&w=3840&q=100)
Israel, Hamas deny reports of ‘breakthrough' in Gaza ceasefire talks
'Israel is working tirelessly with the Americans and the mediators with the goal of advancing a deal to free our hostages, but as of now, no agreement has been reached,' an Israeli source said read more
Palestinians look at the damage after an Israeli army airstrike in Beit Lahia, northern Gaza Strip, on Monday. AP
Hours after a report suggested that there had been 'significant breakthroughs' in Gaza hostage talks, an Israeli source on Tuesday dismissed the claims, saying there has been no progress since an Israeli negotiating team arrived in Cairo on Monday night.
According to a Times of Israel report, the official said 'Israel is working tirelessly with the Americans and the mediators with the goal of advancing a deal to free our hostages, but as of now, no agreement has been reached.'
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
While speaking to Palestine Today, a Hamas official also confirmed that no progress has been made, saying the group has not been presented with new ideas and stressing its opposition to any partial or temporary agreements.
The denial follows claims by Egyptian security sources to Reuters on Monday that a 'significant breakthrough' had been achieved in the ceasefire talks. However, the sources acknowledged that key issues, including Hamas's weapons, remained unresolved.
In recent weeks, Israel has insisted on Hamas's full disarmament as a precondition for any ceasefire deal — a demand the group has firmly rejected, calling its weapons a 'red line.'
'We are open to any serious proposals to end the war,' Hamas official Taher al-Nunu was quoted as saying on April 26, but emphasised, 'the weapons of resistance are not negotiable.'
Israel has warned it will launch a full-scale offensive across Gaza if talks stall. Officials say current operations, which have seen the army seize around half the territory, are meant to pressure Hamas rather than eliminate it entirely.
A broader assault would involve mass reservist mobilisation and expanded military operations, the Israeli army has said.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
Meanwhile, all Gaza border crossings remain shut, halting aid delivery. Thousands of UNRWA aid trucks are stuck outside, and hospitals face imminent collapse due to critical shortages in medical supplies.
On April 16, Israeli Defence Minister Israel Katz declared that Tel Aviv would block all humanitarian aid, calling it a key tool to pressure Hamas.
The UN, Human Rights Watch, and other rights groups have accused Israel of weaponizing starvation in violation of international law.
Israel resumed its offensive in Gaza on March 18 after a January ceasefire collapsed, saying it would keep up pressure on Hamas until it frees the remaining hostages still held in the enclave. Up to 24 of them are believed to be still alive.
With inputs from agencies
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hindu
43 minutes ago
- The Hindu
Supreme Court allows DOGE team to access Social Security systems with data on millions of Americans
The Supreme Court handed the Trump administration two victories on Friday (June 6, 2025) in cases involving the Department of Government Efficiency, including giving it access to Social Security systems containing personal data on millions of Americans. Also Read | Federal judge blocks DOGE from accessing Social Security personal information for now The justices also separately reined in orders seeking transparency at DOGE, the team once led by billionaire Elon Musk. The court's conservative majority sided with the Trump administration in the first Supreme Court appeals involving DOGE. The three liberal justices dissented in both cases. The DOGE victories come amid a messy breakup between the president and the world's richest man that started shortly after Mr. Musk departed from the White House and has included threats to cut government contracts and a call for the President to be impeached. The future of DOGE's work isn't clear without Musk at the helm, but both men have previously said that it will continue its efforts. In one case, the High Court halted an order from a judge in Maryland that restricted the team's access to the Social Security Administration under federal privacy laws. 'We conclude that, under the present circumstances, SSA may proceed to afford members of the SSA DOGE Team access to the agency records in question in order for those members to do their work,' the court said in an unsigned order. Conservative lower-court judges have said there's no evidence at this point of DOGE mishandling personal information. The agency holds sensitive data on nearly everyone in the country, including school records, salary details and medical information. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson said the court's action creates 'grave privacy risks' for millions of Americans by giving 'unfettered data access to DOGE regardless — despite its failure to show any need or any interest in complying with existing privacy safeguards, and all before we know for sure whether federal law countenances such access.' Justice Sonia Sotomayor joined Jackson's opinion and Justice Elena Kagan said she also would have ruled against the administration. The Trump administration says DOGE needs the access to carry out its mission of targeting waste in the federal government. Musk had been focused on Social Security as an alleged hotbed of fraud. The entrepreneur has described it as a ' Ponzi scheme ' and insisted that reducing waste in the program is an important way to cut government spending. But U.S. District Judge Ellen Hollander in Maryland found that DOGE's efforts at Social Security amounted to a 'fishing expedition' based on 'little more than suspicion' of fraud, and allowing unfettered access puts Americans' private information at risk. Her ruling did allow access to anonymous data for staffers who have undergone training and background checks, or wider access for those who have detailed a specific need. The Trump administration has said DOGE can't work effectively with those restrictions. Solicitor General D. John Sauer also argued that the ruling is an example of federal judges overstepping their authority and trying to micromanage executive branch agencies. The plaintiffs say it's a narrow order that's urgently needed to protect personal information. An appeals court previously refused to immediately to lift the block on DOGE access, though it split along ideological lines. Conservative judges in the minority said there's no evidence that the team has done any 'targeted snooping' or exposed personal information. The lawsuit was originally filed by a group of labor unions and retirees represented by the group Democracy Forward. It's one of more than two dozen lawsuits filed over DOGE's work, which has included deep cuts at federal agencies and large-scale layoffs. The plaintiffs called the high court's order 'a sad day for our democracy and a scary day for millions of people. Elon Musk may have left Washington, D.C., but his impact continues to harm millions of people." The White House did not immediately return a message seeking comment. The nation's court system has been ground zero for pushback to President Donald Trump's sweeping conservative agenda, with about 200 lawsuits filed challenging policies on everything from immigration to education to mass layoffs of federal workers. In the other DOGE order handed down Friday, the justices extended a pause on orders that would require the team to publicly disclose information about its operations, as part of a lawsuit filed by a government watchdog group. Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington argues that DOGE, which has been central to Trump's push to remake the government, is a federal agency and must be subject to the Freedom of Information Act. But the Trump administration says DOGE is just a presidential advisory body aimed at government cost-cutting, which would make it exempt from requests for documents under FOIA. The justices did not decide that issue Friday, but the conservative majority held that U.S. District Judge Christopher Cooper ruled too broadly in ordering documents be turned over to CREW. (AP) NSD NSD
India Today
an hour ago
- India Today
US Supreme Court grants DOGE access to social security data amid legal battle
The US Supreme Court on Friday permitted the Department of Government Efficiency, a key player in President Donald Trump's drive to slash the federal workforce, broad access to personal information on millions of Americans in Social Security Administration data systems while a legal challenge plays the request of the Justice Department, the justices put on hold Maryland-based US District Judge Ellen Hollander's order that had largely blocked DOGE's access to "personally identifiable information" in data such as medical and financial records while litigation proceeds in a lower court. Hollander found that allowing DOGE unfettered access likely would violate a federal privacy court's brief, unsigned order did not provide a rationale for siding with DOGE. The court has a 6-3 conservative majority. Its three liberal justices dissented from the order. Liberal Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, in a dissent that was joined by fellow liberal Justice Sonia Sotomayor, criticized the court's majority for granting DOGE "unfettered data access" despite the administration's "failure to show any need or any interest in complying with existing privacy safeguards."In a separate order on Friday, the Supreme Court extended its block on judicial orders requiring DOGE to turn over records to a government watchdog group that sought details on the entity established by Trump and swept through federal agencies as part of the Republican president's effort, spearheaded by billionaire Elon Musk, to eliminate federal jobs, downsize and reshape the US government and root out what they see as wasteful spending. Musk formally ended his government work on May labor unions and an advocacy group sued to stop DOGE from accessing sensitive data at the Social Security Administration, or SSA, including Social Security numbers, bank account data, tax information, earnings history and immigration agency is a major provider of government benefits, sending checks each month to more than 70 million recipients including retirees and disabled Forward, a liberal legal group that represented the plaintiffs, said Friday's order would put millions of Americans' data at risk."Elon Musk may have left Washington, DC, but his impact continues to harm millions of people," the group said in a statement. "We will continue to use every legal tool at our disposal to keep unelected bureaucrats from misusing the public's most sensitive data as this case moves forward."In their lawsuit, the plaintiffs argued that the Social Security Administration had been "ransacked" and that DOGE members had been installed without proper vetting or training and demanded access to some of the agency's most sensitive data in an April 17 ruling found that DOGE had failed to explain why its stated mission required "unprecedented, unfettered access to virtually SSA's entire data systems.""For some 90 years, SSA has been guided by the foundational principle of an expectation of privacy with respect to its records," Hollander wrote. "This case exposes a wide fissure in the foundation."advertisementHollander issued a preliminary injunction that prohibited DOGE staffers and anyone working with them from accessing data containing personal information, with only narrow exceptions. The judge's ruling did allow DOGE affiliates to access data that had been stripped of private information as long as those seeking access had gone through the proper training and passed background also ordered DOGE affiliates to "disgorge and delete" any personal information already in their Richmond, Virginia-based 4th US Circuit Court of Appeals in a 9-6 vote declined on April 30 to pause Hollander's block on DOGE's unlimited access to Social Security Administration Department lawyers in their Supreme Court filing characterized Hollander's order as judicial overreach."The district court is forcing the executive branch to stop employees charged with modernizing government information systems from accessing the data in those systems because, in the court's judgment, those employees do not 'need' such access," they six dissenting judges wrote that the case should have been treated the same as one in which 4th Circuit panel ruled 2-1 to allow DOGE to access data at the UTreasury and Education Departments and the Office of Personnel a concurring opinion, seven judges who ruled against DOGE wrote that the case involving Social Security data was "substantially stronger" with "vastly greater stakes," citing "detailed and profoundly sensitive Social Security records," such as family court and school records of children, mental health treatment records and credit card InMust Watch
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
an hour ago
- First Post
'Fake news': Amid legal setbacks, Trump wins 'Gulf of America' battle against AP
The AP sued in February after the White House restricted the news outlet's access over its decision to continue referring to the Gulf of Mexico in its coverage despite Trump renaming the body of water the Gulf of America read more President Donald Trump is free to bar The Associated Press from some White House media events for now, after a U.S. appeals court on Friday paused a lower court ruling mandating that AP journalists be given access. The divided ruling by the US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit temporarily blocks an order by US District Judge Trevor McFadden, who ruled on April 8 that the Trump administration must allow AP journalists access to the Oval Office, Air Force One and White House events while the news agency's lawsuit moves forward. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD The 2-1 ruling was written by US Circuit Judge Neomi Rao, joined by fellow Trump appointee U.S. Circuit Judge Gregory Katsas. Rao wrote that the lower court injunction 'impinges on the President's independence and control over his private workspaces' and that the White House was likely to ultimately defeat the Associated Press' lawsuit. The Associated Press in a statement said it was disappointed by the decision and weighing its options. A White House spokesperson, Taylor Budowich, in a statement on the social media platform X said the Associated Press has no 'right to unfettered access to limited spaces, like the Oval Office and Air Force One.' In a dissent, Circuit Judge Cornelia Pillard, an appointee of President Barack Obama, said her two colleagues' ruling cannot be squared with 'any sensible understanding of the role of a free press in our constitutional democracy.' The AP sued in February after the White House restricted the news outlet's access over its decision to continue referring to the Gulf of Mexico in its coverage despite Trump renaming the body of water the Gulf of America. The AP's lawyers argued the new policy violated the First Amendment of the Constitution, which protects free speech rights. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD McFadden, who was appointed by Trump during his first term, said in his ruling that if the White House opens its doors to some journalists it cannot exclude others based on their viewpoints. Trump administration lawyers said the president has absolute discretion over media access to the White House and that McFadden's ruling infringed on his ability to decide whom to admit to sensitive spaces. 'The Constitution does not prohibit the President from considering a journalist's prior coverage in evaluating how much access he will grant that journalist,' lawyers for the administration said in a court filing. On April 16, the AP accused the Trump administration of defying the court order by continuing to exclude its journalists from some events and then limiting access to Trump for all news wires, including Reuters and Bloomberg. Reuters and the AP both issued statements denouncing the new policy, which puts wire services in a larger rotation with about 30 other newspaper and print outlets. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Other media customers, including local news organizations that have no presence in Washington, rely on the wire services' real-time reports of presidential statements as do global financial markets. The AP says in its stylebook that the Gulf of Mexico has carried that name for more than 400 years and, as a global news agency, the AP will refer to it by its original name while acknowledging the new name Trump has chosen.
