Israel threatens Iranian leader with same fate as Saddam Hussein
Israel's Foreign Minister Israel Katz has issued a stark warning to Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, comparing him to former Iraqi President Saddam Hussein, who was toppled and executed following the 2003 US-led invasion.
'I warn the Iranian dictator against continuing to commit war crimes and launching missiles at Israeli civilians,' Katz said, according to Israeli media reports.
He added: 'He would do well to remember the fate of the dictator in the country neighbouring Iran who chose this same path against the state of Israel.'
Katz also reiterated threats to continue Israeli strikes on Tehran, urging residents of the Iranian capital to leave, as Iran reported dozens of civilians killed and hundreds wounded since Israel's attacks began on Friday.
Iranian supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei (AFP)
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Middle East Eye
8 minutes ago
- Middle East Eye
Oxford Union defies trustees' threat to shut it down over pro-Palestine speech
The Oxford Union, founded in 1823, describes itself as the most prestigious debating society in the world. The student-led organisation at the University of Oxford says its "roots lie in free speech". It has hosted scores of world leaders and multiple British prime ministers. William Gladstone, Edward Heath and Boris Johnson were once union presidents. But now, the institution has been plunged into chaos over a debate it held last year on Israel's war on Gaza. Students are clashing with the union's trustees, who have threatened to shut the institution down if it publishes a video of a speech by Palestinian-American writer Susan Abulhawa. New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters Middle East Eye can reveal that the union's standing committee voted on Monday to publish the full video of Abulhawa's speech - but some union officials fear the president will not do so under pressure from trustees. "The Oxford Union was one of few places where we could have debates like this without the influence of moneyed interests," a senior union official who asked to remain anonymous told MEE. "Students are supposed to organise debates without being influenced by power and money. But now the trustees are pressuring the committee. "This is censorship of pro-Palestinian speech." 'Apartheid state responsible for genocide' In November 2024, the union voted by an overwhelming majority that Israel is an "apartheid state responsible for genocide". The debate made national headlines but the real scandal was yet to come. On 5 December, the union published a speech from the debate by Susan Abulhawa, a renowned Palestinian-American author, on YouTube, where it racked up hundreds of thousands of views within a few days. But in under a week the video was removed from YouTube without explanation. At the same time, another version of the video, with 73 seconds of Abulhawa's speech removed, was uploaded. Sources told MEE the decision was taken under intense pressure from the union's board of trustees, and after the president who presided over the debate, Ebrahim Osman-Mowafy, finished his term as president. Censored speech In the censored sections of the speech, heard by MEE, Abulhawa discussed the Israeli military's documented use of booby-trapped toys and systematic rape in Israeli prisons. She argued that Zionists feel divinely favoured and entitled and that they are unable to live with others without dominating them. Oxford Union declares Israel an 'apartheid state responsible for genocide' Read More » Abulhawa said the censored parts of the speech were "factual information". A union member who attended the debate told MEE on condition of anonymity that "everything Susan said was measured and factually accurate. She is a great and experienced writer." "Editing her speech is censorship of an important piece of literary work." Abulhawa brought a lawsuit against the union on 3 March, accusing it of discrimination and copyright infringement and alleging they had breached a contract signed before the debate. Sources told MEE that the union's elected standing committee, which is made up of students and serves as the institution's governing body, recently decided to publish the full, unedited video. But the Oxford Literary and Debating Union Trust (OLDUT) - the charity board that oversees the society - reportedly threatened to shut the union down if it published the full video. "Trustees were telling members of the standing committee that they would go to jail," a senior union official said on condition of anonymity. "But there was nothing illegal in the speech and no one was contacted by the police after the debate - including the speakers." In a dramatic turn this week, and in apparent defiance of the alleged threats by trustees, on Monday the standing committee held a vote on whether to "upload the full, unedited speech of Susan Abulhawa". A senior union official told MEE that nine out of the 20 committee members resigned to avoid voting. In the end, the remaining members of the committee voted to publish the video. Oxford college referred to charity regulator over £1m investment in Israeli settlements Read More » The union president, Anita Okunde, was given 48 hours to publish the video. The deadline is 8:30pm on Wednesday. In a bizarre twist, a senior union official told MEE that some members of the standing committee want the president to hold another vote or simply refuse to implement the vote's result. "Some on the standing committee are claiming the vote was invalid or that the president can ignore it," the official said. "The Oxford Union is on its knees under pressure from the trustees. "This has never happened in the history of the society." MEE has contacted the Oxford Union for comment. Abulhawa told MEE that "this is part of a widespread pattern of silencing Palestinian and pro-Palestinian, anti-genocide voices in western institutions, media and political life." Now, all eyes are on the Oxford Union's president - and on the society's YouTube channel.
Sharjah 24
30 minutes ago
- Sharjah 24
UAE and Turkish Presidents discuss regional developments
Discussion on bilateral cooperation The two leaders discussed ongoing cooperation and joint initiatives across various sectors, highlighting the strength of UAE-Türkiye relations. Regional and international developments reviewed They also reviewed several regional and international issues, with particular focus on the evolving situation in the Middle East. Emphasis on de-escalation and diplomacy In light of the recent Israeli military strikes on Iran, both leaders underscored the importance of de-escalating tensions, promoting constructive dialogue, and resolving conflicts through diplomatic means to prevent further instability in the region. Joint support for peace and stability Sheikh
Arabian Post
33 minutes ago
- Arabian Post
Lawmakers Face Referendum Pressure After 54,000 Thai Signatures
A coalition of civic groups has presented the Election Commission with over 54,000 signatures demanding a public vote on the Entertainment Complex Business Act, a proposed law to legalise integrated resorts with casinos in Thailand. The petition surpasses the 50,000-signature threshold mandated by the National Referendum Act, compelling authorities to verify the submissions within 30 days. The campaign, led by the Stop Gambling Foundation and allied organisations, began gathering support in January and reached its goal in May after approximately 120 days of mobilisation. On submission day, activists including Thanakorn Khomkrit, the foundation's secretary-general, and youth representative Wasinee Sonsaeb, arrived at the Commission's offices in Bangkok backed by over 100 civil society figures. Proponents of the law argue it would generate substantial economic advantages. Cabinet estimates suggest that legal casinos in integrated resorts could add between US$3.5 billion and $7 billion annually to tourism revenue, attract nearly US$3 billion per development, create thousands of jobs, and lift tourist numbers by 5–10%. The government also contends such regulation might curb illegal gambling and bolster the national economy. ADVERTISEMENT Yet critics argue the bill was neither debated during the 2023 election campaign nor subjected to meaningful public consultation. Thanakorn Khomkrit warned that proceeding with casino legislation without a public mandate could pose political dangers and exacerbate societal tensions, especially given concerns around sufficiency-economy principles. He urged that a referendum would lend legitimacy to both the government and investors, reducing public resistance. Echoing those views, Wasinee Sonsaeb cautioned that legalising casinos and online gambling 'would be handing down a sinful legacy to our children,' warning that current proposals echo past mistakes instead of learning from thorough consultation seen in jurisdictions like Singapore. Under the referendum law, once the commission validates the signatures, the petition will be forwarded to the Cabinet Secretariat for consideration. The Cabinet must then approve a referendum before legislation may proceed. The bill's political trajectory has already faced obstacles. Introduced to Cabinet on 13 January, it received preliminary approval; however, debate was postponed until Parliament's July session following resistance from coalition members and public protests. Proposed safeguards include a 5,000‑baht entry fee for Thai nationals with a minimum bank deposit of 50 million baht, along with capping casino space at 5% of each complex. Economic modelling from Thailand's Fiscal Policy Office projects that integrated resorts could draw 5–20% more foreign visitors and increase per-visitor spending from 40,000 to 60,000 baht. International gaming giants including Las Vegas Sands, MGM, Wynn, Genting, and Galaxy have reportedly expressed interest, particularly in the Bangkok market. Still, public opposition remains fierce. Alongside concerns about youth exposure and gambling dependency, critics emphasise that transparency demands more extensive public dialogue. A January poll found nearly half the population doubted the bill would pass because of widespread disapproval.
