Israeli minister confronts long-imprisoned Palestinian leader face to face
Polls consistently show he is the most popular Palestinian leader.
He has rarely been seen since his arrest more than two decades ago.
It was unclear when the video was taken, but it shows national security minister Itamar Ben-Gvir, known for staging provocative encounters with Palestinians, telling Barghouti that he will 'not win'.
'Anyone who messes with the people of Israel, anyone who murders our children, anyone who murders our women, we will wipe them out,' Mr Ben-Gvir said in the video.
He repeated those words in a post on X in which he shared the footage.
Mr Ben-Gvir's spokesman confirmed the visit and the video's authenticity, but denied that the minister was threatening Barghouti.
Barghouti, now in his mid-60s, was a senior leader in President Mahmoud Abbas's secular Fatah movement during the intifada.
Many Palestinians see him as a natural successor to the ageing and unpopular leader of the Palestinian Authority, which administers parts of the Israeli-occupied West Bank.
Israel considers him a terrorist and has shown no sign it would release him.
Hamas has demanded his release in exchange for hostages taken in the October 7 2023 attack that triggered the war in the Gaza Strip.
In a Facebook post, Barghouti's wife said she could not recognise her husband, who appeared frail in the video.
Still, she said after watching the video, he remained connected to the Palestinian people.
'Perhaps a part of me does not want to acknowledge everything that your face and body shows, and what you and the prisoners have been through,' wrote Fadwa Al Barghouthi, who spells their last name differently in English.
Israeli officials say they have reduced the conditions under which Palestinians are held to the bare minimum allowed under Israeli and international law.
Many detainees released as part of a ceasefire in Gaza earlier this year appeared gaunt and ill, and some were taken for immediate medical treatment.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Scotsman
4 hours ago
- Scotsman
The first casualty of war is truth
Bruce Whitehead On Monday morning the news was sinking in of the killing of six journalists in Gaza as they reported on Israel's relentless war on a largely civilian territory occupied by starving families. Sign up to our daily newsletter Sign up Thank you for signing up! Did you know with a Digital Subscription to Edinburgh News, you can get unlimited access to the website including our premium content, as well as benefiting from fewer ads, loyalty rewards and much more. Learn More Sorry, there seem to be some issues. Please try again later. Submitting... I am sick of writing about atrocities in Gaza. In 2009 I drove there with humanitarian aid collected by Scottish Muslim, Jewish and Christian faith groups, after up to 1400 Palestinians and 13 Israelis died when Israel's Prime Minister Ehud Olmert – recently invited onto British TV news programmes as a 'moderate' – breached a six-month ceasefire by ordering the killing of seven Hamas fighters. With a dozen vehicles we travelled through eastern Europe to deliver first aid, food, toys and healthcare supplies to areas of Gaza City flattened by Israeli bombs. As a journalist I witnessed the effects of bombardment on innocent civilians which killed an estimated 300 children. Crushed concrete buildings, donkey carts picking their way through mounds of rubble. 16 years on, western journalists are barred from Gaza, so it's impossible to verify Israel's claims about the conflict on the ground. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad With the deaths of Al Jazeera's Anas al-Sharif, Mohammed Qreiqeh, Ibrahim Zaher, Mohammed Noufal and Moamen Aliwa and freelancer Mohammad al-Khaldi – sheltering in a cloth tent near a hospital – Israel has almost snuffed out the last source of evidence of its genocidal campaign. The BBC still has its own freelancers sending footage of the slaughter of starving Palestinians in food queues, but surely they too are in mortal peril. I have called on my union, the National Union of Journalists, to demand that the Foreign Minister David Lammy summon the Israeli ambassador Tzipi Hotovely for a formal British diplomatic protest. Many of my former BBC and ITN colleagues work for Al Jazeera, and this is the latest in a long and shameful tale of targeted Israeli raids on journalists. In May I paid tribute on behalf of the NUJ to all journalists killed at work, at Workers' Memorial Day in Princes Street Gardens. My words then are appropriate today: 'The deaths of journalists remind us yet again that the first casualty of war is Truth.'
The Guardian
4 hours ago
- The Guardian
We are gen Z – and AI is our future. Will that be good or bad?
Sumaiya Motara Freelance journalist based in Preston, where she works in broadcasting and local democracy reporting An older family member recently showed me a video on Facebook. I pressed play and saw Donald Trump accusing India of violating the ceasefire agreement with Pakistan. If it weren't so out of character, I would have been fooled too. After cross-referencing the video with news sources, it became clear to me that Trump had been a victim of AI false imaging. I explained this but my family member refused to believe me, insisting that it was real because it looked real. If I hadn't been there to dissuade them, they would have forwarded it to 30 people. On another occasion, a video surfaced on my TikTok homepage. It showed male migrants climbing off a boat, vlogging their arrival in the UK. 'This dangerous journey, we survived it,' says one. 'Now to the five-star Marriott hotel.' This video racked up almost 380,000 views in one month. The 22 videos posted from 9 to 13 June on this account, named migrantvlog, showed these men thanking Labour for 'free' buffets, feeling 'blessed' after being given £2,000 e-bikes for Deliveroo deliveries and burning the union flag. Even if a man's arm didn't disappear midway through a video or a plate vanish into thin air, I could tell the content was AI-generated because of the blurred background and strange, simulation-like characters. But could the thousands of other people watching? Unfortunately, it seemed not many of them could. Racist and anti-immigration posts dominated the comment section. I worry about this blurring of fact and fiction, and I see this unchecked capability of AI as incredibly dangerous. The Online Safety Act focuses on state-sponsored disinformation. But what happens when ordinary people spread videos like wildfire, believing them to be true? Last summer's riots were fuelled by inflammatory AI visuals, with only sources such as Full Fact working to cut through the noise. I fear for less media-literate people who succumb to AI-generated falsehoods, and the heat this adds to the pan. Rukanah Mogra Leicester-based journalist working in sports media and digital communications with Harborough Town FC The first time I dared use AI in my work, it was to help with a match report. I was on a tight deadline, tired, and my opening paragraph wasn't working. I fed some notes into an AI tool, and surprisingly it suggested a headline and intro that actually clicked. It saved me time and got me unstuck – a relief when the clock was ticking. But AI isn't a magic wand. It can clean up clunky sentences and help cut down wordiness but it can't chase sources, capture atmosphere or know when a story needs to shift direction. Those instinctive calls are still up to me. What's made AI especially useful is that it feels like a judgment-free editor. As a young freelance journalist, I don't always have access to regular editorial support. Sharing an early draft with a real-life editor can feel exposing, especially when you're still finding your voice. But ChatGPT doesn't judge. It lets me experiment, refine awkward phrasing and build confidence before I hit send. That said, I'm cautious. In journalism it's easy to lean on tools that promise speed. But if AI starts shaping how stories are told – or worse, which stories are told – we risk losing the creativity, challenge and friction that make reporting meaningful. For now AI is an assistant. But it's still up to us to set the direction. Author's note: I wrote the initial draft for the above piece myself, drawing on real experiences and my personal views. Then I used ChatGPT to help tighten the flow, suggest clearer phrasing and polish the style. I prompted the AI with requests such as: 'Rewrite this in a natural, eloquent Guardian-style voice.' While AI gave me useful suggestions and saved time, the core ideas, voice and structure remain mine. Frances Briggs Manchester-based science website editor AI is powerful. It's an impressive technological advancement and I'd be burying my head in the sand if I believed otherwise. But I'm worried. I'm worried my job won't exist in five years and I'm worried about its environmental impact. Attempting to understand the actual impact of AI is difficult; the key players are keeping their statistics close to their chests. What I can see is that things are pretty bad. A recent research paper has spat out some ugly numbers. (It joins other papers that reveal a similar story.) The team considered just one case study: OpenAI's ChatGPT-4o model. Its annual energy consumption is about the same as that of 35,000 residential households. That's approximately 450,000 KWh-1. Or 325 universities. Or 50 US inpatient hospitals. That's not all. There's also the cooling of these supercomputer's super-processors. Social media is swarming with terrifying numbers about the data-processing centres that power AI, and they're not far off. It takes approximately 2,500 Olympic-sized swimming pools of water to cool ChatGPT-4o's processing units, according to the latest estimates. AI agents such as the free products Perplexity or Claude don't actually seem to be consuming that much electricity. At most, the total global energy consumed yearly by AI is still less than 1%. But at the same time, data-processing centres in Ireland consumed 22% of the total electricity used by the whole country last year, more than urban housing. For context, there are 80 data-processing centres in Ireland. At present, there are more than 6,000 data-processing centres in the US alone. With the almost exponential uptake in AI since 2018, these numbers are likely to be completely different within a year. In spite of all these scary statistics, I have to hope that things are not as worrying as they seem. Researchers are already working to meet demands as they explore more effective, economic processing units using nanoscale materials and more. And when you compare the first language-learning models from seven years ago to those created today, they have iterated well beyond their previous inefficiencies. Energy-hungry processing centres will get less greedy – experts are just trying to figure out how. Saranka Maheswaran London-based student who pursues journalism alongside her studies 'You need to get out there, meet lots of people, and date, date, date!' is the cliche I hear most often when speaking to people about being in my 20s. After a few questionable dates and lots of juicy gossip sessions with friends, a new fear emerged. What if they're using AI to message me? Overly formal responses, or conversation starters that sounded just a bit too perfect, were what first made me question messages I'd received. I am not completely against AI, and don't think opposing it entirely is going to stop its development. But I do fear for our ability to make genuine connections with people. Pre-existing insecurities about how you speak, write or present yourself make a generation with AI to hand an easy prey. It may begin with a simple prompt, asking ChatGPT to make a message sound more friendly, but it can also grow into a menacing relationship in which you become reliant on the technology and lose confidence in your own voice. The 2025 iteration of the annual Singles in America study, produced in collaboration with the Kinsey Institute at Indiana University, found that one in four singles in the US have used AI in dating. Perhaps I am over cynical. But to those who are not so sure of how their personalities are coming across when dating or how they may be perceived in a message, they should have faith that if it is meant to be it will be – and if AI has a little too much say in how you communicate, you may just lose yourself. Iman Khan Final-year student at the University of Cambridge, specialising in social anthropology The advancement of AI in education has made me question the idea of any claimed impartiality or neutrality of knowledge. The age of AI brings with it the need to scrutinise any information that comes our way. This is truer than ever in our universities, where teaching and learning are increasingly assisted by AI. We cannot now isolate AI from education, but we must be ready to scrutinise the mechanisms and narratives that underpin the technology itself and shape its use. One of my first encounters with AI in education was a request to ChatGPT to suggest reading resources for my course. I had assumed that the tool would play the role of an advanced search engine. But I quickly saw how ChatGPT's tendency to hallucinate – to present false or misleading information as fact – makes it both a producer and disseminator of information, true or false. I originally saw this as only a small barrier to the great possibilities of AI, not least because I knew it would improve over time. However, it has also become increasingly clear to me that ChatGPT, Gemini and other AI chatbots contribute to the spread of false information. AI has rendered the relationship between humans and technology precarious. There is research to be done on the potential implications of AI for all the social sciences. We need to investigate how it is integrated into how we learn and how we live. I'd like to be involved in researching how we adapt to AI's role as not only a tool but as an active and contributing participant in society. Nimrah Tariq London-based graduate specialising in architecture In my first years at university, we were discouraged from utilising AI for our architecture essays and models, only using it to proofread our work. However, in my final year, it was introduced a lot more into our process for rendering and enhancing design work. Our studio tutor gave us a mini-seminar on how to create AI prompts so that we could have detailed descriptions to put into architectural websites such as Visoid. This allowed us to put any models or drawings that we created into an AI prompt, asking it to create a concept design that suited our proposal. It gave my original ideas more complexity and a wide range of designs to play around with. While this was useful during the conceptual phase of our work, if the prompts were not accurate the AI would fail to deliver, so we learned how to be more strategic. I specifically used it after rendering my work as a final touch to create seamless final images. During my first and second year, AI didn't have as much impact on the design process of my work; I mainly used existing buildings for design inspiration. However, AI introduced new forms of innovation, which accelerated the speed with which we can push the boundaries of our work. It also made the creative process more experimental, opening up a new way of designing and visualising. Now I have finished my degree, I'm intrigued to see how much more architecture can grow through using AI. Initially, I believed AI wasn't the most creative way to design; now, I see it as a tool to improve our designs. It cannot replace human creativity, but it can enhance it. Architectural practices always ask job applicants for skills in software that uses AI, and you can already see how it is being incorporated in designs and projects. It has always been important to keep up to date with the latest technological advancements in architecture – and AI has reaffirmed this. The panel was compiled by Sumaiya Motara and Saranka Maheswaran, interns on the Guardian's positive action scheme
Powys County Times
4 hours ago
- Powys County Times
MP resigns as trade envoy over northern Cyprus visit
A Labour MP has resigned as the UK's trade envoy to Turkey amid controversy over a visit to Turkish-occupied northern Cyprus. A government spokesman told the BBC Afzal Khan, who represents Manchester Rusholme, had stepped down from his position on Friday. Mr Khan said the trip to the self-declared Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus, which is not recognised by the UK Government, was to visit his nephew and to receive an honorary degree. He said he had paid for the trip himself. Turkish troops have occupied the northern section of the Mediterranean island since 1974.
