish government's landmark act, which received royal assent and passed into law in December 2017, was the cause of the start of a significant divergence in child poverty levels between the home nations. Before 2018, Scotland had seen similar rises in relative child poverty to England and Wales. Child poverty in Scotland rose by 19% between 2015 and 2018, only marginally slower than England and Wales at 23%. The Big Issue is calling on the UK Government to introduce similar statutory targets for reducing child poverty in England and Wales, citing Scotland as an example of how significant progress can be made. (Image: PA) The rise of poverty in the UK over recent decades is a shameful story of government failure and the capitulation of the British government to the interests of the wealthy. Currently in the UK, 3.8 million people are living in destitution, the most extreme form of poverty. This is defined as when people struggle to keep themselves warm, clean, fed, and clothed. Shockingly, this number is rising markedly; destitution has more than doubled in the UK over the last 7 years. Meanwhile, income inequality has grown more rapidly in the UK than in other developed economies. The UK is now the ninth most unequal economy out of the 38 OECD countries. Wealth inequality in the UK is far worse than income inequality, figures from the Office for National Statistics show that the top fifth of the population take 36% of the UK's income and hold 63% of its wealth, while the bottom fifth of the population have only 8% of the income and a mere 0.5% of the wealth. It is categorically not that there is no money to tackle poverty, it's that the rich are jealously hoarding it like a dragon curled up on a pile of gold and jewels, and governments are full of politicians who are in effect clients of the dragons, bought and paid for with political donations. (Image: PA) Scotland's government lacks the full powers of an independent state, but even with the limited economic levers at its disposal, the Scottish Government has achieved a remarkable success in reducing the incidence of child poverty in Scotland. As part of the UK, Scotland is subject to the economic constraints imposed upon it by the government in Westminster, but has still managed to reduce child poverty in Scotland. What this proves is that the rise in child poverty in the rest of the UK is a political choice, a damning political choice which tells us that Westminster is morally bankrupt. A report on the findings of the latest British Social Attitudes survey has laid bare the disconnection between the Labour government, the main British political parties and what people actually want. This disconnection is starkest when it comes to the issue of Brexit. A large majority of people in the UK, 63%, would support rejoining the EU if the issue was put to them in a referendum. This figure is even higher in Scotland where some polls have put the figure at 70%. Most of those who voted Labour in last year's Westminster general election supported rejoining the EU. Yet despite this Labour doggedly doubles down on Theresa May's red lines and refuses to countenance even rejoining the European single market and customs union. Meanwhile, new polling from YouGov finds that voters who have deserted Labour since last year's general election are much more likely to vote Green or Lib Dems, than Reform. Green and Lib Dem defectors are also much more likely to consider switching back to Labour than Reform voters who overwhelmingly say they're committed to Farage's party. But Starmer continues in his quixotic and damaging pursuit of Reform UK, adopting policies which ramp up the performative cruelty against migrants and asylum seekers and throwing the LGBT community under the bus. Today, Labour government figures are still insisting that they intend to follow through on their deeply damaging cuts to benefits payments to the disabled, some of the most vulnerable in society, in the face of a growing rebellion amongst its own backbenchers. Yesterday 108 Labour MPs had signed an amendment to the government's bill, which would effectively kill it. In response, the government reportedly called Labour MPs to tell them that the vote would effectively be a vote of confidence in Keir Starmer, whereupon the number of Labour MPs who signed the amendment rose to 120. It is believed senior cabinet ministers, including Chancellor Rachel Reeves and Health Secretary Wes Streeting, called MPs who had signed the amendment to try to convince them to vote with the government, with very little success. Never mind being a government that is disconnected from its voters, Starmer's government is disconnected from its own MPs. Pressure is also growing on Anas Sarwar, who had expressed his support for the cuts, after a tenth Labour MP representing a Scottish constituency signed the amendment opposing the cuts. Glasgow North East MP Maureen Burke added her name to the amendment yesterday, joining fellow Labour MPs Patricia Ferguson, Brian Leishman, Tracy Gilbert, Scott Arthur, Richard Baker, Lilian Jones, Elaine Stewart, Kirsteen Sullivan, and Euan Stainbank.
